Is it necessary to compile s@h for AMD 64 / Linux ?

Message boards : Number crunching : Is it necessary to compile s@h for AMD 64 / Linux ?
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Mario2000

Send message
Joined: 1 Feb 00
Posts: 2
Credit: 15,339
RAC: 0
Austria
Message 4150 - Posted: 4 Jul 2004, 21:17:09 UTC
Last modified: 4 Jul 2004, 22:10:56 UTC

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.
ID: 4150 · Report as offensive

Message boards : Number crunching : Is it necessary to compile s@h for AMD 64 / Linux ?


 
©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.