Does the new development stream of BOINC V4.6x etc benchmark windows boxes properly or are we still going to be claiming significantly different credit for the same work crunched?

---

Paul
(S@H1 8888)
And proud of it!

I saw somewhere in a different thread that there was a bug in the benchmarking for BOINC 4.1x and it was fixed in 4.5x and the fix was carried through to 4.66. Basically what I have found is you will receive less credit with the 4.6x version. I had some free time and put together a spreadsheet for the benchmarks and compairing versions 4.19, 4.54, 4.62 and 4.66 for the six different cpu's that I run on various projects. As expected the 4.5x and up all scored the same but the difference was in 4.19. For example I have a server that has a P3 550Mhz processor and it takes about 12 hours to run a Seti unit. Under 4.19 I would claim a credit of 42.68 but under versions 4.5x and up I would only claim a credit of 33.63. Still not sure if the benchmark for windows in 4.6x is proper but it is less than what you are using now.

---

From BOINC CVS checkin notes in November 2004:

David 2 Nov 2004
- split Dhrystone source into 2 files (from Peter Smithson).
This supposedly prevents compiler optimizations on Win
that give inflated results

From BOINC_dev mailing List (Peter Smithson):

The original dhrystone source for revison 2.0 was split intentionally to
avoid over optimisation (see comments in original dhrystone test source
code). The BOINC uses merged source which causes the benchmark to run
unusually quickly when compiled with MSVC 7.1 due to better optimisation
possible. Presumably the optimiser is taking out most of the test and not
giving a result consistent with a real application. MSVC 6.0 did not do
this.
Link

---

SETI@home classic workunits: 1,985 CPU time: 24,567 hours



Professor Desty Nova
Researching Karma the Hard Way

Cool...thanks guys. I wonder if CPDN will drop it's trickle credit back to 75 from 95 once we all go the current dev version?