Forum > Windows

KWSN Auto Install

<< < (2/2)

Simon:
Thanks for putting me right there Josef :)

I did notice the values for runtime didn't change much as I decreased the chirp_limit below the value you mentioned. Also, guess I lost track of the 2.5 instead of 4 multiplier...
Too much to do, too little time.

I have to agree the test results aren't very conclusive at this short run time, but I really do not believe many people would sit through a benchmark that takes 30 minutes, much less several hours. Test group members are a notable exception :) This was my real rationale behind choosing very low values - I tested them on a 1.6 GHz machine and they already took ~7 mins to run, vs. about 2 mins on my P-D at the value currently set.

I really don't see an easy way to have a short, repeatable and meaningful performance measurement as far as S@H goes - it all takes lots of time.

Regards,
Simon.

Josef W. Segur:

--- Quote from: Simon on 23 Aug 2006, 04:59:51 pm ---I really don't see an easy way to have a short, repeatable and meaningful performance measurement as far as S@H goes - it all takes lots of time.
--- End quote ---

For sure! I gave up trying to figure out whether the generic SSE2 or P4 SSE2 version was "best" for my Willamette P4. They're so close that sufficient testing would waste far more time than would ever be recouped.

One possibility might be to install both and switch between them by putting one or the other first in app_info.xml. But that would require quitting and restarting BOINC to get it to read the change. Perhaps we need a custom version of BOINC which would switch automatically when a  new WU was started...
                                                                     Joe

Darkclown:
So for the C2D E6600, you're recommending the SSE3 client over any of the SSE2 ones?

BenHer:
Hey Dark (clown),

Is your first name Bobo?  ::)

Anyway - Your best bet would be to check the list of Top Computers...and see if you can find a Core2Duo computer running  Simon's SSE2 version...vs some other Core 2 running SSE3 (same speed of course).

Core 2 Duo 6600s sorted by RAC should be somewhere around 20-50 on the list.  Most systems in that range are running some optimized client.

Example host with SSE3 speed = 3690 MHz

Another host running SSE2 Speed = 3510 MHz

Seti's database might still be down for weekly database cleanup however.

You find what version of client they are running by going to Computer -> Results -> Click on the Result link for a finished (completed) result and the client version info is displayed in the <std_err> section of the page.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page