GUI vs CLI performance

Author	Message
tsservo Send message Joined: 12 Jun 99 Posts: 3 Credit: 2,649 RAC: 0	Message 944 - Posted: 24 Jun 2004, 2:00:00 UTC
	SETI Classic ran so much quicker as a CLI. Does BOINC suffer the same shortcoming, or are they equivalent speeds? I've installed the GUI version (CLI failed on install) but I'd like to know if I should attempt to switch it to the CLI in the future... Thanks.
	ID: 944 ·

John McLeod VII Volunteer developer Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 15 Jul 99 Posts: 22343 Credit: 439,127 RAC: 429	Message 949 - Posted: 24 Jun 2004, 2:07:26 UTC
	The GUI will absorb a small fraction of the time in communications that the CLI may not do. That said, the code that does the actual crunching is identical in that the CLI and the GUI call the same executable to do the actual work. So there may be a difference, but it is going to be minimal. However if you want the install as a service, you need the CLI. On some machines a vast improvement can be gotten by turning off the screen saver. Which tab is active also affects the processing somewhat. More on slower machines than on faster ones. For best results, select the projects tab, even when the GUI is minimized or hidden. jm7
	ID: 949 ·