Message boards :
Number crunching :
Is it necessary to compile s@h for AMD 64 / Linux ?
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Mario2000 Send message Joined: 1 Feb 00 Posts: 2 Credit: 15,339 RAC: 0 |
Hi, I was running seti@home classic on my AMD K6 / Redhat 7.3. I used the client "3.03.i386-pc-linux-gnu-gnulibc2.1". Now I upraded my Sytem to: AMD 64 2800+ (1.8GHz) / Fedora Core 2 Linux (x86_64). I tried the same files (just copied the dir) and it works! It also finished the old workunit. Would it crunch faster if I compiled the client myself? It takes about 3h/wu now. Are there other advantages? Unfortunatelly I have no experience in compiling programms. thx in advance for your advice edit: I just found a x86_64 version of the seti@home classic client. It really seems to run faster but I have to test it further. I did not see such a version of BOINC though! edit2: I'm not so sure anymore whether the 64bit client crunches faster. At first the estimanted time left is always lower. Since I could not find a decent logger for Linux I can't see an avereage time, and since every WU needs more or less time to complete it is difficult to determine what the speed gain of the 64bit version really is. |
©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.