Posts by Webmaster Yoda

1)

Message boards : Unix/Linux : Ubuntu 6.10

( Message 2207 )
Posted 3856 days ago by Profile Webmaster Yoda
I'm running Ubuntu 6.10 on my main machine now - used to be Windows Server but I got sick of waiting 20 minutes for it to start up and didn't have a spare licence for Windows XP.

Main problem I had with the Ubuntu setup was the lack of drivers for my wireless network card. Took hours to find one that would work, but eventually found one that worked. Other than that, I can't recall any real problems (and I'm a n00b when it comes to Linux).

BOINC 5.4.11 came as a package. I have since upgraded to 5.8.2 (Development version) which was a bit tricky as the packaged install had put files in several directories.

I miss some Windows programs but am using BIONCView (running under Wine) to monitor my BOINC installations and can connect to a Windows PC via Remote Desktop when I need programs like Fireworks and Dreamweaver. I have not yet been able to connect in the other direction (operating my Linux box from a Windows one) but will get there eventually ;D


2)

Message boards : Number crunching : Who is overclocking their machine?

( Message 2145 )
Posted 3858 days ago by Profile Webmaster Yoda
Host 758 is 20% overclocked from stock 2.2GHz. Hardly ever has problems on any projects

Host 1296 is sometimes overclocked by a few percent. Has had trouble at Docking even at stock speed but works fine at up to 10% overclock on other projects

My other comps run at stock speed.
3)

Message boards : Number crunching : Homogenous Redundancy?

( Message 2098 )
Posted 3860 days ago by Profile Webmaster Yoda
Can you think of any other reason why this computer is reporting erroneous results... perhaps it is overclocked or overheating?


It was mildly overclocked (running at 2.26Ghz instead of 2.17) with RAM underclocked (DDR400 running at "DDR348" speed). It's not overheating and works well on other projects. It stil has problems at Docking at stock speed so I don't think the overclock is causing the problems.

RAM has been memtested (even at 433MHz) and had no errors.

It has had some hard-disk issues (which caused it to reboot regularly) but that was sorted out before I ran the Docking work units. It's been running ABC@Home for the last 2 days (at even higher speed) and worked flawlessly.

So it's probably just my computer that has a problem with Docking. Don't waste any more time on it - I will run it on projects where it does work.
4)

Message boards : Number crunching : New credit system

( Message 2080 )
Posted 3861 days ago by Profile Webmaster Yoda
Converting this into credits/WU on Docking@home would be 51.04 credits/WU. In my opinion a value around this would be best. It's in line with other projects and the moderately high amount of credit granted attracts many credit hunters.


In my opinion a figure around 40-45 credits per work unit (of the current size) would be more appropriate, although I'd happily accept more :)
5)

Message boards : Number crunching : Homogenous Redundancy?

( Message 2074 )
Posted 3861 days ago by Profile Webmaster Yoda
I'm still having problems with my Athlon XP. It completes work units but gets no credit - everything deemed invalid. Have aborted the remaining WU on that computer as it's obviously futile.

http://docking.utep.edu/results.php?hostid=1296

4 work units completed in 11 hours (total), all invalid. Could be the CPU has a problem, but it may also still be HR issue (I notice it has been paired with Athlon 64 and X2 on some of them). It works fine on other projects (but doesn't get used much)







6)

Message boards : Number crunching : New credit system

( Message 2071 )
Posted 3861 days ago by Profile Webmaster Yoda
According to this table, our possible future 14.31 credits/h doesn't look so crazy :-)


Except what Tom quoted is credit per hour, not per work unit.

EDIT: I can't read... But credits per hour is not a good guide as it will be vastly different between say a 200MHz Pentium II and a Core 2 Duo overclocked to 4GHz. Of course, I'd love to get 14.31 credits an hour on a slow computer - I think I'll be able to find a few old Pentiums if you go down that track :D

Here's some figures from my own Windows hosts, running Charmm 5.04. These figures are claimed credits per work unit :

2.8 GHz Mobile Pentium4: 27.75 (average over 3 WU)
2.3 GHz Athlon XP 3000+: 38.40 (average over 4 WU)
2.6 GHz Athlon 64 3700+: 31.91 (average over 8 WU)
2.4 GHz Pentium 4 no HT: 29.82 (average over 2 WU)

Tom's 4600+ is averaging 32.66 claimed credits over 3 work units.

My computers above are all running an official BOINC client (ranging from 5.4.9 to the 5.8.1 development version). No fiddling with benchmarks, no "optimised" clients. Some overclocking, but that should not be an issue (they bench higher but complete work faster)

Note also that most computers get more at SETI and Einstein for the same amount of CPU time - you might want to err on the generous side if you want to attract lots of crunchers.

Perhaps you could run a query on the database to see what people are claiming (on average) with Windows, using Charmm 5.04 only? Delete any outliers (like >50 or <20 credits) and see what the rest works out to.
7)

Message boards : Number crunching : Some more PII/PIII w/ Windows? Anyone? :-)

( Message 2062 )
Posted 3862 days ago by Profile Webmaster Yoda
Another easy-to install distro is Ubuntu (www.ubuntu.com). Their distro loads from a bootable CD so you can try it out and sees if it will work for you on your hardware; if you like it, there is a install icon on the desktop.


I'll second that. I'm a Windows user from way back (OK, late last century), but have recently (this month) switched my main computer to Ubuntu. It's still dual boot but is running Ubuntu Linux almost exclusively now.

Biggest problem I had was with wireless nework setup (took hours to find a suitable driver) but other than that it's been quite smooth sailing.

It has a BOINC package too.
8)

Message boards : Number crunching : Charmm 5.04 (Windows)

( Message 2027 )
Posted 3864 days ago by Profile Webmaster Yoda
I'll second that. My Pentium 4/550 with HT (Windows XP) used to take about 10 hours per work unit. I have just finished a work unit with the new app and it only took 4.5 hours. That's actually slightly quicker than it does them under Ubuntu Linux.

Here's some figures of the PC's I have run Docking on:

Athlon XP 3000+ (at 2.34 GHz) - tried with 3 operating systems:

  • with Linux, Charmm 5.02: 13,969s (average of 4 WU)
  • with Win2K, Charmm 5.03: 23,315s (average of 5 WU)
  • with WinXP, Charmm 5.04: 9,904s (one WU)


2.4 GHz Pentium 4:


  • with WinXP, Charmm 5.03: 38,365s (average of 5 WU)
  • Witn WinXP, Charmm 5.04: 15,138s est. (90.1% complete at 13.639s)


2.6 GHz Athlon 64 3700+:


  • with WinXP x64, Charmm 5.03: 18,319s (average of 9 WU)
  • with WinXP x64, Charmm 5.04: 7,459s (one WU completed)


2.8 GHz Mobile Pentium 4:


  • with WinXP, Charmm 5.03: 24,470s (average of 8 WU)
  • with WinXP, Charmm 5.04: 11,040s (one WU completed)


3.4GHz Pentium 4 with HT:


  • with Win2003, Charmm 5.03: 34,296s (average of 10 WU)
  • with Linux, Charmm 5.02: 16,051s (average of 4 WU)
  • with WinXP, Charmm 5.04: 16,024s (one WU completed)


That's an impressive change from 5.03 to 5.04

Of course the credits are lower - that's normal behaviour as there's no fixed credits (yet)

9)

Message boards : Number crunching : New credit system

( Message 2023 )
Posted 3864 days ago by Profile Webmaster Yoda
We rely on almost only floating point operations (let's say 99.5%). The app doesn't use any cpu-specific features (like for example SSE2/3) though. At least not yet; we would only be able to optimize per platform if we go fully HR which we might do later on.

HR?


Homogenous Redundancy

http://boinc.berkeley.edu/homogeneous_redundancy.php
10)

Message boards : Number crunching : New credit system

( Message 2018 )
Posted 3865 days ago by Profile Webmaster Yoda
Linux BOINC 5.8.1 has better benchmarks on my P4/3.4 if I run with one thread - only about 5% lower than Windows. But If I run with HT enabled and using both virtual cores it's still awful. I haven't tested it on any other computers as this is the only Linux box I've got, but my guess is that at least on single core processors it would be close to Windows.

And yes, congratulations for holding us off for so long. Imagine where we'd be if we were a combined Aussie team (hmm, we'd probably be ranked 4th!)


Next 10 posts