Who's Skull Prevails at Last
Who's Skull Prevails at Last |
|
| log in |
Message boards : Number crunching : Who's Skull Prevails at Last
1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · Next
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
Congrats but remember, Fame is a fleeting thing, and the code we write is written in sand. Some call it sillicon:) Oooops is that the next wave I see on the horizon? | |
ID: 756682 ·  | |
|
Only just on top at the moment, so it is still close. | |
| ID: 756685 · | |
|
I believe Mr.Who? is running eight cores at 4.0 Gig. Scroll down through the tasks until you find a completed one. Click on the work unit. | |
| ID: 756691 · | |
|
| |
| ID: 756711 · | |
|
Hi Francois, | |
| ID: 756731 · | |
|
It's an interesting race to the top and it's all good! | |
| ID: 756794 · | |
 [seti.international] Philip J. Fry Volunteer tester  Send message Joined: 6 Apr 07 Posts: 6570 Credit: 50,810,778 RAC: 20,509  | |
|
SSE4.1 or SSSE3x ? I would go with SSSE3x: Hi Francois, Hey, my QX6700 is running faster.. ;-) :-D [b]CPU time 3188.531[/b] stderr out <core_client_version>6.1.0</core_client_version> <![CDATA[ <stderr_txt> Windows optimized S@H Enhanced application by Alex Kan Version info: SSSE3x (Intel, Core 2-optimized v8-nographics) V5.13 by Alex Kan SSSE3x Win32 Build 41 , Ported by : Jason G, Raistmer, JDWhale [b]CPUID: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU @ 2.66GHz Speed: 4 x 3143 MHz[/b] Cache: L1=64K L2=4096K Features: MMX SSE SSE2 SSE3 SSSE3 Work Unit Info: ............... Credit multiplier is : 2.85 WU true angle range is : 0.406880 Flopcounter: 16453481286828.516000 Spike count: 0 Pulse count: 0 Triplet count: 0 Gaussian count: 0 called boinc_finish </stderr_txt> ]]> Validate state Initial [b]Claimed credit 54.2900694444444[/b] ____________ >Das Deutsche Cafe. The German Cafe.< | |
| ID: 756797 · | |
SSE4.1 or SSSE3x ? I would go with SSSE3x: What planet are you on, Apart from Marks Frozen penny, francois SKT is the fastest runnng machine at the minute. Sutura is your machine running at 8 x 4050MHz or so? NO. ____________  | |
| ID: 756824 · | |
SSE4.1 or SSSE3x ? I would go with SSSE3x: Satan, per core that skulltrail isn't so fast. Many q6600's and 9450 etc have shorter times than the 8 and 16 core xeons etc. Those machines get higher in the top-x list because they have more cores. Heck, my q6600 at 3.3 GHz does better than the times the skulltrail needs (and that is my slowest 24/7 cruncher!). Regards, John. | |
| ID: 756825 · | |
I'm guessing there are plenty of people running their rigs at 4GHz plus...I know I run my X9650 @ 4.1GHz 24/7, BUT that doesn't quite help aganist the massive onslaught of twice the number of cores... On a 54.3 credit unit where Francois manages to finish in 3500s I do around 2350s. Still not enough, but an interesting comparison (for me that is;). /Anton | |
| ID: 756828 · | |
|
[seti.international] Philip J. Fry Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 6 Apr 07 Posts: 6570 Credit: 50,810,778 RAC: 20,509 | |
|
mr.kjellen X9650 x 4 Cores -> 7,327.06 x 2 = 14,654.12 RAC | |
| ID: 756837 · | |
mr.kjellen X9650 x 4 Cores -> 7,327.06 x 2 = 14,654.12 RAC In computer design, x 2 is easy to say, it is hard to do. The real problem is to feed that 8 cores at 4.0Ghz ... With 4 cores, it is much easier. I think we got it right on the next architecture for many cores. Get ready for traumatic experience ... Can't say more. who? | |
| ID: 756849 · | |
Oh...come on! Of course you can!! ;) | |
| ID: 756858 · | |
No actually, He can't, As It's like He's under an NDA and such, So don't ask Him. ____________ BSG Anthem My Facebook page | |
| ID: 756859 · | |
|
How about 12 cores? | |
| ID: 756869 · | |
|
As you all know Intel has running in their labs already a 80 core since 2006, maybe they are comming out with the 32nm process end of the year with a 16 or 32 core chip in the production line. Let us wait and see. | |
| ID: 756871 · | |
|
Well we all know what it's called and we all know how many cores the next SKT will have. | |
| ID: 756874 · | |
Well we all know what it's called and we all know how many cores the next SKT will have. Ditto, but I am waiting for it on the 32nM fabrications. Someone said that with the Nehalem there was a possibility of introducing HT again, giving a 16 core chip a capability of running 2 threads per core. I am looking forwards to the Xeon version so I can build a dual processor system (16 cores + HT per CPU) ____________ It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues   | |
| ID: 756887 · | |
|
Yep waiting for the end of 2009 as well. They will be some killer machines. I may take my first foray into building my own machine and over clock the crap out of it. Will have to see the fund situation at the time though. | |
| ID: 756890 · | |
|
I read somewhere that the Nehalem would have over 2 billion transistors and 30 MB L2!! | |
| ID: 756891 · | |
Message boards : Number crunching : Who's Skull Prevails at Last
| Copyright © 2013 University of California |
And proud of it!
