my P4 is the fastest

P4 3.2 with HT 2:35 for 2 WUs

that means every 77 Minutes a new WU :)

Athlon64 3.200+ ca 2:30 for one WU

Athlon 2.500+ ca 3:10 for every WU

so no can beat the P4s, also no Pentium M

Greetings from Germany NRW
Ulli S@h Berkeley's Staff Friends Club m7 ©

Check the AMD's dual cores :) simply.. the fastest processor on earth (yet)

---

<blockquote>my P4 is the fastest

P4 3.2 with HT 2:35 for 2 WUs

that means every 77 Minutes a new WU :)

Athlon64 3.200+ ca 2:30 for one WU

Athlon 2.500+ ca 3:10 for every WU

so no can beat the P4s, also no Pentium M

</blockquote>

Errm ..... my Athlon64 seems to be beating that at around 72 mins on average. :P

---

Be lucky

Neil

<blockquote>my P4 is the fastest

P4 3.2 with HT 2:35 for 2 WUs

that means every 77 Minutes a new WU :)

Athlon64 3.200+ ca 2:30 for one WU

Athlon 2.500+ ca 3:10 for every WU

so no can beat the P4s, also no Pentium M

Greetings from Germany NRW
Ulli S@h Berkeley's Staff Friends Club m7 ©


</blockquote>

you must not be doing something right on your computers. my AthlonXP-M is 1wu per 2:08.

---

<blockquote>my P4 is the fastest

P4 3.2 with HT 2:35 for 2 WUs

that means every 77 Minutes a new WU :)

Athlon64 3.200+ ca 2:30 for one WU

Athlon 2.500+ ca 3:10 for every WU

so no can beat the P4s, also no Pentium M
</blockquote>

Well... your p4 uses over 2 hour on one wu, so isn't the fastest. ;)

If you starts calculating per cpu (real or ht), the fastest computer in SETI@home/BOINC uses 6 minutes/wu, roughly 240 wu/day.


In "classic", the fastest platform was...
alpha-compaq-T64Uv4.0d/EV67 there average cpu-time is 1 hr 00 min 00.4 sec

As for fastest cpu this is alpha with average cpu-time 0 hr 59 min 25.2 sec

<blockquote>my P4 is the fastest

P4 3.2 with HT 2:35 for 2 WUs

that means every 77 Minutes a new WU :)
</blockquote>

HeHe... Not exactly... It means every 2:35 a new WU. :)

<blockquote>If you starts calculating per cpu (real or ht), the fastest computer in SETI@home/BOINC uses 6 minutes/wu, roughly 240 wu/day.
</blockquote>

Where did you see this?

---

<blockquote><blockquote>my P4 is the fastest

P4 3.2 with HT 2:35 for 2 WUs

that means every 77 Minutes a new WU :)

Athlon64 3.200+ ca 2:30 for one WU

Athlon 2.500+ ca 3:10 for every WU

so no can beat the P4s, also no Pentium M

</blockquote>

Errm ..... my Athlon64 seems to be beating that at around 72 mins on average. :P

</blockquote>

you are using an optimized Client for Linux is that right

is Linux 2.6.11-gentoo-r7 an 32 or an 64 Bit OS

Greetings from Germany NRW
Ulli S@h Berkeley's Staff Friends Club m7 ©

<blockquote>
you are using an optimized Client for Linux is that right
</blockquote>

Yes.

<blockquote>
is Linux 2.6.11-gentoo-r7 an 32 or an 64 Bit OS
</blockquote>

It's either, depending on how you compile it. In this particular case, it's 64 bit.

---

Be lucky

Neil

<BLOCKQUOTE><blockquote>If you starts calculating per cpu (real or ht), the fastest computer in SETI@home/BOINC uses 6 minutes/wu, roughly 240 wu/day.
</blockquote>

Where did you see this?</BLOCKQUOTE>

A look on top computers-listing by RAC, shows a 64-cpu-box...
The cpu-time seems to be a little more than 6h/wu, with 64 cpu's this gives 6 minutes/wu. 6 minutes/wu equals 240 wu/day.

Since the daily quota in seti is 100 per cpu, with upper limit 4 cpu's per computer, this means 400 wu/day as upper limit.

Didn't check if really crunches 240 results/day, but this computer have atleast the cpu-power to do it...

btw have you noticed this

my Athlon64 3.200+ does a WU in 2:30 under Windows XP SP1

but when i look here

http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/results.php?hostid=841391

Athlon 3.500+

Wu Times 55xx that means a wu in 1:30

and

http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/results.php?hostid=819359&offset=60

Athlon 4.000+

WU Times around 4xxx that means a Wu in 72 Minutes, that is very fast, so someone is using Linux on Fedora Core 3x86-64 or somethink else..with an optimised Client...you can speak for this

and for more info, look at Neds
Compiling the seti client under linux x86_64 fantastic Side...

Greetings from Germany NRW
Ulli S@h Berkeley's Staff Friends Club m7 ©

I'm now a big advocate of compiling clients for Linux, and here's why:

I'm running a 2.0GHz P4 (Willamette) with a 512Kb Cache and 400MHz FSB for my "everyday use computer." When I ran SetiBOINC under the Windows partition with the stock clients, I would get times that were OK.

Recently I decided to compile my own client and run SetiBOINC under the Linux partitions. I had compiled my own programs before, but it was usually because there were no binaries available for the program that I needed.

But what a difference. Now I crunch a WU in 135 minutes. I know that's not a groundbreaking time by any means. I just wanted to say that Metod and Ned inspired me to not settle for stock and to go out and compile my own.

---

7,049 S@H Classic Credits

<blockquote>
A look on top computers-listing by RAC, shows a 64-cpu-box...
The cpu-time seems to be a little more than 6h/wu, with 64 cpu's this gives 6 minutes/wu. 6 minutes/wu equals 240 wu/day.
</blockquote>

Actually, it is still 6 hours per Work Unit, with 64 Work Units done each 6 hours, giving 256 per day.

---

<blockquote>
Actually, it is still 6 hours per Work Unit, with 64 Work Units done each 6 hours, giving 256 per day.</blockquote>

The cpu-time is 6 hours, but the run-time between each time you reports a result is 6 minutes.

<blockquote><blockquote>
Actually, it is still 6 hours per Work Unit, with 64 Work Units done each 6 hours, giving 256 per day.</blockquote>
The cpu-time is 6 hours, but the run-time between each time you reports a result is 6 minutes.
</blockquote>

You are assuming an even distribution of work completion. This is one of the reasons people get confused with BOINC. Each processor within the machine takes 6 hours to complete a work unit, with 4 processors it completes work as I stated above, for, as you stated, a throughput that delivers, on average, one result every 6 minutes.

But, the machine is not, in fact, returning a result each 6 minutes.

---

<blockquote>my P4 is the fastest

P4 3.2 with HT 2:35 for 2 WUs

that means every 77 Minutes a new WU :)

Athlon64 3.200+ ca 2:30 for one WU

Athlon 2.500+ ca 3:10 for every WU

so no can beat the P4s, also no Pentium M

Greetings from Germany NRW


</blockquote>

Err... I saw on your stats the P4 reports an average WU time about 12 000 seconds. That means about 3h 20 mins per WU which is normal for P4 3.2 :) not 77 mins per WU :)

---

<blockquote>You are assuming an even distribution of work completion. This is one of the reasons people get confused with BOINC. Each processor within the machine takes 6 hours to complete a work unit, with 4 processors it completes work as I stated above, for, as you stated, a throughput that delivers, on average, one result every 6 minutes.

But, the machine is not, in fact, returning a result each 6 minutes.</blockquote>

Oh, did I forget to add average time between a result is finished...

BTW, with 64 cpu's my guess is this is already fairly averaged-out if the server runs SETI@home/BOINC 24/7...


Atleast from my 1st post it should be apparent it was divided by #cpu's and is therefore an average, if this doesn't come across my exquse is English isn't my strong point so got lost in translation...

<blockquote>
but when i look here

http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/results.php?hostid=841391

Athlon 3.500+

Wu Times 55xx that means a wu in 1:30
</blockquote>


Feel free to link to my computer :p

;)

---

Impressive!

---

Hi

P4 look her:

http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah/results.php?hostid=712366

Do not Overclock this time.

2 WU in sometimes shorter than 2h.

Cu
Sometime I use
http://boinc.us.tt/
Sometime I use
http://mkx.feridot.com/boinc/
Sometime I use
http://www.pperry.f2s.com/boinc.htm

---