Forum > Windows
New apps based on code revision 2.2 'Noo? No, Ni!' have been released!
Simon:
--- Quote from: Ronon Dex on 16 Feb 2007, 02:02:35 pm ---
CPUID: Intel Xeon 51xx 'Woodcrest'
Features: MMX, SSE, SSE3, SSE3, SSSE3
EDIT:
I downloaded (I have running (Task Manager)) the KWSN_2.2_SSSE3-C2_Ben-Joe.exe... (with the other files)
Or is the link not right for the SSSE3 app.? And I have the SSE3 app.?
Or the name of the/my app. is not rigtht? SSSE3 but is SSE3?
--- End quote ---
You have the correct app, and the stderr output is also correct (except for that small error others pointed out where SSE2 in the features line becomes SSE3, I've coloured it red above, and our CPUID table needs an update for quad-cores).
We have tested a lot of versions on Core 2 based systems. Try as we might, SSSE3 does not offer any usable functions for SETI@Home crunching, so calling the app SSSE3 really is not true as such. However, you can tell the Intel compiler to optimize the program for Core 2 systems, and this does work.
In the end, the SSE3 functions coupled with the Core 2 optimizations produced the fastest crunch times, so that's why we did it this way.
So that's why it says SSE3 on Core 2, and the app is called SSE3-C2.
All's well ;)
Simon.
Ronon Dex:
--- Quote from: Simon on 16 Feb 2007, 04:23:38 pm ---You have the correct app, and the stderr output is also correct (except for that small error others pointed out where SSE2 in the features line becomes SSE3, I've coloured it red above, and our CPUID table needs an update for quad-cores).
We have tested a lot of versions on Core 2 based systems. Try as we might, SSSE3 does not offer any usable functions for SETI@Home crunching, so calling the app SSSE3 really is not true as such. However, you can tell the Intel compiler to optimize the program for Core 2 systems, and this does work.
In the end, the SSE3 functions coupled with the Core 2 optimizations produced the fastest crunch times, so that's why we did it this way.
So that's why it says SSE3 on Core 2, and the app is called SSE3-C2.
All's well ;)
Simon.
--- End quote ---
Thanx for explaining for the "ignorant" people, like me! ;)
Small suggestion :) :
In the <stderr_txt>:
instead of:
Version: Windows SSE3 32-bit based on seti V5.15 'Noo? No - Ni!'
that:
Version: Windows SSE3-Core2 32-bit based on seti V5.15 'Noo? No - Ni!'
And the name of the app:
instead of:
KWSN_2.2_SSSE3-C2_Ben-Joe.exe
that:
KWSN_2.2_SSE3-Core2_Ben-Joe.exe
That the people, like me, know that they have the correct app. ... ;)
Simon:
Thing is,
do you put it so it's correct or do you put it so people can more easily identify it? ;) It's always a trade-off.
In any case, an auto-installer package should come up shortly, as well as some recompiles with rectified stderr output.
Tsk, I really need more sleep :)
Regards,
Simon.
KarVi:
Simon:
I had an idea it was only an cosmetic error, and found it a little funny that my CPU had 2xSSE3 (actually it has, since its dual core) :-)
Something else for anybody who is interested:
I have done the quite tiresome job of making all the new applications work with the previous auto-installer and tester (a lot of patching and renaming...), to find out which application does best on my A64 (CPUID: AMD Athlon 64 X2 'Toledo'). Its an Socket 939 Athlon64 X2 3800+ clocked at 2475Mhz.
After patching all the Intel "only" versions, and renaming them and the generic version to the correct old application names, I let the program run a medium size test.
The result was this.
Patched Intel "only" SSE3-P4: 214 seconds.
Patched Intel "only" SSE2-P4: 212 seconds.
Patched Intel "only" SSE2-PM: 205 seconds.
Generic SSE2: 212 seconds.
It seems that the fastest version for my A64 this time is the SSE2-PM, and it seems to be quite a lot faster.
More testing has to be done, but until then, I'm running the SSE2-PM version, and letting it stretch its legs.
Simon:
Thanks for those results, Karsten!
Quite interesting. I'd say that since the Pentium M has a short pipeline like the Athlon64s do, that may be the deciding factor for the speedup you're seeing.
I believe so far people have only patched the P4-SSEx versions. Good idea there.
Let us know how it goes!
Simon.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version