Forum > Windows
2.4V updated apps.
Sutaru Tsureku:
--- Quote from: Crunch3r on 03 Sep 2007, 04:10:29 pm ---
--- Quote from: Raistmer on 03 Sep 2007, 03:56:42 pm ---According my own tests SSSE3 64bit under 64-bit OS is the best one for such CPU
So right now probably KWSN_2.4V_SSSE3_MB.exe is the leader :) (from 2.4V_Windows_x64_SSSE3 archive)
--- End quote ---
That's what i'm telling people all day long :P However... i do see a possibility to gain another 10 to max 15% in performance... but ONLY for the 64 bit app.
Anyhow, we need to get a common base (2.4V changes) for ALL apps. That' Linux,Windows,UNIX before we can start figuring out how to get some more performance...
--- End quote ---
So if I have the QX6700 with WinVista Home Basic 64Bit..
The best performance I have with the SSSE3- 32Bit app now?
BTW.
I saw that the opt. app have a lower 'Claimed credit' than the stock app..
This is 'only' sometimes with this special AR?
This are only -0.02, but.. ;)
(The opt. app is from 08/26/2007)
_____________________________________________________
<core_client_version>5.10.13</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<stderr_txt>
setiathome_enhanced 5.27 DevC++/MinGW
Work Unit Info:
...............
WU true angle range is : 1.393579
Optimal function choices:
-----------------------------------------------------
name
-----------------------------------------------------
v_BaseLineSmooth (no other)
v_vGetPowerSpectrumUnrolled 0.00013 0.00000
sse1_ChirpData_ak 0.01417 0.00000
v_vTranspose4 0.00449 0.00000
AK SSE folding 0.00083 0.00000
Flopcounter: 5876485106912.311500
Spike count: 1
Pulse count: 0
Triplet count: 2
Gaussian count: 0
</stderr_txt>
]]>
Validate state Initial
Claimed credit 19.4006742531251
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
<core_client_version>5.10.13</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<stderr_txt>
Optimized SETI@Home Enhanced application
Optimizers: Ben Herndon, Josef Segur, Alex Kan, Simon Zadra
Version: Windows SSSE3 32-bit based on S@H V5.15 'Noo? No - Ni!'
Revision: R-2.4v|xT|FFT:IPP_SSSE3|Ben-Joe
CPUID: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU @ 2.66GHz
Speed: 4 x 3143 MHz
Cache: L1=64K L2=4096K
Features: MMX SSE SSE2 SSE3 SSSE3
Work Unit Info
True angle range: 1.393579
Spikes Pulses Triplets Gaussians Flops
1 0 2 0 5875824229395
</stderr_txt>
]]>
Validate state Initial
Claimed credit 19.3820590900193
_____________________________________________________
Josef W. Segur:
--- Quote from: Sutaru Tsureku on 04 Sep 2007, 12:42:07 am ---...
BTW.
I saw that the opt. app have a lower 'Claimed credit' than the stock app..
This is 'only' sometimes with this special AR?
This are only -0.02, but.. ;)
--- End quote ---
Some of the alternative routines which are checked for performance just after startup have flop counting embedded. The stock app uses a different and longer lasting routine to test for which routines are optimal, so accrues more flops due to testing.
If the angle range were within the about 0.226 to 1.12 limits for Gaussian fitting, then two WUs with the same angle range but different data could have larger credit differences because each Gaussian test starts with a precheck which can get out quickly if the data has too little range to possibly find a Gaussian. When it takes that early exit there are fewer flops counted for the test.
Joe
Raistmer:
--- Quote from: Sutaru Tsureku on 04 Sep 2007, 12:42:07 am ---So if I have the QX6700 with WinVista Home Basic 64Bit..
The best performance I have with the SSSE3- 32Bit app now?
--- End quote ---
Under Win2003 it's 64-bit one (on Core2 class CPU). Probably the same for 64-bit Vista...
Josef W. Segur:
--- Quote from: msattler on 03 Sep 2007, 09:22:43 pm ---...
If there were a way to test the same app on 2 cores or 4 cores simultaneously, I wouldn't mind knowing if it can be done and trying it..............would it be a hard thing to modify the knabench script to do it, or really just not worth the bother?
--- End quote ---
It might be possible to modify knabench that way, but certainly difficult.
There is a way to do realistic testing, though. It requires a cache of work, but none which might cause going into EDF during the test.
1. Turn off Network activity in BOINC, then shut it down.
2. Make another folder, say BOINCTEST.
3. Copy everything from the BOINC folder and its subdirectories to BOINCTEST.
4. Install the application you want to test in the project folder below BOINCTEST.
5. Start a timer and the Boinc Manager in BOINCTEST.
6. Run for say two hours then save all messages from BOINC Manager and shut down. Make a copy of client_state.xml, that and the saved messages are the test results.
7. To test another app, wipe out all the contents of BOINCTEST and go back to step 3.
This should be possible on any platform with minor modifications. I wouldn't recommend comparing more than two apps this way, it does require going through the messages and/or client_state.xml files and checking time differences, contents of stderr reports, etc. But it's about as realistic as testing can be, each test using identical WUs starting at the same points.
Joe
Raistmer:
Well, this approach assumes to use "normal" full-length WUs. Really realistic one ;) but at least one WU per core should be completed during the test because of not perfectly linear %of work done changing during WU calculation, right? This can take more than 2 hours on lower CPUs :'(
Does CPU time for WUs with the same AR spread widely to not allow statistical approach?
And how CPU time logged on web-page corresponds real time spent on WU (assuming app running 100% of time)? Are any CPU-time corrections performed?
--- Quote from: Josef W. Segur on 04 Sep 2007, 01:55:19 am ---It might be possible to modify knabench that way, but certainly difficult.
--- End quote ---
All we need is some utility that starts prescribed app in prescribed quantity and set affinity to each child process (optional step? does last BOINC versions do this ?) and wait for all childs exit,t hen exits
such utility then may be used instead of optimized app in knabench, right? This approach will test "worst case" of simultaneous calculation - time for completion of all work on all cores.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version