Forum > Windows

Simon there's a Problem with the 1.3 app and It's 64bit derivative

(1/3) > >>

JokerCPoC:
Ok Simon here's the post I made at setiathome:
I switched back to 1.2 on My PC Joker2(It used to have 1.3 on It under XP Pro sp2 x32), Joker3 has the 64bit app that is based on 1.3 under XP x64.

In any case, Yes, I've had It happen under both 1.3 and the 64bit app.

Here's the 32bit app as I posted earlier, plus there are a couple of pure 64bit ones below also.
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=378753838

<message>
Incorrect function. (0x1) - exit code 1 (0x1)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
Optimized Windows SETI@Home Enhanced application
Version info: Windows SSE2 32-bit V5.15 'Chicken Good!' (R-1.3|+freq|xW)
Compiled by Simon Zadra (KWSN - Chicken of Angnor) - Member of the Knights who say Ni! (http://www.kwsn.net)
Download Updates at: http://www.zadra.org/seti_enhanced/

CPU real speed: 2368 MHz

Work Unit Info
True angle range: 0.426463
Optimized Windows SETI@Home Enhanced application
Version info: Windows SSE2 32-bit V5.15 'Chicken Good!' (R-1.3|+freq|xW)
Compiled by Simon Zadra (KWSN - Chicken of Angnor) - Member of the Knights who say Ni! (http://www.kwsn.net)
Download Updates at: http://www.zadra.org/seti_enhanced/

CPU real speed: 2368 MHz

Work Unit Info
True angle range: 0.426463

</stderr_txt>

links to the 64bit app results that was made from Your 1.3 app.
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=378774946
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=378774917

I'm running 1.2 on My other PC as I said and I'm getting no problems there and yes both PCs are overclocked and both ran 1.2 just fine with no errors until now.

JokerCPoC:
I'm using Boincview 1.2.5 to keep track of what WU passess or fails and now both PCs are using (setiathome-5.15-kwsn-sse2.exe) v1.2 as the extra code in v1.3 may be causing the errors and slowing 1.3 down too boot, I've notice that once I switched back to 1.2 that My RAC started to climb and My pending WU's haven't changed really in the mean time. Once the WU known to Boincview as: 9/16/2006 12:42:29 PM 13jn02aa.24708.4769.903410.3.48_1(See link below) passes out of Boincviews buffer, I'll post a screenshot both here and at setiathome for all to see. So Simon(Chicken) could You please remove that cpu speed code as It takes up space and has said My cpu runs as slow as 1808MHz(Ain't possible as It's a 2.0GHz cpu) or as high as 5920MHz(Impossible) and so It's also inacurrate and possibly is whats causing the errors in the results being generated.

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=378800674

BenHer:
Agree the result of cpu mhz isnt accurate, however it is just a function call to one of the Intel library functions - so not causing errors.  Not to say other things aren't causing errors, just not that one.

It does add maybe 2 or 3 seconds to the run time...as all it does is a)gather cpu tick counter, b) wait til hardware clock in motherboard says xx seconds have passed, c) read ending tick counter, d) subtract begin count from end to find total tick count.  Tick count / time = Mhz speed.

Crunch3r:

--- Quote from: JokerCPoC on 16 Sep 2006, 06:16:20 pm ---I'm using Boincview 1.2.5 to keep track of what WU passess or fails and now both PCs are using (setiathome-5.15-kwsn-sse2.exe) v1.2 as the extra code in v1.3 may be causing the errors and slowing 1.3 down too boot, I've notice that once I switched back to 1.2 that My RAC started to climb and My pending WU's haven't changed really in the mean time. Once the WU known to Boincview as: 9/16/2006 12:42:29 PM 13jn02aa.24708.4769.903410.3.48_1(See link below) passes out of Boincviews buffer, I'll post a screenshot both here and at setiathome for all to see. So Simon(Chicken) could You please remove that cpu speed code as It takes up space and has said My cpu runs as slow as 1808MHz(Ain't possible as It's a 2.0GHz cpu) or as high as 5920MHz(Impossible) and so It's also inacurrate and possibly is whats causing the errors in the results being generated.

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=378800674

--- End quote ---

Maybe, the one who build the app (don't know who) wasn't aware of some side effects or maybe he/she forgot to patch the right places to get a usefull 64 bit app.  (for  accurate results ;-)

P.S.
Anyhow... my 64 bit linux app is STILL the fastes app. available  ;D

BenHer:
Linux....64....yea thats probably correct   :P

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page