| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Community
Forum: Chat Room
Thread: need some guidance on what computer would be good for WCG... |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 16
|
|
| Author |
|
|
mikey
Veteran Cruncher Joined: May 10, 2009 Post Count: 826 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
The note about W7 being faster than Linux ( or Brand X) is interesting. I don't have any answers as both my boxes (one of each ) have different CPUs. My attraction to UBU is its cost (£0), its low memory requirement, and its snappy front end. It's nice to have the choice. I use W7 most of the day, while the Ubu box saves the planet from people like me. The only thing I found when running Linux while crunching was that there are WAAAAY more Windows people than Linux people and some projects do not cross validate workunits, meaning if you crunch with Linux you must wait for another Linux pc to crunch the same unit validate it and get your credits. I do not know how it is here at WCG but at some projects that can take awhile for the credits to start flowing.   |
||
|
|
Hardnews
Senior Cruncher England Joined: Oct 11, 2008 Post Count: 151 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
I did a quick install of 32 bit W7 on a spare drive on the i7 machine, it ran under BOINC about ten per cent slower than 64 bit Ubuntu according to the BOINC benchmarks. This means nothing much of course, both OS's can be tuned, but it did surprise me.
|
||
|
|
GeraldRube
Master Cruncher United States Joined: Nov 20, 2004 Post Count: 2153 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I did a quick install of 32 bit W7 on a spare drive on the i7 machine, it ran under BOINC about ten per cent slower than 64 bit Ubuntu according to the BOINC benchmarks. This means nothing much of course, both OS's can be tuned, but it did surprise me. I am running Ubuntu on three machines with one being Lubuntu which is a little faster than Ubuntu---if you check task manager the only program using cpu is boinc--in windows there are many programs using cpu which makes it slower--  |
||
|
|
Hardnews
Senior Cruncher England Joined: Oct 11, 2008 Post Count: 151 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
"windows there are many programs using cpu which makes it slower"
Yes, indeed. The Crunch box is back on Ubuntu 11.04. This suits both me and the box. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Another note on the efficiency on Windows w/CEP2. While I indeed did have a higher than 99% on Windows, the tasks averaged 3-3:15 hrs to finish, while under Ubuntu I averaged 95% and finishing around 2:25-2:40. Also the gigantic increase in points is hard to turn a blind eye too.
Either way, Happy Crunching!! |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Would not stare very hard at the run times unless you have a large population for CEP2. The tasks are just too variable, particular for those series that do not all complete through the 16 jobs and bow out early with the RC warning. Presently the DDDT2's 'p' run 3:35 hours under Windows 7-64 [hyperthreaded at that, but 4:45 hours under Ubu-64.
I'm barely seeing difference in credit on the W7-64 I7 v Ubu-64... the benchmarks are near identical for the 7 test client, for fpops anyhow on any client version, but for iops too, which used to be 2 / 3 times on Ubuntu v Windows. At any rate, my motivation is to run that platform which on average offers the best net run time. Think presently those compiled for Windows have the upper hand. --//-- P.S. Best to compare with is running the very constant C4CW and a to a little lesser extend HCC. Then you get fair apple-apple results. |
||
|
|
|