Or just a another couple of months for ASUS to work the bugs out of the BIOS code hopefully. But ASUS is absolutely the last vendor to offer updated BIOS with the latest AGESA code.

---

Seti@Home classic workunits:20,676 CPU time:74,226 hours

A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association)

Memory considerations for Ryzen 3000 systems as tested by Linus Media Group: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHJ16hD4ysk

---

Memory considerations for Ryzen 3000 systems as tested by Linus Media Group: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHJ16hD4ysk

Good video. Shows that AMD has been able to engineer the maximum performance even out of base Jedec memory speeds. So you don't have to spend the premium bucks on the fastest memory/lowest latency kits that you had to do for best performance on Ryzen Gen. 1 and Ryzen Gen. 2.

---

Seti@Home classic workunits:20,676 CPU time:74,226 hours

A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association)

And the leaked benchmarks for the Epyc processors using the new chiplet design are out. How about 64 cores and 128 threads and 256MB of cache?

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-epyc-7742-vs-intel-xeon-benchmarks,40089.html

---

Seti@Home classic workunits:20,676 CPU time:74,226 hours

A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association)

And the leaked benchmarks for the Epyc processors using the new chiplet design are out. How about 64 cores and 128 threads and 256MB of cache?

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-epyc-7742-vs-intel-xeon-benchmarks,40089.html

Sounds like a CPU that SETI wouldnt be able to load 100% because of the CPU WU restrictions :P

---

Seti@Home classic workunits: 29,492 CPU time: 134,419 hours

Nope you would still be restricted to only 100 cpu tasks running on it at any time. Might be enough reduction to not have the cpu exhibit overcommitment and can use the other 28 threads to feed 20 gpus with 8 threads left over to run the Desktop.

---

Seti@Home classic workunits:20,676 CPU time:74,226 hours

A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association)

Nope you would still be restricted to only 100 cpu tasks running on it at any time. Might be enough reduction to not have the cpu exhibit overcommitment and can use the other 28 threads to feed 20 gpus with 8 threads left over to run the Desktop.

Is the 100 cpu task a BOINC limit or a Seti limit?
If it is a Seti limit you could be running another cpu-based project with no loss of production.

Tom

---

A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association).

I believe it is only a Seti limit. But I have no experience with any other projects cpu applications. I wonder if the QC Chemistry app at GPUGrid has any limit.

---

Seti@Home classic workunits:20,676 CPU time:74,226 hours

A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association)

Is it perhaps time for those in charge of SETI development to review all such limits in the light of improved or enhanced capability? Surely these will be constants easily modified. Of particular concern is the limit on downloading background tasks on my 2990 because every time SETI goes off line I run out of work very quickly.
Who is actually responsible for making this sort of decision?
jsm

It would have to be a consensus among all the BOINC and Seti developers to increase the task per cpu count. The controls are in the server side software. The lead developer would be David Anderson.

---

Seti@Home classic workunits:20,676 CPU time:74,226 hours

A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association)

It is down to the day-to-day project team, which is lead by Eric Korpela.
These day DA is taking a back seat from day-to-day life of SETI@Home, spending a chunk of his time working on Nebula and Science United.

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

SETI is one of very few projects that use the processor limits.

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

Is the 100 cpu task a BOINC limit or a Seti limit?

It is a Seti@home limit because the Seti@home servers can't cope with the load a larger amount of Results-out-in-the-field produces.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

It is down to the day-to-day project team, which is lead by Eric Korpela.
These day DA is taking a back seat from day-to-day life of SETI@Home, spending a chunk of his time working on Nebula and Science United.

I'm not talking about project management. I am speaking of code development. Eric has done very little in the past. Look at the contributors list at github/boinc. DA is the major code writer.
https://github.com/BOINC/boinc/graphs/contributors

The server code commits have been predominately by Tristan Olive, Shawn Kwang, Christian Beer, Kevin Reed and Vitali Koshura. Those are the guys you need to petition to increase the cpu task limit.

---

Seti@Home classic workunits:20,676 CPU time:74,226 hours

A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association)

To Keith’s question on GPUGrid. I don’t think there is. I restrict by how many days worth, usually half day with no additional. Since there hasn’t been any for a long time it’s hard to remember.

---

Well whoever is responsible I hope they will consider that to hold back frm change can lead to stagnation. I would be disappointed if TR3 comes out with 64/128, I shell out a considerable sum and then find it cannot run SETI at better than a Ryzen 3 m/c.
jsm

AMD Rome Second Generation EPYC Review: 2x 64-core Benchmarked.
AMD have finally done it- they didn't just catch up with Intel, they're way out in front (for most workloads).

Summary-

Sixty-four cores. Each core with an improved Zen 2 core, offering ~15% better IPC performance than Naples (as tested in our consumer CPU review), and doubled AVX2/FP performance. The chip has a total of 256 MB of L3 cache, and 128 PCIe 4.0 lanes. AMD's second generation EPYC, in this case the EPYC 7742, is a behemoth...

For those with little time: at the high end with socketed x86 CPUs, AMD offers you up to 50 to 100% higher performance while offering at a 40% lower price. Unless you go for the low end server CPUs, there is no contest: AMD offers much better performance for a much lower price than Intel, with more memory channels and over 2x the number of PCIe lanes. These are also PCIe 4.0 lanes. What if you want to more than 2 TB of RAM in your dual socket server? The discount in favor of AMD just became 50%.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

Phoronix has also taken a look at the new Epyc Rome CPUs.

AMD EPYC 7502 + EPYC 7742 Linux Performance Benchmarks

---

Grant
Darwin NT

Phoronix has also taken a look at the new Epyc Rome CPUs.

AMD EPYC 7502 + EPYC 7742 Linux Performance Benchmarks

Tom's Hardware also reports on that from earlier 'leaked' results:

AMD EPYC Rome 7742 Battles Intel Xeon in Benchmarks Posted Online

An anonymous source has submitted initial benchmarks of AMD's rumored 64-core, 128-thread EPYC 7742 processor to the publicly available OpenBenchmarking database. The posting has since been removed, but we managed to grab the test results...

... The EPYC 7742's alleged dominance continued to be seen in rendering workloads. The 64-core beast purportedly outperformed two Xeon Platinum 8280s...



The return of AMD has been a very long time coming...

Here's hoping there's no repeat of the 'dirty tricks' to stymie AMD this time round!


Happy fast crunchin'!
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

This may be obvious, but if you have so many PCIe lanes, memory lanes, and cores, wouldn't a server chock full of GPUs be the better way if you wanted to just purely crunch Seti/Boinc? I'm sure the cost is what prohibits most people from going this route, but I'm wondering if there are other reasons besides this.

---

Seti@home classic: 1,456 results, 1.613 years CPU time