Posts by Hypnotoad
|
1)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
CPUs: Intel vs AMD (Intel update, IDF 2006)
(Message 263400)
Posted 17 Mar 2006 by  Hypnotoad
Post: "Integrated graphics" that use the CPU RAM effectively steal a large share of memory bandwidth away from the CPU. For most normal usage, this is crippling for CPU performance in that the CPU is left waiting idle while starved of memory accesses. Thanks for pointing this out, guys... does anyone know if it matters if I get a cheap PCI Express card or a cheaper AGP card? I'm not planning on doing any serious gaming on the computer, but I want to know if it matters for other things. Forgive my ignorance, some of my favorite computers don't have any graphics cards... or monitors, for that matter! |
|
2)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
CPUs: Intel vs AMD (Intel update, IDF 2006)
(Message 263201)
Posted 17 Mar 2006 by Hypnotoad
Post: IMHO Intel chips have always kicked butt over AMD for serious applications. Although I am the first to point out that Intel chips are superior as S@h crunching workstations due to their recent adoption of enormous CPU caches, AMD's HyperTransport and really fast bus speeds make Opterons better to run as serious servers than anything Intel has or will have anytime soon. And servers are definitely for grown-ups! The basic difference right now and for the next 3-5 years is that AMD moves data better, and Intel crunches data better. They each have their lucrative niches (enterprise servers for Opteron, high-end workstations for Xeon). |
|
3)
Message boards :
SETI@home Science :
Could we be the OLDEST civilization in the galaxy?
(Message 263169)
Posted 17 Mar 2006 by Hypnotoad
Post: I rather envision building an intergalactic beacon. Perhaps form a black hole and start feeding it stars on a regular basis. Maybe align galaxies in specific patterns? If relativity holds up these may be billion or multi-billion year projects. Bit tough to sell to today's corporate boards, but to a civilization with 5 billion years under it's belt? An intergalactic beacon is a great way to invite nefarious aliens our way, who could destroy us all. Human history is full of bloody clashes between different civilizations when they discover each other. And that was just in-fighting among the same species! I hope our species will never advertise itself to the universe, if it makes it far enough without destroying itself to even think about such a thing. |
|
4)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Help me make a cheap SETI machine
(Message 263098)
Posted 17 Mar 2006 by Hypnotoad
Post: To really make your SETI-indifferent wife or husband happy, you could stick a 2.53 GHz Celeron D in with the components I listed. And it would run cooler without a case, if you can remember to blow off the dust every week or two. That cuts the price way down, to $104 ($146 BELOW TARGET!). But the cache falls from 2 MB to 256 KB. Of course, my Athlon 64 has a mere 512 KB of cache and it does okay. Celeron D 310 (SSE3, 256kb) $49 ABIT BH 7 Board $30 Kingston 128mb DDR400 $14 Maxtor DiamondMax 4 GB HD $11 Total: $104 Decoration (optional): Apex 350w Case $25 Total: $129 It would be fun to put together a SETI Super-Farm with, say, 30 or 40 of these SSE3 crunchers for the price of one lowly Power Mac in 1994! |
|
5)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
CPUs: Intel vs AMD (Intel update, IDF 2006)
(Message 263009)
Posted 16 Mar 2006 by Hypnotoad
Post: It seems your mb has on-board video, correct? If so the "missing" RAM is used by Win/mb to run graphics. I saw no graphics card in your specs. Huge drain on your resources and cycles if that's the case. Get even a cheap card and you'll speed up a LOT. Is an on-board GPU really a drain on CPU cycles? SETI@home never uses more than 35 MB of memory, so I certainly don't need to free up more RAM. I could definitely get a cheap graphics card, but didn't think I needed one since I'm not a gamer (you blew my cover there, didn't you!). |
|
6)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Help me make a cheap SETI machine
(Message 262969)
Posted 16 Mar 2006 by Hypnotoad
Post: Maybe I'm missing something.....I don't see a motherboard on your lists. You weren't missing it! I forgot it... if you want the system to run, it'll cost $305... $55 over target. But it would be a FAST $305!! |
|
7)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Help me make a cheap SETI machine
(Message 262962)
Posted 16 Mar 2006 by Hypnotoad
Post: a 2mb P4D 2.8 runs $1 more than the entire rig I quoted. The 2mb P4D is $42 less (by itself) than the rig you quoted. A 4mb P4D is $2 less than the rig you quoted. The best and cheapest sytem that I would build: 2mb Intel Pentium 4 D $212 ASROCK 775VM800 Board $43 Apex 350w Case $25 Kingston 128mb DDR400 $14 Maxtor DiamondMax 4 GB HD $11 Total: $305 This would significantly outperform the $252 config, IMHO. For really awesome performance, the dual-core 4 MB cache version would be $345. SETI@home never uses more than 40mb of memory (hence the "only" 128mb memory in the system). This is an optimized SETI crunching system. For a file server too, you'd probably want to boost up the disk space from 4 GB to 80 GB or more. That'd cost another $30. Maybe also buy another $8 of RAM (256mb). |
|
8)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
CPUs: Intel vs AMD (Intel update, IDF 2006)
(Message 262957)
Posted 16 Mar 2006 by Hypnotoad
Post: your memory configuration appears to be odd (896 MB). What are your system specs? I looked up my specs and I was mistaken on my own cache. I also have only 512kb, not 1 MB! So your 3000+ overclocked to 2.3GHz should be faster than my 2.2GHz by 5% or so. I don't know why the memory is reported down, however. - processor: AMD Athlon 64 3500+, 2.2GHz, Venice S939 - cache: 128kb primary, 512kb secondary - memory: Slots A0,A1 have 512MB each; A2,A3 are empty - moboard: MSI RS480R2 (MS-7093) - chipset: ATI Radeon Express 200 - BIOS: Phoenix LTD 6.00 PG 04/29/2005 - disk: 200.3GB useable storage - CD/DVD: TSSTcorp CD/DVDW TS-H552B CDROM Drive - network: Realtek RTL8139/810x Fast Ethernet NIC - software: Windows XP Media Center, SP-2 (build 2600) - TV tuner card and IR remote. |
|
9)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
SETI@home enhanced
(Message 262943)
Posted 16 Mar 2006 by Hypnotoad
Post: So basically, the only is waiting on is to fix the crashing-bugs in Seti_Enhanced-application under NT4 and on some Cyrix-cpu's or something... Ingleside, the current SETI@home takes great advantage of CPU cache relative to nearly all other programs (and thus, PCs with a large cache will outperform those with smaller caches). Do you know if this will change with the enhanced version? It would be a shame for S@h enthusiasts to build PCs just for S@h (and people are actually doing that) and thinking they are getting the most optimal equipment only to find that performance on Enhanced is a very different beast. |
|
10)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Intel or AMD ??
(Message 262928)
Posted 16 Mar 2006 by Hypnotoad
Post: Cache is not shared between cores. Good point. That would explain why the SETI performance of the Pentium M laptops (single core, 2 MB x1 cache) seem to be at least as good as the Core Duo (dual core, 1 MB x2 cache) laptops. Cache is shared between cores sometimes, or at least it will be. Check out the new "Tulsa" Xeons for multiprocessor systems that have 16mb of shared cache per dual-core processor. In the standard config it will have 4 processors, 8 cores, and a whopping 64 MB (16 MB x 4) of cache! And to think that I have only a 1 MB cache on my AMD 64. |
|
11)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Intel or AMD ??
(Message 262911)
Posted 16 Mar 2006 by Hypnotoad
Post:
Wow, I didn't know there was a 4mb cache Pentium D! That would explain why so many Pentium D's are at the top of the performance charts... I thought it was just because they had the same 2mb cache as Pentium M but faster clockspeeds than the mobiles. Pentium D 9x0 is thus what I would invest in, too! |
|
12)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Intel or AMD ??
(Message 262898)
Posted 16 Mar 2006 by Hypnotoad
Post: what is the fastest CPU for SETI and needs not much Power ?? Actually, there is an absolute win here! Well, sort of. Please see this message I just posted in another thread to see why, but a 1600 MHz mobile Intel will outperform a 3500+ AMD on SETI@home, and it will also draw less power. Some versions of this chip use only 15 watts! Jim is right though about the desktop Intels, they will drink more power than a desktop AMD. So if you aren't in the market for a notebook computer, you'll sacrifice utility bills for the performance. |
|
13)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
CPUs: Intel vs AMD (Intel update, IDF 2006)
(Message 262877)
Posted 16 Mar 2006 by Hypnotoad
Post: I just want to point out that, these future products aside, Intel is already in the lead when it comes to SETI@home... just for using larger caches. AMD is clearly in the lead when it comes to gaming and server performance, but relatively cheap 1600 MHz Pentium M laptops outperform my 3500+ Athlon 64 (Venice, SSE3, 1mb cache) desktop on SETI@home simply because they have a 2mb cache. Cache size doesn't much matter with gaming machines or for servers. But while gamers are better off with Athlon 64 (at least until these new Intel parts come out), crunchers are better off with Pentium D (or even Pentium M laptops!). It's all about the cache size, really. With regard to Intel's new Conroe part that this thread is about, it depends on which version. As noted, any Conroe is a jump by leaps and bounds over Pentium D for gaming. But the low-end Conroes with 2mb cache won't be much better than the Pentium D for crunching. What is really exciting here is that the 4mb cache versions of Conroe will be inconceivably awesome for SETI@home and, while I am proud my AMD 64 chip does 1.3 work units per hour, the 8mb cache "Extreme Edition" Conroes will probably churn out 10 or more work units per hour!!! In regards to SETI@home, Cache is King. So count me in for switching to from Athlon 64 to Conroe when the 8mb Extreme Editions are semi-affordable (yes, that may take quite a while). Of course, this all depends on whether or not the new Enhanced SETI@home still puts such a huge emphasis on cache size versus system bus speed. If it becomes more in line with other BOINC projects, AMD may catch back up in SETI@home even as it falls a little behind in gaming. In conclusion, server administrators and web hosting companies should stick with AMD (Opteron) versus Conroe because system bus and HyperTransport is what matters here. Gamers should switch to Conroe, but only if Conroe is affordable... it probably won't be, because knowing Intel's business model as we all do, the future Athlon 64s will continue to be sold at an attractive price point verus Conroe. So many gamers will probably want to upgrade with Athlon 64s. The only group that should switch from AMD to Intel (before or after Conroe) with absolute certainty are SETI@home crunching enthusiasts, and we would already be better off with Pentium D. |
|
14)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Help me make a cheap SETI machine
(Message 262859)
Posted 16 Mar 2006 by Hypnotoad
Post: I may bump it up another $50-$75 just to get a better processor...So maybe if you guys can suggest the next few up processors... SETI@home loves cache even more than it loves SSE3. From what I've learned in these forums, for running SETI@home you should be concerned with primarily just one aspect of a potential CPU: the size of the cache. I just started running SETI@home and use an Athlon 64 3500+ (Venice, SSE3) desktop but since it has "only" a 1 Mb cache it seems to be outperformed by Pentium M 1600 MHz laptops with 2 Mb of cache. These laptops can be had for $700-$750 from Dell, so I suspect that you could make a generic desktop system based on a Pentium M or Pentium D (also 2 Mb cache but faster clock speeds) for a lot less. In other words, don't buy a Celeron for SETI because they always have less cache than the Pentium versions. For things like graphics and games, that doesn't matter too much and Celerons appear virtually identical to their Pentium counterparts for gamers. But for crunchers, the Pentiums handily outperform Celerons of the same clock speed because of the larger cache size. Of course, that's not to say whether or not cache will be the single greatest determiner of performance on the new S@H Enhanced program. Maybe someone can comment on that? Or if you really want to design a SETI-specific machine, you may want to wait until the new version comes out and folks can get a better handle on what performs best with the new version. |
|
15)
Message boards :
SETI@home Science :
Parallel Universes; what do you think of it?
(Message 262359)
Posted 15 Mar 2006 by Hypnotoad
Post: This brings up something I have trouble with. We know the universe is around 14 billion years old, right? So what was here, in this space, before the universe was here? Or did Time itself begin when the universe began? What was here before Time? How can anything be "before" Time, since "before" indicates previous to on a timeline? Did nothing at all exist, anywhere, 14 billion years ago? And if we travelled back in time 14 billion years, could we not exist? Because not only was there nothingness everywhere, but there was no "everywhere"... there was nowhere, not even space for one person? |
|
16)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Can any non-Trux BOINC client improve my claimed credits?
(Message 262263)
Posted 15 Mar 2006 by Hypnotoad
Post:
Thanks guys! I didn't realize that. Maybe I'll have at it once more and leave it going. |
|
17)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Can any non-Trux BOINC client improve my claimed credits?
(Message 262253)
Posted 15 Mar 2006 by Hypnotoad
Post: Hello Crunchers, I've tried using Trux's calibrating BOINC client three times. Two times it adjusted my claimed credits down from 18-ish to around 12 when I was hoping for an increase to about 30! The third time it simply did not work at all and I got some sort of error message that I no longer recall. I'd like to know if there are any other clients that can improve my claimed credits to be about what the average work unit is claimed at. I realize that my credits granted are usually more than I claim, but I'd like to claim what I earn and leave it at that. |
|
18)
Message boards :
SETI@home Science :
SETI@home, assumptions, speculations, etc.
(Message 262245)
Posted 15 Mar 2006 by Hypnotoad
Post: ...you have to consider that Radio Waves are a completely natural component in the Universe, just think of Pulsars, or Radio Galaxies. Hey now, this is interesting. Some actual science involved! I didn't know what a radio galaxy was after reading your message, so I looked it up at Wikipedia: click here to see. It's too bad that we can't just look for "everything" at the same time. People get bored with SETI@Home and don't stick with it very long, but just think how much easier this would be if we actually had 8 million active users using the optimized S@H apps... or 80 million. We could look for a lot more stuff, and do it faster. |
|
19)
Message boards :
Cafe SETI :
Weird Gap in 3D graph?
(Message 262117)
Posted 15 Mar 2006 by Hypnotoad
Post: Sounds interesting! I have no idea what it could indicate, but that's the fun of it. |
©2020 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.