I was wondering if anyone is still using some "old" hardware to crunch on seti? Like 80486 or something like that. I got some older 80486 boards lying around and was wondering if it's worth the work of setting them up just for seti. I doubt it, but it seems I just can't throw them away...

---

I was wondering if anyone is still using some "old" hardware to crunch on seti? Like 80486 or something like that. I got some older 80486 boards lying around and was wondering if it's worth the work of setting them up just for seti. I doubt it, but it seems I just can't throw them away...

I believe seti has a memory req. of 64mb.. but some programs allow less.

---

- cJ

I origanally ran seti@home classic on an cyrix 266 Mhz machine then moved to AMD 500 Mhz I am not sure if the new Seti will run on old 486 machines but it is worth a try I also run seti on my machine at work which is an old gateway 2000 400Mhz good luck on the old stuff

---

I was wondering if anyone is still using some "old" hardware to crunch on seti? Like 80486 or something like that. I got some older 80486 boards lying around and was wondering if it's worth the work of setting them up just for seti. I doubt it, but it seems I just can't throw them away...

I believe seti has a memory req. of 64mb.. but some programs allow less.

I have a couple

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=1828672

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=2088893

I am not sure about the first one - but the second one listed I am sure is a 486 - hardly worth setting up a PC for - I have this one used as a fax gateway so it was already set up and runing.

---

Up until a few days ago I was running Boinc on an Intel PII 266Mhz.
Turning in a result every 17 hours on an optimised client.
The case now houses a different m/b with an AMD K6 2/500 which is about
to complete it's second result after 26 hours!
More tweaking required to get it down to an expected 9 hours.
Do have access to a working Commodore Pet but it only has 16K (yes "K")
of memory. Would you believe that this machine is still used at my place
of work to control some test equipment. (circa 1982) Still working!

Graeme.
www.setiuk.com

---

Up until a few days ago I was running Boinc on an Intel PII 266Mhz.

I'm running seti on 4 DEC Alpha boxes.
When I 1st got them, the current desktop was a PII 266 or something like that.
The Alphas were great in their day, 2 or 3 times faster than a PII and really helped in seti classic.
Even now on boinc/seti they churn out a WU in about 30k seconds.
Not bad for an old timer.

Could even get that 30k down to maybe 15k if I could get hold of the infamous compaq c compiler

---

For one result late last year, which I noticed because it was pending for days, one of the machines crunching it was a 486, it took 70+ hours to crunch unit using standard app.

On the Stats sites some of them list project by cpu, might be worth a look if you're really interested.

---

I don't have the slowest, but my Celeron 500 w/256M ram and TMR optimized app takes 12 hours.

im thinking of running it on my athlon k 7 500 but untill i get my 1.33athlon successfully optimised i wont be looking into that one

---

I had a PIII 500 with TMR op app I think it did a WU in either 7 or 9 hours (leaning toward 9 if forced to guess)

I had a PIII 500 with TMR op app I think it did a WU in either 7 or 9 hours (leaning toward 9 if forced to guess)

Yeah, I had a Pentium III 500 running as well. Took it the same time to crunch a WU. Until I gave it away and got a 800MHz Celeron Laptop for it :)
Haven't tried seti on this one yet and I doubt I will.

---

Running a quad PIII-550 using crunchr3's app. doing a WU in about 3.5 hours. nice thing is it is doing 4 wu's at the same time, so it is producing a nice amount of work per day.


Join Hawaiian Beach Bums

---

Beach Bums Current Stats:


Come Join us at Hawaiian Beach Bums

I was wondering if anyone is still using some "old" hardware to crunch on seti? Like 80486 or something like that. I got some older 80486 boards lying around and was wondering if it's worth the work of setting them up just for seti. I doubt it, but it seems I just can't throw them away...

You might find the thread "My 486 (Please Don't Laugh)" interesting.

I tried to revive my 486 80MHz, 64MB RAM for Seti crunching. I wasn't able to do real crunching for Seti, because the memory requirements are 64 MB after the OS was loaded...

---

"Are you suggesting coconuts migrate?"

HP 9000/782
200 MHz, 64 bits
Recent average credit 20.45

---

You might find the thread "My 486 (Please Don't Laugh)" interesting.

Yes. My 486 is still happily giving me a completed WU in a little over 12 days. It's a weed growing on my farm :-)

I was wondering if anyone is still using some "old" hardware to crunch on seti? Like 80486 or something like that. I got some older 80486 boards lying around and was wondering if it's worth the work of setting them up just for seti. I doubt it, but it seems I just can't throw them away...

You might find the thread "My 486 (Please Don't Laugh)" interesting.

I tried to revive my 486 80MHz, 64MB RAM for Seti crunching. I wasn't able to do real crunching for Seti, because the memory requirements are 64 MB after the OS was loaded...

Ahhh...this was the thread I was looking for. I googled it once, but closed the Tab in my browser and then wasn't able to find it again for some reason, lol.

---

I was wondering if anyone is still using some "old" hardware to crunch on seti? Like 80486 or something like that. I got some older 80486 boards lying around and was wondering if it's worth the work of setting them up just for seti. I doubt it, but it seems I just can't throw them away...

You might find the thread "My 486 (Please Don't Laugh)" interesting.

I tried to revive my 486 80MHz, 64MB RAM for Seti crunching. I wasn't able to do real crunching for Seti, because the memory requirements are 64 MB after the OS was loaded...

Ahhh...this was the thread I was looking for. I googled it once, but closed the Tab in my browser and then wasn't able to find it again for some reason, lol.

I won't laugh (per the URL above):

That's because I "revived" an old 486 myself last year...

(The very first PC I ever built in fact, had to replace the mobo, with a 'better' one (from the technology of that period too, no less, going from ALL ISA, to VESA Local Bus (anyone remember THOSE?)).

First system I ever built (circa 1992-1994), which was revived recently (it ran DOS 5.0/Win3.1):

486 Sx/25mhz CPU by Intel (no fpop coprocessor)
Generic motherboard (FastMicro was OEM of the system) ALL ISA slots
4mb 30-pin FastPage RAM (80ns speed)
40mb Quantum "Pro-Drive" disk (5400rpm iirc)
Generic Trident 256k SVGA Videocard

2nd stage "evolution" of it (1994-1996) which ran Win95 & later Windows NT 3.51:

486 Dx/4 133mhz Intel CPU
(Same mobo as above, was ISA still, BUT - with 'enhancements')
32mb 30-pin FastPage RAM (70ns speed)
Dual Western Digital HDD's 420mb each
Caching IDE controller with 16mb cache onboard (same speed RAM as system RAM, chips you added to it)
Diamond Stealth 24 ISA "Windows Accelerator" videocard

REVIVED RECENTLY TO RUN Windows NT 3.51 (w/ it's final Service Pack #6 iirc) again (which really runs fast on this believe it or not & on 2nd iteration of it also):

Only REAL changes were (in this final stage revival of it) were:

1.) The mobo to a VESA Local Bus slotted type

So I could use a Diamond Stealth 64 VLB video card (state-of-the-art, for its day @ least) & a VLB version of the caching disk controller (same amt. of RAM & type)

:)

* Why'd I do this? Because there is CERTAIN THINGS & PROGRAMS you can only run on that platform is why (Windows NT 3.51) because they have not been ported to more modern platforms (not that I could find @ least & I do NOT feel like recoding them either) that OCCASIONALLY, I still have use for...

Can't get into which ones & for what, because if I told ya? "Then I'd have to kill ya"... lol!

Let's put it THIS way - there's things in its IP stack (really NetBIOS based as the PRIMARY packet-carrier, whereas since 2000 onwards IP is the main protocol which piggybacks the others IF you need/use them, & on NT 3.51 IP rides within NetBIOS packets) that you can't do today on the modern NT-based OS' (2000/XP/Server 2003)... i.e. - the particular program I want to run will NOT run on them!

That, & I had some extra time on my hands last summer to do it, & to revisit what I thought was once "the ultimate OS" in WinNT 3.51 really - nostalgia!

APK

P.S.=> Windows Server 2003 SP #1 + latest (as of this date) hotfix patches in place is 10x as stable (stable as DOS) & 10x as capable/flexible/ubiquitous - but, then again, takes 10x as much of a system to run it (if not more) in terms of hardware power... the price of progress in things computing! apk

---

http://torry.net/authorsmore.php?id=1781

"The object's hull is made of SOLID neutronium: A single StarShip cannot combat it!" quote Mr. Spock, Star Trek original series, episode title: "The Doomsday Machine"

I was wondering if anyone is still using some "old" hardware to crunch on seti? Like 80486 or something like that. I got some older 80486 boards lying around and was wondering if it's worth the work of setting them up just for seti. I doubt it, but it seems I just can't throw them away...

You might find the thread "My 486 (Please Don't Laugh)" interesting.
I tried to revive my 486 80MHz, 64MB RAM for Seti crunching. I wasn't able to do real crunching for Seti, because the memory requirements are 64 MB after the OS was loaded...

Then you might be interested in the "new" Seti coming out "soon". It will only require 32 meg of ram, after the OS loads. It will take a LONG time to crunch the units though, they are saying up to 10 times longer than the current units. Don't know how that fits into the 14 day workunit deadline cycle for you.

---

Hi

The deadline is much longer with enhanced app.
There will be no problem to reach them.
Look around they are allready defined.

greetz Mike

---

With each crime and every kindness we birth our future.

I was wondering if anyone is still using some "old" hardware to crunch on seti? Like 80486 or something like that. I got some older 80486 boards lying around and was wondering if it's worth the work of setting them up just for seti. I doubt it, but it seems I just can't throw them away...

I had a few old Mac systems in the 66-90 MHz range working for "Classic", but there's no way they could be upgraded to run BOINC ; even if technically possible it would involve investing many times what they're worth, let alone the minuscule contribution they'd be able to make.

Haven't thrown them away yet, either ...

---