Thanks Mark, you would think the 3700+ w/1MB cache would be a little faster than that over the 3000+. Should I go with the Athlon 64 SSE3 client? I tried running that one first and got some errors so I went with the SSE2. Maybe I should give the SSE3 versions another try.

Vyper... no way... I've got my 3000+ clocked at 2.8 Ghz, memory 255(510 DDR) 1.5-2-2-5 timings and crunching 31 minutes average with Cruncher's client.. maybe his 3200+ have got 1 MB cache or what?! :D

Hey everyone, I'm more of a hardware geek than a software or in this case client/performance geek and I was wondering if someone could look at my current stats and see if they're on par for my computer. I'm running 3 computers, but the one I'm mostly curious about is my Athlon 64 which I have running the SSE2. Here's the computer specs:

Gigabyte K8NE MB
Athlon 64 3700+ 1MB cache
1GB Corsair 3200 ram
Water Cooled (93 degrees at 100% load with room temp at 71)

Any suggestions for improvement if needed would be appreciated.

Don wrote:

Yeah, I have a 3200+ running at 3.72 Gig, and dual channel ddr running as ddr453, with 2-3-2-5 T1 timing. Just screams with the sse3 client. Check out:

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=1607541

You're using a multiplier of 16 instead of the default 11?

No, still default multiplier. But you can lower the memory speed, tell it ddr-333 or however your mobo does it, and then crank up the HT speed.

And this is all with the stock AMD retail HSF.

You do not have to worry about hitting 50C, like you did with the old athlons. The amd64s happily crunch away up to 65C or higher.

This one is running at 52-54, and solid as a rock.

Don

I'm sorry, Don, but nothing you have written makes any sense. My 4000+ (running at stock 2.4GHz) is faster than your overclocked 3200+. If your claim of running it at 3.72GHz were true, it would be much faster than mine. HT? That has no effect whatsoever on CPU clock speed. You are getting good times for a 3200+ but I think you need to look at the numbers again and compare with what you have claimed.

Yeah, I have a 3200+ running at 3.72 Gig, and dual channel ddr running as ddr453, with 2-3-2-5 T1 timing. Just screams with the sse3 client. Check out:

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=1607541

You have a proper pair.

Tests on standard and real WU's show that the Crunch3r SSE3 on an Athlon 64 runs at least 2 minutes to maybe three minutes faster than the Crunch3r SSE2 does on the same system.... You might need a fast and optimized memory configuration to get the bigger performance improvement.

My 3000+ is a Venice core, which thus allegedly supports SSE3. Mark

It would be better to find out what instruction sets your AMD chip supports. Run either CPU-Z or WCPUID, as suggested earlier in this thread, and satisfy the speculation.

LINK What was it that Ben Franklin once said about security and liberty...and then there's George Orwell.

It does say "intent to annoy" which is an important distinction.

In the U.S. Legal System, you'd have to prove that the person was intentionally annoying, not just annoying. You'd have to prove that they did it on purpose.

BTW SX or DX for those 486?

The one I seem to have, that Cyrix still stuck on one of the boards, is of course DX. I don't recall that Cyrix ever made an SX, though perhaps they should have, considering their reputation for sloooow FPUs. The boards themselves are 3rd-party generic and can handle either.

Had one of these but it had a spot on the board to install a second FPU, thus making it a DX. I installed one and it made a big difference. That was the only upgrade that could be done since the CPU was soldered to the board.

Sad sad sad. Intel 386SX 33 MHZ here. Anyone still remember the days of the turbo button and the MHz display? I thought it was super cool when they got the display to read 100 finally.

Oh, and the reason Microsoft is having so many problems is that they steal, and the government doesn't like competition.

you sreousle still have that in opertation? what it doing?

I remeber them. my first PC was DEC 386SEX25 which I upgreaded to 12MB of ram I learnt the meanin of patiace surifing the web on it with 14.4K modem

BTW SX or DX for those 486?

You want my ancient Gigabyte board with the Athlon 900 I used with it? That should make up the difference. :-)

your calling that Ancient?!? I only just retired my K6 !

Mark, just checked to see how your results are doing and you are not that much behind now, just a few hundred seconds. But then my times are not quite as good as they could be either since I'm running an FTP daemon as well as streaming music 24/7. Wish I could afford to have a second system running the other processes.

Yes my AGP is locked and at standard voltage
Ram OCZ400512ELDC-K is at 2.7v as recommended by ocz for this ram
Vcore is at 1.65v When the system was new I needed 1.70v to be stable o/c but after breakin time was able to lower it to 1.65v
Oh and the MB is K7N2 Delta.

I ran this system at stock speed for a month when i bought it b4 ever attempting to o/c. The Barton core seems to really like running at 200Mhz almost as if it was designed for that speed. You may not be able to get the same memory timings as i do, depends on your ram but Should have no problem with the rest.

P.S. Even IDENTICAL hardware is never Exactly the same. In other words your milage may vary.

Now that Mark's problem is solved, why is my client claiming only around 6 credits per WU?
Yesterday I upgraded from BOINC v4.45 to v5.2.13, and have installed Crunch3r's optimised application.
This is a Pentium M 1.6 GHz, not overclocked (except the graphics chipset, which doesn't matter in this case) with 512 MB DDR memory.
My WUs, on the other hand, now complete in half the time - from 90 minutes to about 45 minutes each. Could that be the reason for the low claimed credit?