cli vs gui

[lane42]

Just thought id post on this since i switched from the gui to the cli. On my Tbird 850 and duron 920 which ran about the same times, 9.5-10 hours on gui, dropped to between 7.5-8.5 hours for the cli.
Didn't know why my K6-2/500 times stayed the same ?

 

[ElFenix]

good stuff, that CLI. i dunno why the k6 stayed the same either.

 

[ColinP]

I just switched on a K6-2-500 from GUI to CLI..

Times came down from 1day 3hours to 1day 1hour.

I've switch most of my Intel boxes and the gains were much better %age wise. eg PIII500 from 14 hours to 11 hours..

Something to do with L1 cache maybe ???

cheers,

Col

 

[lane42]

All in all, the cli is a bit slower for some reason. The K6-2 was doing 26-28 hour wu's with gui, and now 1 day 5 hours with cli, or is that 1 day 5 minuites

 

[Assimilator1]

Nice drop ,it seems there is a bigger difference between GUI & CLi with v3.03 than previous clients.

ColinP & Lane 42
What chipsets are those K6-2's on? L2 cache size? RAM SIMMS or DIMMS?
My little bros K6-2 @ 374 (75MHz FSB) with DIMMS ,CAS2 ,TX chipset ,Asus m/brd ,does a WU in about 30hrs with CLi v3.03.
Doh! ,forgot to mention 512Kb L2 cache

 

[ColinP]

K6-2-500
PCchips M577 1MB L2 cache
128MB PC100
UDMA33 H/D
Video&Bios cache disabled...

err

that's it I think



Col

 

[lane42]

K6-2-500@522
PC100 AGP PRO (Thats what it says on the chips)
1 MB L2 CACHE
64 MEGS PC100

 

[ColinP]

Sounds like the same chipset as mine although I can only do 5x100.
So we should be getting similar times, yours should be a fraction better.

Forgot to mention the OS, win2000 pro...

cheers,

Col

 

[Orange Kid]

10-Day Average CPU Time 1 day 4 hr 32 min <from setiQ>

This is on a K6-2-350, 128mg RAM set to fast timings in the bios<fic 2013>, running win2k <is my server>, no over clocking and the CLI

I would think a 500 would do better?

 

[lane42]

Colin, yes i have the multiplier at 5.5 @ 100 but only posts to 522. Win 98. Maybe ill switch this one back to gui. Its so slow i wouldn't miss much if the servers went down a day or too.

 

[ColinP]

lane,

wierd !!!

I only just put the 500 in, previously it was a 350 oc 400..

I tried 5.5 x 100 first, and it posted 522 !!!!!! Wasn't stable though..

I bet you have a PCchips mobo...

The 350 at 400 was doing 1day 6hours on Win2000 Gui
I then put the 500 in and the times only came down to 1day 3hours
Then I switched to CLI and they came down to 1day 1hour

cheers

Col

 

[lane42]

Am i reading my times wrong ?
The wu going now at 40% done is 1day 06:38. is that 6 hours 38 min. or 6 min. 38 seconds.

 

[artemedes]

Your probably reading it right. On my K6-3 450 with the cli is 20 hours, but it is not uncommon to get an occasionaly WU that almost doubles in time. Been less frequently lately, but still happens.

Some WU just take longer and certain combinations of hardware/OS take a big hit when it comes to VLAR (very low angle ranges) WU. You can find out what your Angle range is from setispy.

Win98 and the K6s are known to take a big hit on vlar with the cli.

 

[Assimilator1]

OK
The K6-2's relatively slow L2 m/brd cache hold back these cpu's ,hence the fairly small reduction in WU times.
K6-3's do much better ,as you can see by artemedes WU times