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: 57
|
![]() |
Author |
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
681.2 credit claimed LOL! I got like 2 results returned today, since 2 out of 3 machines R doing Dengue (my laptop isn't even going to try). It likes the 128 meg requirement of Rice (and the 7hour and it's done!) I have and old slow AMD 64 Jack. It would take forever to do these jobs, although it has 2gig of RAM in it and is capable of completing them. I'm just letting it carry on doing HCC. It may join in later when the C type jobs become available. Any type of job completed helps all of the projects here. Rice is a great project too and is well worth doing. |
||
|
uplinger
Former World Community Grid Tech Joined: May 23, 2005 Post Count: 3952 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Personally I have one running in a Q6600 at 3.16 GHz and it should last between 39 and 40 hours (average 47 minutes between checkpoints - 2 %). Complete. No noticeable trouble.Elapsed time: 38:45:57 CPU time: 37:37:19 Uploaded files: 91.50, 62.27 and 30.89 KB. erlc_ b001_ ps0000_ 1-- 612 Valide 17/02/10 17:11:25 19/02/10 08:12:48 37,62 874,7 / 769,3 <--- mine erlc_ b001_ ps0000_ 0-- 612 Valide 17/02/10 17:09:44 19/02/10 07:20:36 35,90 664,0 / 769,3 Edit: PS: Thanks to my wingman for having returned it quickly. ![]() jm, It is I who thanks you for being quick :) This could have been the first valid result for the project. :) btw, the other half is me on this work unit. -Uplinger |
||
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
1st one done, and of course Murphy was in the neighborhood to coach BOINC [6.10.32] to immediately switch away after the last checkpoint, sitting there with 100% "waiting to run"... so the micro-managing finger interacted and shuffled it around to give it about 1 second to pack up and prepare 3 files totaling 180kb raw for upload.
----------------------------------------erlc_ b025_ ps0000_ 1-- 1112084 Pending Validation 17-2-10 17:31:58 19-2-10 16:53:47 44.91 841.7 / 0.0 Imminently 3 more finishing, a genuine, 64 bit client over-claim (though I think some lenience is in order) ;P
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
JmBoullier
Former Community Advisor Normandy - France Joined: Jan 26, 2007 Post Count: 3715 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
jm, It is I who thanks you for being quick :) This could have been the first valid result for the project. :) btw, the other half is me on this work unit.-Uplinger Keith,It's the second time that we happen to be crunching the same type A together! The previous time was during the first betas. Although I am glad to crunch with you I would be even more if you were not underclaiming so much, you cost me many credits each time**. ![]() 18.5 credits/hour is not much for a machine crunching at this speed. A 32-bit one I guess? Cheers. Jean. ** If I remember well, for the beta it was even worse. You were so low that it has not been averaged and I have been granted your claim. ![]() Never mind... ![]() |
||
|
TBirdTheYuri
Advanced Cruncher France Joined: Mar 5, 2006 Post Count: 115 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
New estimates this morning : i7 920 @ 3GHz : 8 units simultaneously - 50 hours per unit Q9450 @ 3GHz : 4 units simultaneously - 30 hours per unit Q6600 @ 2,4GHz : 4 unites simultaneously - 40 hours per unit T2050 @ 1.6 GHz : 2 simultaneous units - 100 hours per unit My Pentium 4 doesn't support this project because is needed 750 MB ram or above. Update : i7 920 @ 3GHz : 8 units simultaneously - 48 hours per unit (+/- 1h) Q9450 @ 3GHz : 4 units simultaneously - 28 hours per unit (+/- 1h) Q6600 @ 2,4GHz : 4 units simultaneously - 45 hours per unit (+/- 2h) T2050 @ 1.6 GHz : 2 units simultaneously - 90 hours per unit (+/- 4h) Etonnante différence entre le Q6600 et le Q9450. La seule différence de fréquence aurait dû donner un écart d'environ 7 heures de calcul, or ici il y a 17 heures d'écart. Le cache L2 de 12Mo du Q9450 par rapport aux 8Mo du Q6600 doivent avoir un impact significatif pour ce projet, le reste du matos étant très similaire entre les deux ordinateurs (4Go ram, XP32 SP3 pour les deux) --- A surprising difference between the Q6600 and Q9450. The only difference in frequency would have given a gap of about 7 hours to load, here or there 17 hours apart. The L2 cache of 12MB of Q9450 compared to Q6600's 8MB must have a significant impact for this project, the rest of the hardware is very similar between the two computers (4GB ram, XP32 SP3 for both) |
||
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
Your Q6600 stock is now right on my mean mark. The actual range I've had so far was completing from 44.6 to 46.6 hours.
----------------------------------------Surprises... maybe higher speed RAM is also adding significantly to improve performance? Got DDR2-666 in mine... can't be clocked up over 553, the BIOS not updated by mnf for 3 years... a very lowly board in this off-the-shelf quad. Still contemplating to get a Q9450 replacement. Fits the mb and runs 60 Euro here.
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
TBirdTheYuri
Advanced Cruncher France Joined: Mar 5, 2006 Post Count: 115 Status: Offline Project Badges: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Oui, la mémoire est cadencée plus haut sur le Q9450 (936 MHz) que sur le Q6600 (800 MHz), du fait du FSB plus haut et de l'overclocking appliqué sur ce dernier.
--- Yes, memory is clocked higher on the Q9450 (936 MHz) than the Q6600 (800 MHz), due to the higher FSB and overclock applied on it. |
||
|
|
![]() |