this is what I have it's not the biggest machine on here nor is it the smallest

Message boards : Number crunching : this is what I have it's not the biggest machine on here nor is it the smallest
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 . . . 6 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile Sutehk
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Jun 99
Posts: 42
Credit: 1,443,674
RAC: 0
United States
Message 438174 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 0:35:27 UTC

I'm running the generic SSE2 app myself on both of the afformentioned computers. Haven't had a hiccup once with either one.
ID: 438174 · Report as offensive
Profile KWSN - Chicken of Angnor
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Jul 99
Posts: 1199
Credit: 6,615,780
RAC: 0
Austria
Message 438198 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 0:58:26 UTC - in response to Message 438164.  
Last modified: 17 Oct 2006, 0:59:05 UTC

Thanks Chicken for answering his call for help as it were. I had to leave the keyboard for dinner.

While your here, quick question. Are there any differences in the cores of the opty and athlon they may cause this problem?

Nope.

A lot of people are running the generic SSE2 app fine on Opterons (1xx to 8xx as well as the new DDR2 ones), some have even patched the Intel-only ones to run on AMD systems (though possible, due to the questionable legality of this I won't offer pre-patched apps).

There are no really large differences between Athlon64s and Opterons except for two: Opterons have more HT channels enabled (except the 1xx ones) and they have a freely selectable multiplier.

The second of these makes them excellent overclocking platforms.

HTH,
Simon.
Donate to SETI@Home via PayPal!

Optimized SETI@Home apps + Information
ID: 438198 · Report as offensive
Profile Ace Casino
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Feb 03
Posts: 285
Credit: 29,750,804
RAC: 15
United States
Message 438245 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 1:57:46 UTC

That seems like a great set-up.

However, I bet if you spent $1,000 every year for 11 years, you would have a lot more crunching power at the end of 11 years. The way computers are progressing with speed and all aspects of the computer. Prices are dropping all the time. Who knows what will be possible in 3 years? Maybe you have other reasons for purchasing this computer besides SETI?

But than again,…maybe you can afford to spend $11,500 every few years on a computer?
ID: 438245 · Report as offensive
KB7RZF
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 15 Aug 99
Posts: 9549
Credit: 3,308,926
RAC: 2
United States
Message 438250 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 2:00:36 UTC - in response to Message 438245.  

That seems like a great set-up.

However, I bet if you spent $1,000 every year for 11 years, you would have a lot more crunching power at the end of 11 years. The way computers are progressing with speed and all aspects of the computer. Prices are dropping all the time. Who knows what will be possible in 3 years? Maybe you have other reasons for purchasing this computer besides SETI?

But than again,…maybe you can afford to spend $11,500 every few years on a computer?

I can't even imagine what computers will do in 3 years. We think what is out there now is fast. LOL Heck, I still got an old 400mhz, no hard drive, sitting doing nothing. One day I'll buy a small hard drive off of ebay, throw it in, and see if I can't figure out linux on it. :-)
ID: 438250 · Report as offensive
Profile Jw
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 10 Sep 06
Posts: 306
Credit: 26,612
RAC: 0
Message 438259 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 2:08:30 UTC - in response to Message 438250.  


I can't even imagine what computers will do in 3 years. We think what is out there now is fast.




80 Cores in Five Years?
ID: 438259 · Report as offensive
Randy Hancock
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 06
Posts: 169
Credit: 220,579
RAC: 0
United States
Message 438260 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 2:09:13 UTC - in response to Message 438145.  

Randy,

did you try the generic SSE2 ones or the Intel-only ones?

Any SSE3 versions or any of the ones saying Intel in front do not work on AMD chips (unless you use ICCPatch to patch away the CPUID checks).

I'm curious what the problem is that's keeping you from using my apps, since I'm running several XP64 and Server2003 X64 systems with them just fine.

The app I'm suggesting to try is:

Generic SSE2 optimized SETI@Home app

I've been running this version on my AMD hosts for quite a while (though recently I switched to a development version that will be released soon).
just installed it succesfully this time I think Give it an hour and three minutes and well know for sure
Alternatively, you could try this:

Automatic installer - Full package (Beta 1)

This is a small program that will try to run each optimized app on your system. If a specific app will not run for you, it'll tell you. At the end of the benchmark run, it will suggest an app to use and offer to install it for you (that is, if it manages to find your BOINC dir).

Regards,
Simon.


the universe is to big to just have life on one planet
ID: 438260 · Report as offensive
Randy Hancock
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 06
Posts: 169
Credit: 220,579
RAC: 0
United States
Message 438266 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 2:12:29 UTC - in response to Message 438259.  


I can't even imagine what computers will do in 3 years. We think what is out there now is fast.




80 Cores in Five Years?

no &*^ thought when I bought this it was the best mmulitasking machine you could get now they got better ones
the universe is to big to just have life on one planet
ID: 438266 · Report as offensive
Profile Jw
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 10 Sep 06
Posts: 306
Credit: 26,612
RAC: 0
Message 438268 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 2:15:52 UTC - in response to Message 438266.  
Last modified: 17 Oct 2006, 2:18:50 UTC


no &*^ thought when I bought this it was the best mmulitasking machine you could get now they got better ones




And as soon as you buy one of those Better One's, It will be Obsolete as soon as your card is Charged!
.
.
.
IMO:the Intel Core 2's are Reining Kings at the Moment!
ID: 438268 · Report as offensive
Randy Hancock
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 06
Posts: 169
Credit: 220,579
RAC: 0
United States
Message 438269 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 2:17:43 UTC

don't use credit use cash
the universe is to big to just have life on one planet
ID: 438269 · Report as offensive
zombie67 [MM]
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Apr 04
Posts: 758
Credit: 27,771,894
RAC: 0
United States
Message 438319 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 3:23:15 UTC - in response to Message 438063.  

tjis is what I get

10/16/2006 5:18:23 PM|| 2475 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
10/16/2006 5:18:23 PM|| 4557 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU


My (older) stock G5 quad gets this:

Measured floating point speed 1361 million ops/sec
Measured integer speed 4507.56 million ops/sec

Not sure of the impact for each of the values, fp vs int.

The new Xeon 51xx Mac Pros are getting in excess of

2400 fp
7100 int

(I think those are the scores of the 3ghz versions which start around $3300.)

If you hadn't noticed, macs have "pwned" the top computers list for some time, and the new Mac Pros (w/ alexkan's wicked optimized application) are turning it into total domination.
Dublin, California
Team: SETI.USA
ID: 438319 · Report as offensive
OzzFan Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15691
Credit: 84,761,841
RAC: 28
United States
Message 438322 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 3:32:01 UTC - in response to Message 438319.  

If you hadn't noticed, macs have "pwned" the top computers list for some time, and the new Mac Pros (w/ alexkan's wicked optimized application) are turning it into total domination.


Meh. As long as the science is getting done. ;)
ID: 438322 · Report as offensive
Profile Jw
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 10 Sep 06
Posts: 306
Credit: 26,612
RAC: 0
Message 438324 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 3:33:50 UTC - in response to Message 438319.  
Last modified: 17 Oct 2006, 3:35:22 UTC



The new Xeon 51xx Mac Pros are getting in excess of

2400 fp
7100 int

(I think those are the scores of the 3ghz versions which start around $3300.)

If you hadn't noticed, macs have "pwned" the top computers list for some time, and the new Mac Pros (w/ alexkan's wicked optimized application) are turning it into total domination.



Hey Checkout Jedi Mstr's #'s

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<Friggin Off the Chart>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


.



7,300 floating point MIPS (Whetstone)
9,100 integer MIPS (Dhrystone)





ID: 438324 · Report as offensive
Randy Hancock
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 06
Posts: 169
Credit: 220,579
RAC: 0
United States
Message 438351 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 4:21:16 UTC

now that's a nice machine
the universe is to big to just have life on one planet
ID: 438351 · Report as offensive
Randy Hancock
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 06
Posts: 169
Credit: 220,579
RAC: 0
United States
Message 438359 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 4:26:17 UTC

this is what I get

10/16/2006 11:24:05 PM|| 2484 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
10/16/2006 11:24:05 PM|| 4563 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU

the universe is to big to just have life on one planet
ID: 438359 · Report as offensive
Odysseus
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Jul 99
Posts: 1808
Credit: 6,701,347
RAC: 6
Canada
Message 438363 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 4:27:16 UTC - in response to Message 438324.  

Hey Checkout Jedi Mstr's #'s

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<Friggin Off the Chart>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
7,300 floating point MIPS (Whetstone)
9,100 integer MIPS (Dhrystone)

That reminds me of something I saw the other day …

Quad G5, #4 on the Top Computers page:
Measured floating point speed 7014.48 million ops/sec
Measured integer speed 21281.03 million ops/sec

Aside from having four CPUs instead of two, the system looks very similar to my dual-core G5, which shows 1249.14 MFlops / 4021.61 MIps at the moment. How is it possible to get numbers six times faster? There’s nothing in its results’ output messages that indicates a custom BOINC client that might boost the benchmarks. Are there such that don’t have a ‘signature’?
ID: 438363 · Report as offensive
Randy Hancock
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 06
Posts: 169
Credit: 220,579
RAC: 0
United States
Message 438367 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 4:31:18 UTC - in response to Message 438363.  

Hey Checkout Jedi Mstr's #'s

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<Friggin Off the Chart>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
7,300 floating point MIPS (Whetstone)
9,100 integer MIPS (Dhrystone)

That reminds me of something I saw the other day …

Quad G5, #4 on the Top Computers page:
Measured floating point speed 7014.48 million ops/sec
Measured integer speed 21281.03 million ops/sec

Aside from having four CPUs instead of two, the system looks very similar to my dual-core G5, which shows 1249.14 MFlops / 4021.61 MIps at the moment. How is it possible to get numbers six times faster? There’s nothing in its results’ output messages that indicates a custom BOINC client that might boost the benchmarks. Are there such that don’t have a ‘signature’?


go into boinc manager and click on advanced and run benchmarks then see what you get
the universe is to big to just have life on one planet
ID: 438367 · Report as offensive
Profile zoom3+1=4
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 Nov 03
Posts: 65869
Credit: 55,293,173
RAC: 49
United States
Message 438381 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 5:27:36 UTC - in response to Message 438363.  

Hey Checkout Jedi Mstr's #'s

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<Friggin Off the Chart>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
7,300 floating point MIPS (Whetstone)
9,100 integer MIPS (Dhrystone)

That reminds me of something I saw the other day …

Quad G5, #4 on the Top Computers page:
Measured floating point speed 7014.48 million ops/sec
Measured integer speed 21281.03 million ops/sec

Aside from having four CPUs instead of two, the system looks very similar to my dual-core G5, which shows 1249.14 MFlops / 4021.61 MIps at the moment. How is it possible to get numbers six times faster? There’s nothing in its results’ output messages that indicates a custom BOINC client that might boost the benchmarks. Are there such that don’t have a ‘signature’?


Wow, My optys can't do much more than this:
Joker3 @ 2.36GHz(I'm upgrading to a pair of 275 cpus here[2.60GHz ea when overclocked], It now uses a 270 cpu)
10/13/2006 8:41:50 PM|| Number of CPUs: 2
10/13/2006 8:41:50 PM|| 4043 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
10/13/2006 8:41:50 PM|| 13126 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU

Joker2 @ 2.63GHz(This one uses a 165 cpu)
10/13/2006 8:41:50 PM|| Number of CPUs: 2
10/13/2006 8:41:50 PM|| 4514 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
10/13/2006 8:41:50 PM|| 14646 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU

The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's
ID: 438381 · Report as offensive
Randy Hancock
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 06
Posts: 169
Credit: 220,579
RAC: 0
United States
Message 438383 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 5:29:35 UTC - in response to Message 438381.  

Hey Checkout Jedi Mstr's #'s

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<Friggin Off the Chart>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
7,300 floating point MIPS (Whetstone)
9,100 integer MIPS (Dhrystone)

That reminds me of something I saw the other day …

Quad G5, #4 on the Top Computers page:
Measured floating point speed 7014.48 million ops/sec
Measured integer speed 21281.03 million ops/sec

Aside from having four CPUs instead of two, the system looks very similar to my dual-core G5, which shows 1249.14 MFlops / 4021.61 MIps at the moment. How is it possible to get numbers six times faster? There’s nothing in its results’ output messages that indicates a custom BOINC client that might boost the benchmarks. Are there such that don’t have a ‘signature’?


Wow, My optys can't do much more than this:
Joker3 @ 2.36GHz(I'm upgrading to a pair of 275 cpus here[2.60GHz ea when overclocked], It now uses a 270 cpu)
10/13/2006 8:41:50 PM|| Number of CPUs: 2
10/13/2006 8:41:50 PM|| 4043 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
10/13/2006 8:41:50 PM|| 13126 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU

Joker2 @ 2.63GHz(This one uses a 165 cpu)
10/13/2006 8:41:50 PM|| Number of CPUs: 2
10/13/2006 8:41:50 PM|| 4514 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
10/13/2006 8:41:50 PM|| 14646 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU

damn wish mine could pull that off
the universe is to big to just have life on one planet
ID: 438383 · Report as offensive
Randy Hancock
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 06
Posts: 169
Credit: 220,579
RAC: 0
United States
Message 438384 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 5:32:47 UTC

if seti don't crash anytime soon I should be able pull a RAC of 1,800-1,900
the universe is to big to just have life on one planet
ID: 438384 · Report as offensive
Yamanipanuchi

Send message
Joined: 18 May 00
Posts: 87
Credit: 10,646,074
RAC: 0
United States
Message 438385 - Posted: 17 Oct 2006, 5:35:20 UTC

This might just be me, and dont get me wrong. I love computers.

But if I had $11,000 to spend I would use it on a car, or house. Atleast that would hold its value MUCH longer then any PC you purchase today.
ID: 438385 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 . . . 6 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : this is what I have it's not the biggest machine on here nor is it the smallest


 
©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.