Hello fellow KWSN

Newbie number-cruncher question -

I've been recommended Crunch3R's enhanced apps, but am confused as to which version to install...

The machine is an AMD Athlong 64x2 Dual Core Processor 4400+ but of course Vista is intalled with the 32-bit edition...

I presume I should install the 32-bit edition of Crunch3r's apps, but wanted to ask my teammates first.

Any help is greatly appreciated.

2.4V Windows x32 SSE2 AMD

..if you want to let run the 64 bit app, you must first install a 64 bit OS.


..not only your teammates can answer your questions..!! ;-)

Many thanks! Is there a way to know for sure that the enhanced app is running?

...
Many thanks! Is there a way to know for sure that the enhanced app is running?

No problem!
Because of this is here this board! :-)


..yes, of course:
[Control] + [Alt] + [Remove] on your keyboard -> Task Manager
..and then in 'Processes'

---

Hello fellow KWSN

Newbie number-cruncher question -

I've been recommended Crunch3R's enhanced apps, but am confused as to which version to install...

The machine is an AMD Athlong 64x2 Dual Core Processor 4400+ but of course Vista is intalled with the 32-bit edition...

I presume I should install the 32-bit edition of Crunch3r's apps, but wanted to ask my teammates first.

Any help is greatly appreciated.

2.4V Windows x32 SSE2 AMD

..if you want to let run the 64 bit app, you must first install a 64 bit OS.


..not only your teammates can answer your questions..!! ;-)

Many thanks! Is there a way to know for sure that the enhanced app is running?

Have a look at the top of your Messages tab in Boinc Manager.

If there is a line like "Found app_info.xml; Using anonymous platform" then you are using the optimised App.

F.

---

...
Many thanks! Is there a way to know for sure that the enhanced app is running?

No problem!
Because of this is here this board! :-)


..yes, of course:
[Control] + [Alt] + [Remove] on your keyboard -> Task Manager
..and then in 'Processes'

Got it... Perhaps on the next release for AMD, they'll change the description to not read "Intel EM64T optimized application" I'd think it should make reference to the AMD chipset for an AMD app.

Thanks again!

In past with BOINC V5.10.13 I had 3143 and 3144 MHz.
Since I updated to BOINC V5.10.28 and Crunch3rs BOINC V6.1.0.32-files, the CPU-speed is shown now much more different in the overview.. 30xx to 3144
..so I don't know where the problem is..

I let run the OC-settings 314 x 10 since a few months..

What are your experiences?

My experience is that the benchmark speed reported by BOINC - any version of BOINC - is completely untrustworthy and should be ignored at all times.

I Approve the motion:)

OOppsss.. no.. no..
I spoke about the speedtest-result of the app..
..written in <stderr_txt> in the berkeley-homepage-overview

<core_client_version>6.1.0</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<stderr_txt>
Optimized SETI@Home Enhanced application
Optimizers: Ben Herndon, Josef Segur, Alex Kan, Simon Zadra
   Version: Windows SSSE3 32-bit based on S@H V5.15  'Noo? No - Ni!'
  Revision: R-2.4V|xT|FFT:IPP_SSSE3|Ben-Joe
     CPUID: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU           @ 2.66GHz 
     [b]Speed: 4 x 3144 MHz [/b]
     Cache: L1=64K L2=4096K
  Features: MMX SSE SSE2 SSE3 SSSE3 
 
Work Unit Info
WU Credit multi. is:  2.85
WU True angle range:  0.400309

Spikes Pulses Triplets Gaussians Flops
   0      1       0        1     16433662670745

</stderr_txt>
]]>

Or they varied all the time and not since the update of the client?

Maybe it was also in past with other versions and now I noticed it the first time?

The Speedtest-result of the app varies now from 29xx to 319x

It's something to worry about, or it's normal?




AND, because of the higher Benchmarktest-result now of the client.. some people don't get higher Credits at other projects?

---

With The latest Optimized Boinc release on my Conroe Quad 6600 I have been having some problems with Boinc running as a phantom meaning Boinc reports as not running in Windows Task manager and the Client showing as a Blank task screen but CPU usage just running 100% but not producing and the only way to stop and reload Boinc requires a reboot.

Also Boinc will randomly shut it self down.
Reverted to 5.10.28 and the problems stopped.

At the same time that Boinc is fouled up other programs will run without a problem.

Operating system is XP Service pack2 Home addition and it is mildly over clocked to 3.8gig and is stable.

---

Come and Visit Us at
BBR TeamStarFire


****My 9th year of Seti****A Founding Member of the Original Seti Team Starfire at Broadband Reports.com ****

With The latest Optimized Boinc release on my Conroe Quad 6600 I have been having some problems with Boinc running as a phantom meaning Boinc reports as not running in Windows Task manager and the Client showing as a Blank task screen but CPU usage just running 100% but not producing and the only way to stop and reload Boinc requires a reboot.

Also Boinc will randomly shut it self down.
Reverted to 5.10.28 and the problems stopped.

At the same time that Boinc is fouled up other programs will run without a problem.

Operating system is XP Service pack2 Home addition and it is mildly over clocked to 3.8gig and is stable.

Nice OC! G0 Stepping? What are you using for cooling?

---

"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

Operating system is XP Service pack2 Home addition and it is mildly over clocked to 3.8gig and is stable.

Nice OC! G0 Stepping? What are you using for cooling?

I think he meant to say 3.08
(3.8 is in no way mild in my book!)

[edit]
And to the original poster, I'm running one of mine at almost that speed with Crunch3r's 32bit client, no issues for me. Have you actually tested the system out yet with Prime95 or some other stress test program?

-Dave

---

Operating system is XP Service pack2 Home addition and it is mildly over clocked to 3.8gig and is stable.

Nice OC! G0 Stepping? What are you using for cooling?

I think he meant to say 3.08
(3.8 is in no way mild in my book!)

-Dave

Perhaps.....3.8 would be awfully impressive with anything but phase cooling. That's why I asked.... :-)

---

"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

Operating system is XP Service pack2 Home addition and it is mildly over clocked to 3.8gig and is stable.

Nice OC! G0 Stepping? What are you using for cooling?

I think he meant to say 3.08
(3.8 is in no way mild in my book!)

[edit]
And to the original poster, I'm running one of mine at almost that speed with Crunch3r's 32bit client, no issues for me. Have you actually tested the system out yet with Prime95 or some other stress test program?

-Dave

Sorry for the typo you are correct it is at 3.08 Using TEC cooling. But the MB is not really up to handling a Quad it is an Abit IB9 965 chip set. Only a backup board it normally handles a Conroe Core2 6600 with a 3.6gig OC yes .6 no typo this time.

Yes it is a G0..........

Alway run Prim 95 for at least 24 to 48 hours before going into Seti production. Extreme test and a version for every core running concurrently I have 3 PentD 9xx with Over Clocks of from 4.1 to 4.3 and stable a Conroe Core2 6600 at 3.6stable also. This quad is at 3.08 but should go higher with a better board.



Have an Abit IP35 due in Friday and my AW9D just came in from an RMA got a totally new board for the RMA. So there will be 2 Quad 6600 and the Core2 6600.

Winter time they pull in cold New England MA air Directly from outside, Summer time A frigged air cold room using 16k BTU air conditioning.

---

Come and Visit Us at
BBR TeamStarFire


****My 9th year of Seti****A Founding Member of the Original Seti Team Starfire at Broadband Reports.com ****

Perhaps.....3.8 would be awfully impressive with anything but phase cooling. That's why I asked.... :-)

Well, not sooo impressive as someone may think. Actually my G0 Quad
runs at 3845 watercooled. And the CPU isnt as good as i wish. Only
a VID 1,2875.

Helli

Well, not sooo impressive as someone may think. Actually my G0 Quad
runs at 3845 watercooled. And the CPU isnt as good as i wish. Only
a VID 1,2875.

Helli

proprietary water cooling setup or home brew Helli?

jason

---

"Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions.

No, not an All-In-One Solution.
Individual parts for maximum cooling.

Helli

No, not an All-In-One Solution.
Individual parts for maximum cooling.

Helli

Good, thanks for letting me know. I had done some research and was pretty disappointed in the 'all-in-one' offerings and had figured home brew (individual parts) would be the way to go. (planning for next year) Cheers!
[EDIT. PS, if you wanted to start a thread about water cooling specifically I'll be interested, and probably others I'd guess.]

Jason

---

"Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions.

No, not an All-In-One Solution.
Individual parts for maximum cooling.

Helli

Good, thanks for letting me know. I had done some research and was pretty disappointed in the 'all-in-one' offerings and had figured home brew (individual parts) would be the way to go. (planning for next year) Cheers!
[EDIT. PS, if you wanted to start a thread about water cooling specifically I'll be interested, and probably others I'd guess.]

Jason

I would be very interested in water cooling efforts with the Q6600 using individual components- what has worked and equally important what has not... I have a G0 on air at 3.0 and a B3(dog!) on air at 2.7... adding another G0 rig tonight... Nirvana NV120 on the B3 and Zalman 9700 on the G0...
Jon

To get back on topic, since the latest posts where kinda highjacking the thread... :(

Well, in 2.4V we do not use the asm crap (wich is a wastless affort) to identify the cpu and get info on cpu frequency ....

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Cpu id intrinsic code Crunch3r

#include "cpu_check.h"
#include "ipp.h"
void intrinsic_cpuid()
{
__cpuid(CPUInfo, 0);
nIds = CPUInfo[0];
memset(CPUString, 0, sizeof(CPUString));
*((int*)CPUString) = CPUInfo[1];
*((int*)(CPUString+4)) = CPUInfo[3];
*((int*)(CPUString+8)) = CPUInfo[2];

// Get the information associated with each valid Id
for (i=0; i<=nIds; ++i)
{
__cpuid(CPUInfo, i);
// Interpret CPU feature information.
if (i == 1)
{
nSteppingID = CPUInfo[0] & 0xf;
nModel = (CPUInfo[0] >> 4) & 0xf;
nFamily = (CPUInfo[0] >> 8) & 0xf;
nProcessorType = (CPUInfo[0] >> 12) & 0x3;
nExtendedmodel = (CPUInfo[0] >> 16) & 0xf;
nExtendedfamily = (CPUInfo[0] >> 20) & 0xff;
nBrandIndex = CPUInfo[1] & 0xff;
nCLFLUSHcachelinesize = ((CPUInfo[1] >> 8) & 0xff) * 8;
nAPICPhysicalID = (CPUInfo[1] >> 24) & 0xff;
bSSE3NewInstructions = (CPUInfo[2] & 0x1) || false;
bMONITOR_MWAIT = (CPUInfo[2] & 0x8) || false;
bCPLQualifiedDebugStore = (CPUInfo[2] & 0x10) || false;
bThermalMonitor2 = (CPUInfo[2] & 0x100) || false;
nFeatureInfo = CPUInfo[3];
}
}

// Calling __cpuid with 0x80000000 as the InfoType argument
// gets the number of valid extended IDs.
__cpuid(CPUInfo, 0x80000000);
nExIds = CPUInfo[0];
memset(CPUBrandString, 0, sizeof(CPUBrandString));

// Get the information associated with each extended ID.
for (i=0x80000000; i<=nExIds; ++i)
{
__cpuid(CPUInfo, i);
// Interpret CPU brand string and cache information.
if (i == 0x80000002)
memcpy(CPUBrandString, CPUInfo, sizeof(CPUInfo));
else if (i == 0x80000003)
memcpy(CPUBrandString + 16, CPUInfo, sizeof(CPUInfo));
else if (i == 0x80000004)
memcpy(CPUBrandString + 32, CPUInfo, sizeof(CPUInfo));
else if (i == 0x80000006)
{
nCacheLineSize = CPUInfo[2] & 0xff;
nL2Associativity = (CPUInfo[2] >> 12) & 0xf;
nCacheSizeK = (CPUInfo[2] >> 16) & 0xffff;
}
}
// Display all the information in user-friendly format.
if (nExIds >= 0x80000004)
fprintf( stderr, "%10s: %s \\n"
, "CPUID"
, CPUBrandString);
int myfreq;
ippGetCpuFreqMhz(&myfreq);
fprintf(stderr,"%10s: %d x %d MHz ","Speed",ippGetNumCoresOnDie(), myfreq);
fprintf(stderr,"\\n");
if (nExIds >= 0x80000006)
{
fprintf( stderr, "%10s: L1=%dK L2=%dK\\n"
, "Cache"
, nCacheLineSize
, nCacheSizeK);
}

if (nIds >= 1)
{
........
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////


So it might be possible that if the system is under high load the values for clock speed change a bit.

HTH

---

Join BOINC United now!

No, not an All-In-One Solution.
Individual parts for maximum cooling.

Helli

Good, thanks for letting me know. I had done some research and was pretty disappointed in the 'all-in-one' offerings and had figured home brew (individual parts) would be the way to go. (planning for next year) Cheers!
[EDIT. PS, if you wanted to start a thread about water cooling specifically I'll be interested, and probably others I'd guess.]

Jason

I would be very interested in water cooling efforts with the Q6600 using individual components- what has worked and equally important what has not... I have a G0 on air at 3.0 and a B3(dog!) on air at 2.7... adding another G0 rig tonight... Nirvana NV120 on the B3 and Zalman 9700 on the G0...
Jon

I as well would be interested in a water cool thread. I agree the all in one setups are over priced and leave a lot desired.

Putting together my second Quad 6600 as well all the parts just arrived from NewEgg.

Here are the components:

ABS Tagen 700watt PSU
Abit MB IP-35
Intel Quad 6600 /G0
AData DDR2 6400 C4 4gig (great reviews for OC)
Cooler Master GeminII CPU cooler
2 Scythe Ultrakaze 120mm/38mm CPU fans 133cfm each
Arctic Silver 5

That makes 2 G0 Quad 6600 OC??, 1 Conroe Core2 6600 OC 3.6gig, and 3 PentD a 930, 940, 950 OCd to 4gig+

=============================================================================================
============================================================================================

Re-installed the optimized Boinc by Crunch3r seems to be working well now I guess the first install had a glitch in the install process.

Thanks for the help and Crunch3r thanks for a great job on The Optimized Boinc.

Hank

---

Come and Visit Us at
BBR TeamStarFire


****My 9th year of Seti****A Founding Member of the Original Seti Team Starfire at Broadband Reports.com ****

Back on topic(??) I found boinc.exe in a CPU loop when I got up today ... one thread was getting CPU time (SETI time)the other one was not (BOINC.EXE time).

I don't know if this is a 6.1 bug ... I've never had the std BOINC.EXE loop ...

I'm using a 3.0 P4 w/HT and using the "knights" optimized SETI app.

If I see this again ... where should I look or a clue to its cause (If anywhere ;-))

Well, I've been running the 32 bit version since Dec 1 and things have been very smooth so far with no problems. If my pendings are any judge, it crunching way more efficiently as well as I now have 3585 pending credits...either that or my wingmen are on holidays...LOL!

Thanks, Crunch3r!

Hi!

I'm running Crunch3r's 6.1.0 32 bit version since Nov 30 without any problem. All works fine and better than before.

---

Logan.

BOINC FAQ Service (Ahora, también disponible en Español/Now available in Spanish)