Forum > Linux

New 2.4L version for linux x86_64!!!

<< < (2/2)

Rok:
I am running the 64 bit version now, and it seems to at least be on par or a little faster than the 32bit optimized.

Without any real way to benchmark, we really dont have anything to go off of other than "percieved" speed-ups.

I have a C2Q 6600 due in the next few days. I cant wait to fire it up, get it to at least 3gh+ and fire up Seti on It..

I am still debating XP32 or XP64 on it though.

Once my QuadFX gets back from RMA, It will have x86_64 linux on it as well.. hoping to see some good speeds coming from 4 x 3ghz cores.

Raistmer:

--- Quote from: Rok on 11 Sep 2007, 01:14:56 am ---Without any real way to benchmark, we really dont have anything to go off of other than "percieved" speed-ups.

--- End quote ---
You could run linux version of knabench (downloadable from this site).
It's very interesting to compare linux & windows versions on the same host...

michael37:
I will try that too as my laptop dual-boots into 64-bit Ubuntu and 32-bit Windows Vista.  So, no 64-bit Windows apps for the time being, but should give us idea.

Ned Slider:
I have a Q6600, dual booting WinXP Pro and RHEL5 x86-64. So far I've tried the 32-bit Windows client (Simon, 2.4) and on Linux I've tried the 64-bit 2.4 (Simon) and 2.4L (Crunch3r), and I can't see any noticeable difference between them comparing times for batches of similar WUs.

About the only thing I've yet to try is a 32-bit Linux client on my RHEL5 x86-64.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page