CLI vs Graphic

[DWW]

How much advantage is their to CLI over the Graphic mode?

I keep telling my friend to use CLI because he has the graphical one and I assume all those pretty colours require a fair number of CPU cycles.

 

[Robor]

You are correct. The CLI client is about 2x faster than the GUI client. Plus it can run hidden and as a service so it doesn't get in the way.

 

[DWW]

ARE YOU SERIOUS?
2x

 

[DWW]

OMFG hehehe he will be surprised.
He was the one who got me into this last week anyhow and I just merely pointed it out to him today again

 

[DWW]

Welp just gave it a try myself and it seems neat--defaults to "low" priority even.

 

[Assimilator1]

Originally posted by: Robor
You are correct. The CLI client is about 2x faster than the GUI client. Plus it can run hidden and as a service so it doesn't get in the way.

Just to clarify
It is 2x faster if the GUI has its graphics showing ,if it has 'blank screen' set or is run minimsed the CLI is then 25% faster ,not as much but still good
Also v3.08 is about 15% slower than v3.03

 

[DWW]

ok so i should downgrade to 3.03??

I heard about using 3.25 beta? was it with some switch -forceasm to optimize on my thunderbird, can anyone validate that claim?

 

[Assimilator1]

err ,don't know that one ,can't be SETI@Home!

If you want best possible speed then yeah 3.03 is the way to go
Get it here

 

[cooper76]

I heard about using 3.25 beta? was it with some switch -forceasm to optimize on my thunderbird, can anyone validate that claim?

FYI, that is for Folding@Home

 

[DWW]

cooper76 lol makes a LOT more sense