• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

SETI......vs.....HT

K

klaatu51

Member

Last night I upgraded to a 3.0GHz HT chip, and mobo, and want to know how to run two copies
of SETI, with one being the GUI version. This means I am looking for a caching program that
can handle the GUI and CLI versions.

Thanks for any advice but remember I still have trouble with cut and paste.....or is that
copy and paste?


klaatu51
 
Not sure how to cache both of them....but it would be pointless. Your GUI process would severly limit your daily production. You can get 15 WU a day out of it with two CLI processes.
 

Since I started with the GUI three years and 1800 WU's ago I want to stay with it until the
end. I started with a 300MHz Celeron and moved to a 2.4 GHz last year and upgraded to 3.0
last night and which is doing fine now. That said, anyone know of a caching program that
handles both the GUI and CLI?

klaatu51
 
if you must use the extremely slow gui 😉, I'd suggest you use isos's setidriver service installer with it set to run one process, and use the regular gui running like normal.
 
😕😕😕😕😕😕😕😕

Well, i know that with a dual CPU system & running the GUI, one CPU will process the WU & the other will generate the graphics. I wonder if a HT system will do the same thing? In which case it would be pointless to also run the CLI. Well, maybe not pointless, but next to it 😉


I know SETI Queue & SETI Monitor will work with both the GUI & CLI, but i don't know how well either works running both at the same time.


Good luck with you ultra-slow crunching 😉

😕😕😕😕😕😕😕😕
 

Thanks for the advice. As for my WU times, when I started with a Celeron 300, and using
the screensaver, they averaged about 130-140 hours. Turning the screensaver off reduced
the times to 35-40 hours. Last summer I built a box with the 2.4GHz that I mentioned and
times dropped to 5 hours. Now the times seem to be about 3-4 hours with the new chip and
I just set it to 3.3GHz so those times should drop even more.

klaatu51
 
Originally posted by: klaatu51
Thanks for the advice. As for my WU times, when I started with a Celeron 300, and using
the screensaver, they averaged about 130-140 hours. Turning the screensaver off reduced
the times to 35-40 hours. Last summer I built a box with the 2.4GHz that I mentioned and
times dropped to 5 hours. Now the times seem to be about 3-4 hours with the new chip and
I just set it to 3.3GHz so those times should drop even more.

klaatu51
Click to expand...

Using setidriver with the cli you will do around 14to15 a day. Using the screenersaver you will around 6
 
It's your cpu, do it however you want.
I've been doing it since as close to the beginning of the project as I could, so I somewhat understand.
You can assign processes to individual virtual processors, knock yourself out.
Of course you will get a lot more work done with the cmd client than the gui.
 
the only way i can see you doing it is using seti queue and hosting your own queue....good luck with whatever you choose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top