| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Community
Forum: Chat Room
Thread: What CPU combination for best results. |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 5
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Hi all,
----------------------------------------I have two CPUs (a Core 2 Quad and a Core 2 Duo both 2.4 GHz) and two motherboards (one is a cheap one that doesn't allow overclocking). I can set up my CPUs in two different ways, since my good board doesn't like the Quad very much. Both machines have 2 GB of RAM and are fully stable. Which will produce more results for me? Quad at 2.4 GHz and Duo at 3.2 GHz OR Quad at 2.7 GHz and Duo and 2.4 GHz -- Finding something funny though. A HCC unit took about 3 hours with the Core 2 Duo at 3.2 GHz but when I moved it to my other motherboard to run at 2.4 GHz (stock) it's taking 9 hours... Something bottlenecking it perhaps.. There's no way that it's taking 5-6 hours longer with 800 MHz slower. Edit: Take a look at these screenshots. Blizzie = 3.2 GHz Blizzie 2 = 2.4 GHz (Both Core 2 Duo and that error was my own user error  )  [Edit 2 times, last edit by Former Member at Nov 25, 2007 8:40:25 PM] |
||
|
|
David Autumns
Ace Cruncher UK Joined: Nov 16, 2004 Post Count: 11062 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
All I'll say is that not all work units are the same some take longer than others even on the same project
----------------------------------------The IBM crew try to slice them into typically 10 hour runs each but it will never be an exact science As for the best combination try benchmarking both with something like sisoft sandra (free download) the combination with the best Whetstone score is the one you should deploy for the World Community Grid It's marginal but the Quad at 2.4 and the duo at 3.2 would at first glance appear the optimum combo Enjoy your crunching Blizzie Dave  |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Thank you for your comments. =)
I'll look into it more and wait for more comments. If I can get the Quad higher it'd be really nice.. *kicks motherboard* Shutting down crunching on Dual Core.. Testing for stability and see if that frequency control in BIOS is any use for overclocking. Not much usefulness in an AMI BIOS. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
..Finding something funny though. A HCC unit took about 3 hours with the Core 2 Duo at 3.2 GHz but when I moved it to my other motherboard to run at 2.4 GHz (stock) it's taking 9 hours... Something bottlenecking it perhaps.. There's no way that it's taking 5-6 hours longer with 800 MHz slower. There must be something wrong there with combination 2. I have a core 2 duo running stock at 2,4 GHz and the cancer-units take around five hours. On the other hand the times of the Faah-units look normal, so maybe you got two extraordinary units of cancer.  |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
..Finding something funny though. A HCC unit took about 3 hours with the Core 2 Duo at 3.2 GHz but when I moved it to my other motherboard to run at 2.4 GHz (stock) it's taking 9 hours... Something bottlenecking it perhaps.. There's no way that it's taking 5-6 hours longer with 800 MHz slower. There must be something wrong there with combination 2. I have a core 2 duo running stock at 2,4 GHz and the cancer-units take around five hours. On the other hand the times of the Faah-units look normal, so maybe you got two extraordinary units of cancer. Hm.. Well the ones coming in are also 9 hours in length. And the AIDS are about 4 hours. But the crunching on there is paused while I check for stability. 9 hours doesn't seem right. |
||
|
|
|