Forum > Windows

How to make your own optimized Seti@Home client for Windows

<< < (2/3) > >>

Gazzalodi:
Well, actually, I think the initial install was the same as yours, I had the Linux license and was running them out of a common folder...  My Windows issue was just that your IPP version is 5.0 and mine is 5.1, I didn't notice that in the path statements at first.  Once I changed it, everything went like clockwork.

Will compile MMX and SSE this evening and let you know how that goes too.

Cheers and Thanks again!

Dave

Gazzalodi:
Okay, first the good news.  SSE and MMX compiled and tested good:

Same computer as before -

SSE - 18:16

MMX -  20:27

Stock - 36:29

All results were strongly similar.

Now the bad news.

I compiled and tested on the P4.  However when I moved each new executable to their prospective production machines (P3 for SSE, Celeron for MMX) they errored out with the following:

Unrecoverable error for result xxxxxxx (There are no child processes to wait for (0x80) - exit code 128 (0x80))

Not sure what I did wrong.  Each had the appropriate app_info.xml in the directory with them.   I continuted to see the error when I rolled back to stock.  I had to reset the projects for each to recover.

Both computers are crunching stock again.  I am going to go through everything again, just to make sure I don't have another typo issue like I did in compiling.  I have a few more P3's and an Athlon XP running stock, I'll give another try tomorrow after I clear the cache on one of those.

Have you seen this error before?  Is it something that should be obvious that I'm missing.  Nothing is too basic for me to check, I am quite capable of screwing up anything.

-----

On SSE2.  I have it running successfully on the following:

P4, Northwood 2.6 (HT turned off).
P4, Prescott 3.2 (HT on)
P4, Prescott 3.0 (HT on)
P4, Northwood 2.4 (HT on)
Pentium D 2.66

A second Pentium D 2.66 is running stock so I can get a real world feel for the performance difference over a range of WUs.

Oh and I saw where you picked up a 2.66 from the local computer store.  Not sure how the shipping would work.. But I have built 3 PD 2.66's over the past week getting parts from newegg for around a total 300 each.  Each build consisted of proc, mobo, memory, case and hd.  Would definately recommend newegg if you are looking for another test machine.  I see a lot of these in my future, especially when they drop to around 80 bucks after conroe comes out.

Cheers,
Dave

Simon:
Thanks for the suggestions - but don't forget I live in Europe, and most dealers like Newegg don't ship here or only very slowly and at high cost. Also, I got some Corsair XMS2 instead of generic RAM, which is an added cost of around 40 bucks.

Also, regrettably in Europe dollar prices translate into the same price in Euros (even though a Euro is currently worth ~1.20 USD) because of VAT (value added tax), which is 20% where I live.

So the prices I got here at the local dealer were still more than I could have gotten using a local online shop, but I'd have had to wait a week or more for the parts, maybe even spread the order to more than one. It all boils down to me being able to walk into the store and get a replacement inside an hour or inside a couple of weeks, basically :) To me, that's worth a few extra bucks.

About the SSE errors - I've had similar things happen on Linux, but not Windows, but then I haven't yet tested SSE/MMX on Windows. I think there might be an extra setting necessary, but haven't found out exactly what yet. Currently I'm testing an SSE Linux build.

Before you start testing things with BOINC, it's always a good idea to just run your new client from the command line first on the computer in question. It'll tell you about errors there, so you know whether you should even fire up BOINC or not.

I'd recommend installing the development stuff on the P3 and just compiling it there. That's what I did for Linux, and suddenly it worked. Worth a shot even if it's a bother to reinstall your stuff elsewhere.

Regards,
Simon.

Gazzalodi:
I'll definately remember to test is before going live next time.

Now for something a little different.  I think I saw that you did a SSE3 build and an EMT64 build.  Is that correct?

If so I was just wondering if you did an SSE3 on EMT64 build to see if the combination of them provided any speed boost.

I have a beta of Win64 laying around somewhere and way toying with that idea, but figured I would check with you first to see if you might have tried it already.

Cheers,
Dave

Simon:
Yes,

I've already tried both. SSE3 hasn't given me any speed boost at all, and I have not been able to get a 64-bit version to compile - I keep getting errors like "Target machine type AMD64 is incompatible with module machine type X86".

I'm also interested in how a 64-bit version would compare but haven't had more time to get it to work yet.

Hope that helped,
Simon.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page