+- +-
Say hello if visiting :) by Gecko
11 Jan 2023, 07:43:05 pm

Seti is down again by Mike
09 Aug 2017, 10:02:44 am

Some considerations regarding OpenCL MultiBeam app tuning from algorithm view by Raistmer
11 Dec 2016, 06:30:56 am

Loading APU to the limit: performance considerations by Mike
05 Nov 2016, 06:49:26 am

Better sleep on Windows - new round by Raistmer
26 Aug 2016, 02:02:31 pm

Author Topic: Test run results.  (Read 9108 times)

msattler

  • Guest
Test run results.
« on: 02 Sep 2007, 02:47:46 am »
Test run results for crunch3r test aoos for those who are not in the pre-release group.

EDIT....added a re-run of the WU0017 test wu.  The first run had a problem with the reference app.

[attachment deleted by admin]
« Last Edit: 02 Sep 2007, 10:04:28 am by msattler »

Kiva

  • Guest
Re: Test run results.
« Reply #1 on: 04 Sep 2007, 04:32:45 am »
Hi Mark,

Can you give us a short conclusion of your test?
I can't read (understand) those textfiles!

Kiva

Offline Raistmer

  • Working Code Wizard
  • Volunteer Developer
  • Knight who says 'Ni!'
  • *****
  • Posts: 14349
Re: Test run results.
« Reply #2 on: 04 Sep 2007, 07:37:24 am »
The same test WUs on AMD 64 3200+ (Winchester) (64-bit Win2003)
It seems SSE2 32-bit - the best and 2.4 version is slightly faster than 2.4V new one.
In first test former 2.4 SSE2 app was faster, in other tests 2.4 SSEa (from Crunch3r's site) was faster.

So, according this test, KWSN_2.4_MB_SSE2A.exe from 2.4_Windows_x32_SSE2_AMD archive - fastest choice for Athlon 64
(and 64-bit OS of course)

[attachment deleted by admin]
« Last Edit: 04 Sep 2007, 07:43:56 am by Raistmer »

msattler

  • Guest
Re: Test run results.
« Reply #3 on: 04 Sep 2007, 10:55:22 am »
Hi Mark,

Can you give us a short conclusion of your test?
I can't read (understand) those textfiles!

Kiva

Just pay attention to the 'quick timetable' summary at the end of the reports. The summary shows the test WUs that were run, the test apps that were used to run them, and the run time in seconds for each app.  If you just look at the run times, the shorter the better.  You can seen that on different AR WUs, some apps do better than others.  You have to try to pick the one that had the lowest time overall on the mix of WUs tested. On my x64, it was very close between the SSE3 app and the SSSE3 app.
And keep in mind, these test results only apply to the Core 2 cpus that I ran the test on.  Results may be slightly different when run on a different cpu platform.
Hope that helps.

 

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?
Members
Total Members: 97
Latest: ToeBee
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 59559
Total Topics: 1672
Most Online Today: 355
Most Online Ever: 983
(20 Jan 2020, 03:17:55 pm)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 116
Total: 116
Powered by EzPortal