Please compile a 64-bit Windows SETI@home client. In a computer I am planning on building for my family, I will install Vista 64 because the CPUs Intel and AMD are now selling are 64-bit capable, and I do not want to hobble a 64-bit CPU with a 32-bit OS, making me feel like I threw my money away on hardware. XP 64 is out in my situation because almost nobody develops drivers for that OS. People develop 64-bit drivers for Vista because Microsoft refuses to certify 32-bit drivers unless there are corresponding 64-bit drivers unless they are for a 32-bit only part (e.g. a 32-bit processor), making Vista 64 the best choice.

I would like to experiment with Linux, but only on computer for my personal use only instead of a computer for the whole family.

If Seti had to make a compatible version for every OS out there, they'd be doing nothing else but compiling and testing those versions. Since there are only so many people working at Seti, they decided not to go this direction and make the application code Open Source so others could compile those needed versions.

Therefore, please look in places like:
- this thread
- Download Other
- Dotsch.de
- Crunch3r's site
- Lunatics KWSN

I think you'll find one doing what you want in any of those places.

---

I will install Vista 64 because the CPUs Intel and AMD are now selling are 64-bit capable, and I do not want to hobble a 64-bit CPU with a 32-bit OS, making me feel like I threw my money away on hardware.

You can still run 32bit software under the 64bit OS. That's what I'm doing with my 64bit Vista machines.

---

Yes, but I am interested in the speed boost that the better minimum FPU architecture in x64 provides. I do not want to have to bother with figuring out how to install an optimized app or what to do if the code coming from Berkeley turns out to need a bug fix.

Yes, but I am interested in the speed boost that the better minimum FPU architecture in x64 provides. I do not want to have to bother with figuring out how to install an optimized app or what to do if the code coming from Berkeley turns out to need a bug fix.

Compiler licenses cost money which Seti doesn't have. Nor do the dev have the time or manpower to compile for every chip architecture. This is left for third party volunteers with the expertise and access to different compilers to do.

This also means no automatic downloads of specialty apps. It does require that you do more than run and forget which you shouldn't do anyway since Boinc itself is always under constant evolution. If you are going to participate in a project you should visit the forums from time to time to keep abreast of developments. Installing the optimized app is no biggy. You just copy it to the Seti folder with the accompanying app.info file.

---

Boinc V7.2.42
Win7 i5 3.33G 4GB, GTX470

Yes, but I am interested in the speed boost that the better minimum FPU architecture in x64 provides. I do not want to have to bother with figuring out how to install an optimized app or what to do if the code coming from Berkeley turns out to need a bug fix.

Compiler licenses cost money which Seti doesn't have. Nor do the dev have the time or manpower to compile for every chip architecture. This is left for third party volunteers with the expertise and access to different compilers to do.

This also means no automatic downloads of specialty apps. It does require that you do more than run and forget which you shouldn't do anyway since Boinc itself is always under constant evolution. If you are going to participate in a project you should visit the forums from time to time to keep abreast of developments. Installing the optimized app is no biggy. You just copy it to the Seti folder with the accompanying app.info file.

They already have the required compiler. Otherwise, they would not have been able to compile the x64 version of BOINC in the first place. However, developer time to test the applications for different architectures are a factor. Combine that with possible compiler, OS, and BOINC bugs, and this can be a problem. However, the flipside is that this can expose buggy corner cases that are more easily exposed in one version rather than another version. Also, if BOINC bugs are discovered by developing an x64 version of SETI@home in this way, this will ease the pain other developers suffer due to something that is out of their control.

They already have the required compiler. Otherwise, they would not have been able to compile the x64 version of BOINC in the first place.

Don't confuse the BOINC project with the SETI@Home project. BOINC has different resources than SETI@Home. Just because the BOINC development team can compile x64bit apps doesn't mean SETI@Home can do the same.

---

The issue is Programmer time, not Compiler License Fees. They are using MS Dev Studio which supports both 32 and 64 bit builds. There are some 3rd party optimized 64 bit apps available, but not (yet?) a 64 bit stock build. The architecture for 64 bit applications was added to BOINC fairly recently, and most of the projects have not added it.

S@H also does not do very much better with 64 bit than it does with 32 bit. Most of the operations are Double Precision Floating Point which is mostly unaffected by the bit count change. I understand that there is a performance increase, it just isn't as much as you might think it could be.

---

BOINC WIKI