| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
| World Community Grid Forums
|
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 11
|
|
| Author |
|
|
w0rldtravlr
Cruncher Canada Joined: Nov 29, 2005 Post Count: 20 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I'm resonalbe sure this is not the right place to post this question so I appologize in advance.
I have recently grown bored of my little army of PCs (2x A64 2500+, 1x P4M 2Ghz, 1x P4 3Ghz, 1x Q6600) crunching FAAH WUs and decided its time to build a new crunching box to add to the family. My question is this: What bechmarks best model the type of computational load FAAH leverages agains a system? I would like to purchase the most appropriate hardware for the task. When comparing benchmark results I found that one CPU may excel at one task but be completey outrun by a "lesser" spec unit at another... Thanks for your advice, Dan |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
I'm not aware of any significant difference.
The key is making sure you have lots of memory. And use BOINC, of course - but I assume you do already. |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
Suggest to read the Chat Room where a couple of threads touch on the subject of mobo's and processors.... dreaming of a triple quad, or as movieman almost always refers to 'clovers'. That section is closed, so wait till monday/tuesday to post your additions or enquiry there. Who knows one day we get an actual "techies & tweakers" forum (@ sufficient demand AND real posting, which is a different thing). The real tweaker congregations are on team fora externally to WCG.
----------------------------------------That said, there is no uniform solution as some jobs have a prevalence for the integer and others for the floating point.... at sufficient cycles it should make little difference. We cant run to the shop as the flavour of the month is iops and next months project is flops. Anyone running multi-projects is thus best served on a good balance. 2.1 cents from a technignoramus ;>)
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
|
w0rldtravlr
Cruncher Canada Joined: Nov 29, 2005 Post Count: 20 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Thanks for the quick replies. Hopefully a forum will be set up for this kind of banter....I thought it wise to ask as the A64 3500+ (2Ghz) is almost as quick as the Q6600 (2.4Ghz quad core), mind you the Q6600 is doing 4 WUs at a time.... but costs 15 times as much... Thanks for the feesback, I'll see what I can find in the Chat Room threads. Dan |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Hello Dan Cottom,
All of our projects are heavy on floating point. Right now Core 2 rules, but I recently read an article benchmarking samples of the Athlon 64 done in 65 nanometers that said that even though they were slower than Core 2, they actually produced more work per watt. The DC Zone ( http://forum.thedczone.com/ ) has a lot of crunchers from many projects who talk about hardware and software. Lawrence |
||
|
|
w0rldtravlr
Cruncher Canada Joined: Nov 29, 2005 Post Count: 20 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Thanks Lawrence,
I've been leaning towards another Q6600, unless the upcomming price drops on Clovertown make a 2 socket Xeon system more reasonable. Guess we'll see in a couple weeks what the market has to offer :) Happy crunching Dan |
||
|
|
olympic
Senior Cruncher Joined: Jun 12, 2005 Post Count: 156 Status: Offline |
Q6600 all the way! They do use alot of power but when you divide the figure by 4 cores, it's really quite reasonable. I have 3 dual-core Opterons running at 2.8GHz and 2 Q6600's running at 3.2GHz. The quads smoke the Opterons in terms of the average time it takes to complete a WU. Were talking 1 to 2 hours difference per WU!
----------------------------------------After the July 22 price drop, I plan on replacing my Opterons with quads. I think the perfect motherboard for a dedicated Q6600 cruncher would be the Asus P5K-VM. It overclocks like crazy, has onboard video and is fairly cheap. I'm also going to replace all the hard drives with USB flash drives to cut down on heat, noise and power consumption. I tried it on one system already, works perfectly! :) ![]() |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
Q6600 all the way! They do use alot of power but when you divide the figure by 4 cores, it's really quite reasonable. I have 3 dual-core Opterons running at 2.8GHz and 2 Q6600's running at 3.2GHz. The quads smoke the Opterons in terms of the average time it takes to complete a WU. Were talking 1 to 2 hours difference per WU! After the July 22 price drop, I plan on replacing my Opterons with quads. I think the perfect motherboard for a dedicated Q6600 cruncher would be the Asus P5K-VM. It overclocks like crazy, has onboard video and is fairly cheap. I'm also going to replace all the hard drives with USB flash drives to cut down on heat, noise and power consumption. I tried it on one system already, works perfectly! :) Don't know how durable that is on the flash drive side, but if you do, set the write delay for BOINC to it's maximum of 999 seconds. With reliable power that should not be an issue. Really curious how the final set up on RAM/VM/Flash ends up... RAM drive maybe if 2-4gb available? I'll ask Nelsoc to move the thread to Chat Room for when it opens up again. cheers
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
|
olympic
Senior Cruncher Joined: Jun 12, 2005 Post Count: 156 Status: Offline |
I'm using a 1GB flash drive, it's been running for a couple weeks now with no problems. Write delay is set to 999 seconds and VM is turned off. Don't ask me how it still works with no VM but it does. The OS is a cut down version of XP that only takes up around 200MB, so even a 256MB drive can be used. Boot-up is slow at around 3 minutes but BOINC benchmarks are very comparable to using a regular hard drive. I too am concerned about the longevity of a flash drive with this kind of use so I'm going to let this one run for another month or so before converting the rest.
----------------------------------------I've always been intrigued with RAM drives and now with 2GB sticks of RAM on the market for a reasonable price they may become more popular. I also eargerly await the arrival of solid state flash type hard drives. Zero noise, low power consumption and fast access times will be appreciated by most computer enthusiasts. ![]() |
||
|
|
w0rldtravlr
Cruncher Canada Joined: Nov 29, 2005 Post Count: 20 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I've been considering the Flash Drive option as well. My firewall machine runs off an 512MB CF Card in a CF -> IDE converter. It works flawlessly and has been online for almost 2 years now even with rather chatty log activity.
I'm considering using a SFF chasis and running the OS off of an SD card for my next build. I was concerned about using a small chasis (perhaps shuttle xpc ?) with a Q6X00, but with only the Processor and an SD card I think it may run plenty cool to remain stable. As a cruncher it will quite happily run headless. With 4+GB of RAM being so inexpensive now, the lack of VM shouldn't be too big of a problem either. Is FAAH expected to get much more memory intensive as the project moves forward? I think 4GB of RAM should be plenty as the machine would only be running SSH and boinc. |
||
|
|
|