2.74 slower (for me)

[Ees]

For me, the new beta is quite a bit slower than version 2.4.

Platform: i386-pc-linux-gnu-gnulibc2.1

See the following two graphs:

Version 2.4:



Version 2.74:



The horizontal axis is the time of day. Green is seti's progress, blue is seti's current CPU-usage (both in percent).

As you can see, version 2.74 starts off pretty good (faster than 2.4 actually), but then slows down halfway through the WU. It picks up some speed again at the end, but overall it's much slower.

Machines are virtually identical PIII-450's (512 KB cache), running Linux. I haven't tried the previous beta's BTW.

I wonder what's going on, since many people are reporting faster WU-times with the new beta's. Any other experiences?

Martin

[Brian R.]

I am running 2.70 beta and finish WUs in around 8 hours on a Dell XPS-R450 PII.

[xfile]

Hello

I am using 2.74 i386 under Linux.
Now a WU takes 6h, 30 minutes faster than before

[Rattledagger]

There wasn't any linux-beta before 2.74

Of course the 2.70-betas is faster than the current ones, since they don't have all the new science-code.

[Guru]

Version 2.70 is faster than 2.4 ver 2.74 is not! I don't know if there is a 2.70 beta for linux! But if you want to crunch faster instal w98! or 2000!

Guru

------------------
Join the MURC SETI team! | SETI @ MURC

[Ees]

xfile: is that compared to version 2.4? What kind of processor do you use?

Thanks,
Martin

[xfile]

Hello Ees

I used v2.4 before.
Times v2.4 6,5h v2.74 5,5h
My system:
Athlon Model 2 at 920MHz, 115MHz FSB, 115MHz Memory Clock
Mainboard ABIT KA7

[This message has been edited by xfile (edited 02 September 2000).]