Message boards :
Number crunching :
Who's Skull Prevails at Last
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Pilot Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 534 Credit: 5,475,482 RAC: 0 |
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? Good Job Pilot When we finally figure it all out, all the rules will change and we can start all over again. |
Gavin Shaw Send message Joined: 8 Aug 00 Posts: 1116 Credit: 1,304,337 RAC: 0 |
Only just on top at the moment, so it is still close. It appears he is using the AK-Whaleport <core_client_version>5.10.30</core_client_version> <![CDATA[ <stderr_txt> OS X optimized S@H Enhanced application by Alex Kan Version info: OS X SSE4.1 (Intel, Xeon-optimized p8-nographics) V5.13 by Alex Kan Windows Port: JDWhale V0.2X xS|IPP_SSE4.1 8018 Mhz Work Unit Info: ............... </stderr_txt> ]]> Next question is: What is the CPU/memory speeds? How much overclocking has been undertaken to get it to this point? After all is the 8018 Mhz really correct? I don't think so... Never surrender and never give up. In the darkest hour there is always hope. |
chaco Send message Joined: 8 May 99 Posts: 43 Credit: 23,945,396 RAC: 1 |
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. Confidence: Remember that feeling you had just before you truely understood the situation? |
Francois Piednoel Send message Joined: 14 Jun 00 Posts: 898 Credit: 5,969,361 RAC: 0 |
|
_heinz Send message Joined: 25 Feb 05 Posts: 744 Credit: 5,539,270 RAC: 0 |
Hi Francois, I'm impressed about your ocing, nice numbers, smaller as a hour 3511.421875 for a 54,30 credit unit. My Skulltrail is running now, with 2 GHz (not oced) ---------------------------------------------------- Computer ID 4387433 Report deadline 12 Jun 2008 22:15:52 UTC CPU time 5570.016 stderr out <core_client_version>5.10.45</core_client_version> <![CDATA[ <stderr_txt> Windows optimized S@H Enhanced application by Alex Kan Version info: SSE4.1 (Intel, Core 2-optimized v8-nographics) V5.13 by Alex Kan SSE4.1 Win64 Build 42 , Ported by : Jason G, Raistmer, JDWhale CPUID: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5405 @ 2.00GHz Speed: 4 x 1995 MHz Cache: L1=64K L2=6144K Features: MMX SSE SSE2 SSE3 SSSE3 SSE4.1 Work Unit Info: ............... Credit multiplier is : 2.85 WU true angle range is : 0.406782 Flopcounter: 16458015224532.846000 Spike count: 0 Pulse count: 0 Triplet count: 0 Gaussian count: 0 called boinc_finish </stderr_txt> ]]> Validate state Valid Claimed credit 54.3050231481481 Granted credit 54.3050231481481 application version 5.28 ----------------------------- Sure some oced quads have better timings, but we will see what the future developement bring us. heinz |
The Gas Giant Send message Joined: 22 Nov 01 Posts: 1904 Credit: 2,646,654 RAC: 0 |
It's an interesting race to the top and it's all good! Live long and BOINC! Paul (S@H1 8888) And proud of it! |
Sutaru Tsureku Send message Joined: 6 Apr 07 Posts: 7105 Credit: 147,663,825 RAC: 5 |
SSE4.1 or SSSE3x ? I would go with SSSE3x: http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=45971&nowrap=true#756684 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] |
SATAN Send message Joined: 27 Aug 06 Posts: 835 Credit: 2,129,006 RAC: 0 |
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. |
john deneer Send message Joined: 16 Nov 06 Posts: 331 Credit: 20,996,606 RAC: 0 |
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. |
mr.kjellen Send message Joined: 4 Jan 01 Posts: 195 Credit: 71,324,196 RAC: 0 |
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 |
Sutaru Tsureku Send message Joined: 6 Apr 07 Posts: 7105 Credit: 147,663,825 RAC: 5 |
mr.kjellen X9650 x 4 Cores -> 7,327.06 x 2 = 14,654.12 RAC Who? X9775 x 8 Cores -> 11,177.87 RAC How is the power consumption? Costs of buying? I think Wattage / Credits would be two separately Quad-Core-PCs, or? How it will be with the new 8 x Core CPUs? |
Francois Piednoel Send message Joined: 14 Jun 00 Posts: 898 Credit: 5,969,361 RAC: 0 |
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? |
mr.kjellen Send message Joined: 4 Jan 01 Posts: 195 Credit: 71,324,196 RAC: 0 |
Oh...come on! Of course you can!! ;) |
zoom3+1=4 Send message Joined: 30 Nov 03 Posts: 65759 Credit: 55,293,173 RAC: 49 |
No actually, He can't, As It's like He's under an NDA and such, So don't ask Him. The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's |
_heinz Send message Joined: 25 Feb 05 Posts: 744 Credit: 5,539,270 RAC: 0 |
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. heinz |
SATAN Send message Joined: 27 Aug 06 Posts: 835 Credit: 2,129,006 RAC: 0 |
Well we all know what it's called and we all know how many cores the next SKT will have. Nehalem and 16. That will be one hell of a beast. Looking at finding the funds for a windows version. |
John Clark Send message Joined: 29 Sep 99 Posts: 16515 Credit: 4,418,829 RAC: 0 |
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 |
SATAN Send message Joined: 27 Aug 06 Posts: 835 Credit: 2,129,006 RAC: 0 |
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. |
popandbob Send message Joined: 19 Mar 05 Posts: 551 Credit: 4,673,015 RAC: 0 |
I read somewhere that the Nehalem would have over 2 billion transistors and 30 MB L2!! *Actually according to google it wont. Its the Tukwila that will have that. ~BoB Do you Good Search for Seti@Home? http://www.goodsearch.com/?charityid=888957 Or Good Shop? http://www.goodshop.com/?charityid=888957 |
SATAN Send message Joined: 27 Aug 06 Posts: 835 Credit: 2,129,006 RAC: 0 |
The Itanium lot will be very impressive chips, but I don't think we'll find that sort of stuff on normal desktop line chips for a number of years. |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.