What do YOU use to crunch WUs?

[Laurie]

Home: PIII550@616 (6:00 to 6:20 per WU)(cmdline 2.4)
Home: K6II300 (18:00 to 19:00 per WU) (cmdline 2.4)
Work: PII300 (11:40 to 12:40 per WU) (cmdline 2.4)
Assorted SPARC Unix boxes (2's, 5's, 20's) (all take for bloody ever per WU ie. 30:00 to 48:00 hours!! )(Solaris 2.5)

[Rattledagger]

My systems:
Main: dual-p3-600MHz+128MB+G200+voodoo1
"game"-machine: dual-p2-333MHz+128MB+ isa-video card + drx2.
Both machines running win2k+i386-winnt-2.4-cmd.

I've bought a g400 for the game-machine, but it didn't work with the old monitor...

BTW, that's up with the time? Local time is now 01:00, and my time-zone is WestEurope Daylight Time...

[This message has been edited by Rattledagger (edited 20 June 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Rattledagger (edited 20 June 2000).]

[Pace]

<font size=9>MARTIN!</font>

Wouldn't be Maggi, would it? Naah, she wouldn't do that.

Do you not know that, despite his nickname causing confusion, Maggi is a he .

And thanks for the link guys!

Paul.

-- Edit: Doh! The quote thing is UBB - NOT html! Hehe.



[This message has been edited by Pace (edited 19 June 2000).]

[Pace]

Breezer Why not just crunch the units while still in your network directory – can you not give each machine access to the cache you store there? I do that on my network with 1 batch file to crunch them all – and each machine just runs the batch file from across the network. I’m not sure but this may require you to map the network drive (which won’t really be an option I don’t think? Unless the share is already mapped?).

Thanks for all the extra info guys.

And with all the top system people being here – what is all this about the L2 cache – what is more important – size or speed? And what needs to fit into the cache (i.e. what size is required) – my WU and seti.exe are about 530Kb I think which just takes them out of the reach of my caches.

Paul.

[Ees]

GnrlData: yes, I spotted your race up the charts. Did you try the sort by "total Delta WUs"? You're in the top-10 there. Radioman is quite impressive too. Nice!

Paul: about the cache sizes. Check out the Seti Spy page. It has a very nice section on processing efficiency.

Excluding the generation of the screensaver graphics, the most time-consuming part of SETI@home is the FFT routine, which accesses data sets of up to 1 MB in size. Performance is much improved if all the data sets fit entirely in the L2 cache of the processor, as will be the case for all processors with at least 1 MB L2 or L3 cache.

I don't know what the trade-off between size and speed would be exactly. Anyone have any info/thoughts on that?

Martin

[Swing]

Pace,

IBM has a new computer out, I think it may be the fastest.

My system (just one computer) :

PIII 600E overclocked to 800MHz. I can crunch about 3.3 WU per day if I don't do any heavy "work" such as playing games

By the way, Maggi is from Western Europe, I can not remember which country, I have a bad memory (Sorry Maggi).

The other day I looked at some stats and a guy has a computer that is crunching a WU every 24 seconds. I have no idea what machine it is and I don't remember his name. May be someone here knows who I am talking about. We need this guy on the MURC team.

Also, have any of you had problems opening .png pictures at http://seti.matroxusers.com/murc/images/ today? I have had no problems in the past and the charts are a great idea.

Swing

[MegaManX4]

Maggi's from germany, like me.
If someone crunches a WU in 24 sec's than he's cheating mostly.

Mega

[Madturk]

At work- A PIII 500 W192 MB running NT 8-9hrs. It's still work and I run alot of memory hogging apps at once. At home PIII450@558 w/128 running 98- I get around 6.5-8 depending on what Im doing. I also have a Celeron 433 w128, W98 that does WU's in about 13-15 hrs.
Tha fastest WU I had was at home. 5 mins 24 sec. Just a fluke.

[breezer]

Pace,
I used to run from a network drive but changed to run locally for 2 reasons.

The first was if there is a blip on the network, connection was lost and the w/u stoped processing.
Secondly I found that on the network the units took a lot 25% longer to process. This was using 1.x Command line version. I haven't tried with 2.4 which hits the disk less.

Breezer

[Ees]

Swing: some of the pictures weren't available, because I wasn't able to upload them (the disk was full).

Should be okay again now.

Martin

[Sir Hitech]

RadioMan here!

GnrlData's Xeon racers finally blew by me and left my fleet of Athlon's in the dust.... My boys did manage to hang on for a few miles, it was fun...

Athlon 750@1000 1/3 cache 256mb
Athlon 750@923 2/5 cache 192mb
Athlon 700
Athlon 650

and the slackers:
k62-350
k62-300
Pentium 133, 48hr/wu..LOL

Might have hung on a bit longer if they ran 24/7...

Greebe: got any Athlons I can borrow?

[Maggi]

seems like I missed a party ...

Anyway, as said before, I'm male and this is not my homepage, although I live in the same country. (Northern Germany that is and working in Hamburg)



About my fastest WU ... CPU Time = 360 seconds ...
I still have the copy at home, but wouldn't dare to submit it again (just in case someone might get suspicious)

and I indeed sometimes occupy a lot of machines for crunching WUs ... do a search and you'll find the list ...

Cheers,
Maggi

PS: I'm glad nobody brought up the spice girls yet ... Cheesecake, baby !

[Hecubus]

My seti machines are largely non-dedicated. I have about 10 of those, mostly P3's between 350-450 Mhz. Typically they process units only when they are sitting idle, i.e. nobody is logged on. I get about half of my units per day from them.

My (current) dedicated systems are:
1 Dual P3 Xeon 500/1MB cache
1 P3 667
1 P3 500
1 P3 450 (my work machine)
1 P3 450@527 (my home machine, shut-down only for quake or unreal)

Tim

[Brian R.]

I have all my computers running 24/7 unless gaming.

800E at 992 (BE6)
PIII 600 at 672 (BE6-2)
PII 450 (Dell)
PII 333 (Compaq) work

[This message has been edited by Brian R. (edited 23 June 2000).]

[Frankfurt]

no wonder ill never catch up with u ppl, i only use one system and it aint all that fast either
i only crunch in win2k, btw

Frankfurt

------------------
Here is my crappy system config:
K6-3 450, 256MB SDRAM,Tyan Trinity ATX (S1598 2mb cache on board), &lt;b&gt;Matrox G400 Max &lt;/b&gt;
Windows 98SE/Mandrake Linux 7.0/win2k/beos 5.0 (free version)
SB 128 PCI
AOpen Lan aln-325c