| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Community
Forum: Teams
Thread: Minnesota Crunchers |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 6203
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Bearcat
Master Cruncher USA Joined: Jan 6, 2007 Post Count: 2803 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Finally hit Ruby on CEP.
---------------------------------------- No way to get 1 year in before they closes the project so will go after a different project.
Crunching for humanity since 2007!
 |
||
|
|
Khyron
Advanced Cruncher Joined: Mar 17, 2006 Post Count: 103 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Yeah, I knew gateway is cheepo stuff. Asus was tempting but what the heck. Give building one a try. 25 years messing with computers, always wanted to build one. If this turns out good, then will save and do a big build with the new 6 core chips coming out from intel. Not sure if boinc can handle 24 cores from one machine. Would be a sweet machine though. Nice we finally got a bunch of rain. Still down a few inches though. Winter is going to be interesting. I don't see why BOINC would have a problem with more cores. RAM could be a limiting factor depending on the projects selected. |
||
|
|
Warpedcow
Advanced Cruncher Joined: Mar 21, 2009 Post Count: 148 Status: Offline |
I don't see why BOINC would have a problem with more cores. RAM could be a limiting factor depending on the projects selected. Do you guys have any idea if BOINC projects run significantly faster or slower based on the amount of cache on the processor? Right now I have a couple Q9550s with 12MB of L2 Cache, but I might be building another low-end Core 2 Quad for server duties and I'm wondering if you guys think I'd be processing stuff a lot slower if I got one of the cheaper 6MB cache models instead (and overclocked it to Q9550 speed). If cache does help a lot, I wonder if running 4 instances on a Core i7 is actually better than 8 instances, since the HT isn't all that fantastic usually, and you'd have twice as much available cache per instance with only 4. Has anyone here with an i7 tested it both ways to compare?
Gaming/HTPC: Intel Q9550 @ 3.5ghz, 4GB DDR2, Radeon HD 4850
Primary Server: Intel Q9550 @ 3.0ghz, 8GB DDR2, Radeon HD 4830 Backup Server/Gaming: Intel Q9550 @ 3.4ghz, 8GB DDR2, Radeon HD 4870 My ICF Home Build: http://icfbuild.blogspot.com/ |
||
|
|
Sgt.Joe
Ace Cruncher USA Joined: Jul 4, 2006 Post Count: 7846 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
I don't see why BOINC would have a problem with more cores. RAM could be a limiting factor depending on the projects selected. Do you guys have any idea if BOINC projects run significantly faster or slower based on the amount of cache on the processor? Right now I have a couple Q9550s with 12MB of L2 Cache, but I might be building another low-end Core 2 Quad for server duties and I'm wondering if you guys think I'd be processing stuff a lot slower if I got one of the cheaper 6MB cache models instead (and overclocked it to Q9550 speed). If cache does help a lot, I wonder if running 4 instances on a Core i7 is actually better than 8 instances, since the HT isn't all that fantastic usually, and you'd have twice as much available cache per instance with only 4. Has anyone here with an i7 tested it both ways to compare? I do not know about the cache, but surmise that the amount of cache may be mostly irrelevant because the processing is cpu bound. That being said if the processor is wasting cycles waiting on I/O then the cache size would be relevant. It would be interesting to see a side by side comparison on identical jobs. The other part of the answer may be that each project may have differing results, some needing a large cache size and others not. There are some threads dealing with i7 performace and if I recall correctly, they do process more work with HT enabled than without, but it is not a straight linear scaleup. They also tend to run hot if maxed out. Perhaps TXVB or mcclaver could chime in as they both run various flavors of i7. Try this thread: http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/forums/wcg/viewthread?thread=26402#241075 Cheers
Sgt. Joe
----------------------------------------*Minnesota Crunchers* [Edit 1 times, last edit by Sgt.Joe at Aug 14, 2009 2:53:33 AM] |
||
|
|
Bearcat
Master Cruncher USA Joined: Jan 6, 2007 Post Count: 2803 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I know my 8 core mac heats up good using all cores. If it wasn't for fan control program letting me control the speeds of my fans, I wouldn't be able to run max all the time. The windows machine i am building hopefully won't get to hot on all 4 cores. Anyone know if there is a fan control program like smcfancontrol for the mac for windows 64?
----------------------------------------
Crunching for humanity since 2007!
|
||
|
|
Sgt.Joe
Ace Cruncher USA Joined: Jul 4, 2006 Post Count: 7846 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I know my 8 core mac heats up good using all cores. If it wasn't for fan control program letting me control the speeds of my fans, I wouldn't be able to run max all the time. The windows machine i am building hopefully won't get to hot on all 4 cores. Anyone know if there is a fan control program like smcfancontrol for the mac for windows 64? Try this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fan_control Cheers
Sgt. Joe
*Minnesota Crunchers* |
||
|
|
Bearcat
Master Cruncher USA Joined: Jan 6, 2007 Post Count: 2803 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I found this but don't know anything about it. Once my computer is built, I will give this one a try. Ordered the wrong case so have another on the way.
----------------------------------------http://www.almico.com/speedfan.php
Crunching for humanity since 2007!
|
||
|
|
Warpedcow
Advanced Cruncher Joined: Mar 21, 2009 Post Count: 148 Status: Offline |
Use the fan control app that comes with your motherboard. The ASUS one I use is decent. I'll be building another Core 2 Quad here shortly and I think I'm gonna try Gigabyte, had better luck with them in the past. I never was able to get Speedfan to control fans correctly, on any system I've owned. Also, it's not accurate on reading Core 2 proc temps, get RealTemp instead.
----------------------------------------Get a Zalman CPU cooler for PC, just run it on max, it is both cool and quiet! My stock speed Q9550 runs around 65C on all cores when maxxed. The other one overclocked to 3.4ghz hits about 73C on all cores. Well below the 95C max in the Intel spec.
Gaming/HTPC: Intel Q9550 @ 3.5ghz, 4GB DDR2, Radeon HD 4850
----------------------------------------Primary Server: Intel Q9550 @ 3.0ghz, 8GB DDR2, Radeon HD 4830 Backup Server/Gaming: Intel Q9550 @ 3.4ghz, 8GB DDR2, Radeon HD 4870 My ICF Home Build: http://icfbuild.blogspot.com/ [Edit 2 times, last edit by Warpedcow at Aug 17, 2009 3:23:07 PM] |
||
|
|
Bearcat
Master Cruncher USA Joined: Jan 6, 2007 Post Count: 2803 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I got a ASUS server board for my xeons. 2 dual core 2ghz xeons so they shouldn't get to hot. Is this set through the bios or a separate program on the disc that comes with the mobo? Nice thing about this board is I can swap out the xeons to the 45nm chips later when the prices drop. 2 quads are definitely in the future.
----------------------------------------
Crunching for humanity since 2007!
|
||
|
|
mclaver
Veteran Cruncher Joined: Dec 19, 2005 Post Count: 566 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
If cache does help a lot, I wonder if running 4 instances on a Core i7 is actually better than 8 instances, since the HT isn't all that fantastic usually, and you'd have twice as much available cache per instance with only 4. Has anyone here with an i7 tested it both ways to compare There are some threads dealing with i7 performace and if I recall correctly, they do process more work with HT enabled than without, but it is not a straight linear scaleup. They also tend to run hot if maxed out. Perhaps TXVB or mcclaver could chime in as they both run various flavors of i7. I am running a I7 965 and a I7 920 with HT and they process 8 tasks at a time, and process a lot of work. I do not overclock and have no heat problems, they run 24x7. BOINC Average is 1 Intel(R) Core(tm) i7 CPU 965 @ 3.20GHz 1(8) Microsoft Windows Vista 3,781 - 2 Intel(R) Core(tm) i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz 1(8) Linux 2,203 - These are probably the two fastest machines on the team right now. http://boincstats.com/stats/host_cpu_stats.ph...d=6206&st=0&or=10 The I7 965 at the top is mine. There seems to be three I7 920's on the team that are bringing down the avearge, mine would probably be second at 2,203.    |
||
|
|
|