Maybe this dude should do his homework a little more before making such a bastant announcement.

Thanks ChrisD, I've just learnt a new word ... lol.
A Etymological Dictionary of the Scottish Language defines bastant as "possessed of ability" here

Even typos can be fun.

Andrew

Hi :)

It wasn't a typo. ;)

Read a few lines further down in the book and You'll find the text:

His Majestie, perceiving the danger, not being bastant to resist the enemy, retired confusedly in great haste to ---.

The meaning is here 'self confident', 'convinced of his own ability'.

'Convinced that he is superior to everybody else'.

This is exactly what I intended to say. We actually use the word in the Danish language which has gotten a lot from the scottish, meaning just that.

ChrisD

---

Maybe this dude should do his homework a little more before making such a bastant announcement.

Thanks ChrisD, I've just learnt a new word ... lol.
A Etymological Dictionary of the Scottish Language defines bastant as "possessed of ability" here

Even typos can be fun.

Andrew

Hi :)

It wasn't a typo. ;)

Read a few lines further down in the book and You'll find the text:

His Majestie, perceiving the danger, not being bastant to resist the enemy, retired confusedly in great haste to ---.

The meaning is here 'self confident', 'convinced of his own ability'.

'Convinced that he is superior to everybody else'.

This is exactly what I intended to say. We actually use the word in the Danish language which has gotten a lot from the scottish, meaning just that.

ChrisD

My mistake then. Thanks for the clarification.
I thought my English was pretty good, but I haven't started studying Scotish yet. Thanks for the tip.

Andrew

Phenom host Dacom-1 With regards to rigs, cpus,gpus etc, it is a big wide world out there with billions of individuals with freedom of thought & choice. It would be a sad state of affairs if all we had was just the one choice.

Quick question - I've tried to get it running 1 core only for S@H while the other 3 are running the WCG Bunny Race, but it is running 50/50, how do I change it?

@ChrisD, I did have 4x 1gb sticks but 2 were dead so will have to wait until my next trip to London to replace. Will go for your recommendation. Thanks.

PJ

---

snip...

Quick question - I've tried to get it running 1 core only for S@H while the other 3 are running the WCG Bunny Race, but it is running 50/50, how do I change it?

snip

PJ

Set with resource share, but it will not happen immediately but should settle to 3 and 1 cores within a day at most.

Thanks WinterKnight, appreciated.

PJ

---

snip...

Quick question - I've tried to get it running 1 core only for S@H while the other 3 are running the WCG Bunny Race, but it is running 50/50, how do I change it?

snip

PJ

Set with resource share, but it will not happen immediately but should settle to 3 and 1 cores within a day at most.

Or you could set up a separate profile, if you're not using them all, for "school" for example, and set that profile to use only 1 processor. Then set that machine to that location.

-Dave

[edit] actually, that might mean that both projects only use the one, I don't think you can have a machine be one location for Seti and another for the other project, so just ignore my idea....

---

Thanks Dave, however, WinterKnight's suggestion worked. Now working 3 + 1.

PJ

---

In response to Phenom Exposed! Shipping with flaky 3rd cores a friend who has a Phenom, has done some tests on his.
And ChrisD is correct, in that it is probably a problem for those using an older motherboard. The newer motherboards have more powerful voltage regulator for the cpu, and core 2 doesn't see a loss of volts when things are stressed.

In response to Phenom Exposed! Shipping with flaky 3rd cores a friend who has a Phenom, has done some tests on his.
And ChrisD is correct, in that it is probably a problem for those using an older motherboard. The newer motherboards have more powerful voltage regulator for the cpu, and core 2 doesn't see a loss of volts when things are stressed.

Just finished reading it on Tom's. I have a B2 9500 & it's been running 60 hours non stop(so far) @100% load with no problems.

A lot of posters on Tom's state that they can't get past 215mhz on the FSB.
From what ChrisD has been saying, I think those posters have upgraded to the 9500 using older kit. All my kit is new but not sure when the M2M32 WS Pro was orginally released as I only purchased it 3 weeks ago.

As it stands, I'm happy with my 9500 & looking forward to upgrading my ram as per ChrisD's recommendation.

---

use that one --> http://calbe.dw70.de/2.4V/2.4V_Windows_x32_SSE2A.zip

Hi, going to be setting up my Phenom(s) later on, so revisting this thread.

Presume the same file for XP 32bit too?

Also, With regards the enhanced App, what does "features: cpu affinity and delayed return results immediately" mean exactly? What benefit will that give?
Also, other than the additional features, will the App still work in the same way as the official App? i.e. will I still be able to use Boinc View with it?

Thanks for your time :)

---

I think you are interchanging the word application with the client. The optimized app is just what BOINCview and BOINC manager oversee. And the client is what you use to manage the app.

The client (Crunch3r's client is what you're looking at is my guess) is what has the CPU affinity and Delayed Return Results.

CPU affinity assigns a task to one core/thread so Windows doesn't switch it back and forth (theoretically reducing the time to complete), this has been debated many times here.

The delayed return results means that instead of contacting the server according to the "connect every" setting, it waits 1 minute after the task has uploaded and reports the result. This has also been debated many times here.

---

Daniel

I think you are interchanging the word application with the client. The optimized app is just what BOINCview and BOINC manager oversee. And the client is what you use to manage the app.

The client (Crunch3r's client is what you're looking at is my guess) is what has the CPU affinity and Delayed Return Results.

CPU affinity assigns a task to one core/thread so Windows doesn't switch it back and forth (theoretically reducing the time to complete), this has been debated many times here.

The delayed return results means that instead of contacting the server according to the "connect every" setting, it waits 1 minute after the task has uploaded and reports the result. This has also been debated many times here.

You are right Daniel. It's early here and I'm muddling my words.

I'll have another search on "affinity" and see if I can decide if that is a good or a bad thing then.

---

I'll have another search on "affinity" and see if I can decide if that is a good or a bad thing then.

I think you'll find there's a third answer - 'indifferent'. Neither good nor bad, it just doen't make any measurable difference.

Unless you test it and find out something new about the Phenom - I don't think that's been reported on yet.

And Yes, you can use BoincView with it, I do.

-Dave

---

If anyone's curious enough here's two Phenom 9600's I've just built. The first is using the vanilla app, the second is using the one from Crunch3rs site. The BOINC client themselves are both 6.1.0, again from Crunch3r.

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=4243934
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=4245718

Both have only just started, so they'll take some time to settle down.

If anyone's curious enough here's two Phenom 9600's I've just built. The first is using the vanilla app, the second is using the one from Crunch3rs site. The BOINC client themselves are both 6.1.0, again from Crunch3r.

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=4243934
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=4245718

Both have only just started, so they'll take some time to settle down.

I've loaded their hostid's into a copy of Fred W's data vac. I'll try to run it daily for a while.

While RAC takes a reasonably predictable time to stabilize, getting a good individuals vs. AR plot depends more on luck of the splitters. The good news is that looking at the plots gives a good way to judge whether a decent sample is at hand.

As it seems likely the two hosts will get pretty similar supplies of work units from the splitters, the ap difference picture should develop nicely as soon as the supply of ARs covers a reasonable range.

I'll also have data from my Q6600 (Conroe-generation quad, lightly overclocked at 3.006 GHz) and an X9650 (Penryn-generation quad, overclocked to 3.67 GHz) available in the same spread sheet, which should help identify such things as:

less timing spread for VHAR units (to be expected if the Phenom's memory interface provides less memory contention)

different CPU vs. AR relationship

and, of course, just the overall speed comparison for AR, though that will also suffer from OS difference and debates about which clock rate is the "right" one to compare.

---

I've loaded their hostid's into a copy of Fred W's data vac.

So far the Phenom running Crunch3r code has only reported results from an extremely narrow slice of Angle Ranges near 0.39, so I won't post graphs, just a quick comparison for results at that A.R.

These timings are not formal averages, but good eyeball estimates of the typical reported CPU seconds for a successful result very close to .395 AR.

12050 (2.31) GHz Phenom running Stock Linux ap (assumed clock)
9175 2.31 GHz Phenom running Crunch3r Linux ap (reported clock)
6300 3.01 GHz Conroe-class Quad running Crunch3r Windows XP (known clock)
4300 3.67 GHz Penryn-class Quad running Crunch3r Windows Vista (reported clock)

With luck, within a few days we'll have a broad enough AR sample to get a clearer picture. A quick initial look at the stock ap Phenom suggests it has a result-to-result CPU time variation more like the Q6600 (high, suggesting some memory or cache contention) than like the X9650 (low, suggesting that the larger cache or a better memory implementation has cut down contention effects). But a better comparison on that point will be with the crunch3r ap Phenom, as the pattern of memory use may be materially influenced by the ap design.

---

I've loaded their hostid's into a copy of Fred W's data vac.

So far the Phenom running Crunch3r code has only reported results from an extremely narrow slice of Angle Ranges near 0.39, so I won't post graphs, just a quick comparison for results at that A.R.

These timings are not formal averages, but good eyeball estimates of the typical reported CPU seconds for a successful result very close to .395 AR.

12050 (2.31) GHz Phenom running Stock Linux ap (assumed clock)
9175 2.31 GHz Phenom running Crunch3r Linux ap (reported clock)
6300 3.01 GHz Conroe-class Quad running Crunch3r Windows XP (known clock)
4300 3.67 GHz Penryn-class Quad running Crunch3r Windows Vista (reported clock)

With luck, within a few days we'll have a broad enough AR sample to get a clearer picture. A quick initial look at the stock ap Phenom suggests it has a result-to-result CPU time variation more like the Q6600 (high, suggesting some memory or cache contention) than like the X9650 (low, suggesting that the larger cache or a better memory implementation has cut down contention effects). But a better comparison on that point will be with the crunch3r ap Phenom, as the pattern of memory use may be materially influenced by the ap design.

My phased Penny seems to be back on track at 4.58ghz if you want to compare to it......HarvX64-C2QUAD

---

"Time is simply the mechanism that keeps everything from happening all at once."

My second Phenom with the enhanced app doesn't seem too healthy. Although the other machine had a days headstart it already has 66% more results returned and the RAC is already showing as higher. However I've hit issues with the Linux install. I'm getting lockups on the third core. It looks like the PSU isn't giving it enough juice, possibly becuase the PSU has a 20 pin main power connector not the 24 pin that the vanilla app box has. Currently the box is semi locked up and can't reboot. It'll be a good few hours before I can get home and manually power cycle it and swap the PSU out.

---

My second Phenom with the enhanced app doesn't seem too healthy. Although the other machine had a days headstart it already has 66% more results returned and the RAC is already showing as higher. However I've hit issues with the Linux install. I'm getting lockups on the third core. It looks like the PSU isn't giving it enough juice, possibly becuase the PSU has a 20 pin main power connector not the 24 pin that the vanilla app box has. Currently the box is semi locked up and can't reboot. It'll be a good few hours before I can get home and manually power cycle it and swap the PSU out.

It may be Your Mainboard, not the PSU. In order to feed a Phenom You need at least a mainboard with the 4 pin aux power connector located adjacent to the CPU. It is a +12 Volts Seperate CPU Converter Feed. (You don't mention this connector, so You may have it already. If You do, You are probably right about the PSU).

The Power drain is about 75 Amps at 1.2 Volts, so a good number of CPU Pins must be assigned to feeding the Core. The Phenom has 2 seperate Power Planes for the core-power. The standard AM2 board has just one, so if the design is poor, You may starve parts of the CPU using an AM2 board.

My ASUS Boards are all just AM2 boards, but they use an 8 phase Core Power Converter, which may be why I do not have any problems feeding the Phenom.

I'll try finding the Pinout of an Athlon64 X2 and the Phenom, to see the distribution of the Core Power feed Pins..

ChrisD

---