ok .... I'm assuming that these AP workunits are tagged as ap_ .... in the task queue.

Is 8h25m at 7.86% reasonable?

AMD opteron 2400

---

Astropulse units take a lot longer than standard Multibeam units. Also, AMD CPUs take much longer than Intel CPUs.

My 2.1GHz Phenom averages 104 hours, and my 2.16GHz Core 2 Duo averages 74 hours.

---

Cruiser
Gateway GT5692 L-f-S Edition
-Phenom X4 9650 CPU
-4GB 667MHz DDR2 RAM
-500GB SATA HD
-Vista x64 SP1
-BOINC 6.2.19 32-bit client
-SSE3 optimized 32-bit apps

My AMD Opteron 1210 running Linux at 1.8 GHz takes 115 h to crunch an AP WU. I am running an application optimized for sse3 on MB WUs and times are far better.
Tullio

---

Doug,
your AP-wu will need ca. 105hours total.
That sounds o.k. to me for the hardware you're working with.

keep on crunching

---

_\|/_
U r s

Thanks everyone

Good to know those times are normal and the WU isn't stuck or bad

now at 14:45 @ 13.77%

---

Yeah, my Opteron 2210s average about 130h using the stock app. Right now I'm at 40h @ 31% for one.

Killed me the other day because I had four APs that started all roughly at the same time, so I knew it was going to be about 5 days before anything else got done.

Meanwhile, Core 2 Duo/Quad wingmen knock it out in about a 1/4 of the time.

---

Linux laptop:
record uptime: 1511d 20h 19m (ended due to the power brick giving-up)

Astropulse: Intel Inside.
Tullio

---

3.2ghz dual core crunches AP on average 55-65 hours.

---

I only do AP and they usually run in 41 to 43 hours. I also run climate a small percentage. I usually have to wait a while for credit but when it happens, it is a big chunk.

It's not about the credits is it?

---

It should never be about the credits. Its all about finding ET :)

...And other new scientific events or whatever :P

---

i like crunching AP

---

I've noticed that when my last work unit was downloaded, it was AstroPulse. It seems that it works a bit slower than the usual work units that my computer has had on it. Is that normal?

I've noticed that when my last work unit was downloaded, it was AstroPulse. It seems that it works a bit slower than the usual work units that my computer has had on it. Is that normal?

Yes, Astropulse units are slower than regular Enhanced units, especially on AMD-based systems. That Sempron will probably take over 125 hours to complete one Astropulse unit.

---

Cruiser
Gateway GT5692 L-f-S Edition
-Phenom X4 9650 CPU
-4GB 667MHz DDR2 RAM
-500GB SATA HD
-Vista x64 SP1
-BOINC 6.2.19 32-bit client
-SSE3 optimized 32-bit apps

Hi
Why don't you people run the Optimized applications for MB and AP.

Hi
Why don't you people run the Optimized applications for MB and AP.

It's true, most of the people in this thread could benefit greatly from the AP and MB opti apps

---

They could tweak their memory timings and knock off a 1/3 of their times also.

Ugh! We like the sempron, and have had good success with it, especially in customers' computers. It's strange how this AstroPulse is so slow with it. Can I change back to the other way of doing SETI projects? Do I have to wait until this project is finished?

Ugh! We like the sempron, and have had good success with it, especially in customers' computers. It's strange how this AstroPulse is so slow with it. Can I change back to the other way of doing SETI projects? Do I have to wait until this project is finished?

An astropulse workunit has 32 times as much data as a setiathome_enhanced one, so it shouldn't be surprising it takes considerably longer. The project staff has recognized that some participants will not find that acceptable, though, so in your SETI@home preferences you can choose to not get work you don't want.

After changing the preferences you could abort any astropulse work you have already received if you are really unwilling to complete it. The tasks would then be sent to another host. It would be a pity to waste whatever time your host has already spent on the work, but it's your choice.

                                                                 Joe

I think I'll just go ahead & let it run & see what happens. Don't guess it'll kill me to give it a shot. I noticed with the other 'version' that I'm used to, it seems to process a bit faster when I'm working on the computer. Does AP do the same thing?

I have a Sempron crunching away on APs, and it was in the 150-hour range, but the linux SSE3 app worked on that CPU, and has gotten it down to about 60 hours. Makes it much more worthwhile.

The stock AP app was very Intel-friendly, and basically anti-AMD. The optimized app still shows the same thing, but is 50% faster across the board. Half the time it used to be is a good thing.

---

Linux laptop:
record uptime: 1511d 20h 19m (ended due to the power brick giving-up)