• 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.

~ time for W.U. (SETI)

J

Jonitus

Member
Friday, I installed the cmd line version of the client, got it up and running on my SMP rig. I am averaging (so far) 2hrs 28min per W.U. I am wondering if that sounds right?
 
I would say that you had some easy work units there 😀
Single P-4 @ 2.4ghz average 3 hours 15 minutes (over a two month period)
Single XP1800+ @ 1733mhz average 3 hours 30 minutes (over a two month period)
Duals average a liitle longer due to additional overhead.
For instance: dual P-3 866 @ 940mhz averaged 8 hours 30 minutes, while it averaged 7 hours after removing 1 cpu
This is assuming that you run two work units at once on duals, I have never tried just running one on a dual.

Just for info:

My sisters P-3 700 runs an average of 11 hours and my dual Xeon 500/2meg averages 8 hours (running two).
That 2 meg cache does wonders !! 😀 😀

My dual PPro 200 was running an average of 48 hrs with 256k cache, I replaced the cpu's with 200/ 1meg cache and the average dropped to 22 hours.


Forgot to mention the computer in my sig! It runs my SetiQ and two work units and takes 3 days 2 hours on average!! Now that is real speed!!! 😀 😀 😀

 
Friday was my frist use of the commandline version of the client. Before that, I was using the graphical version. With the CLI, I set processor-affinity and am only crunching one WU at a time, on only one processor ( I still need to do other stuff on this machine) If I have been geeting easy WU's, then every single WU I have received has been easy, since even with the graphical version, my times were around 3.5 hours.
 
Well according to your SETI profile, your average is a wee over 9 hours a workunit. You sure you are reading the right info?
 
I run dual clients continuously and do everything else as well. The only time I shut down Seti is for a few games.
You might check out the database at Ars Technia, they have a standard work unit that you use to benchmark.
Team Ars

In particular This page

#1 on the list is a 1900mhz Palomino @ 2 hours 48 minutes (single cpu)

The fastest dual listed is a 2.2ghz Xeon (Prestonia) @ 3 hours 41 minutes
 
I'll check around. Maybe I'll get the standard benchmark WU and see how that goes. I though my times seemed a little too damn fast.
 
Keep in mind that the Seti profile # is based on all wu's completed. With machines running anywhere from 3 days two hours, to machines running it in 3 hours 15 minutes (8 computers total), that number does not tell you a whole lot.
I recently (in the last week) switched two computers to Linux in the quest for more production, and the times stayed the same. Right now I am running them in a terminal window in KDE, using the Win32 client and wine.
I might try and run them at the command line without KDE and see if that helps.

By the way, check out my SetiQ clients for more accurate info.

192.168.1.102 is a single 1800XP @ 1733 on Linux
192.168.1.105 is a dual PPro 200/1meg on Linux
aol**** is a single XP1600 on XP
dhcp@rr*** is a single P-3 700 on WinME
6896A is a single P-4 1.6a @ 2.4ghz on XP
7896A is a dual Xeon 500/2meg on Win2k
***Comcast is a single P-3 866 @ 940mhz on Win2k
HpVectra is a dual P-133 on Win2k

All running command line version.

Had to edit. My addition was a little off 😀

 
Buy the way, please let me know if the SetiQ link above is working, I can't access it myself for some reason (not that way, anyway).

Thanks

 
Hmm, I guess it's the system in your sig... with an average of 2h28min on a p3-1130 MHz !!!
OK, since it's "average", you can have a couple of 1-min-wu pulling down the results... or all wu is only crunching to 50% before terminating.

If this isn't the case, you're either running a pre-3.03-client, or have overclocked too much. If the 1st, you're not producing anything, the latter, try running at default speed.
 
Steell
That PIII 700 should be crunchin much faster ,I had a Cel 366@550 which was crunchin WU's in 10.5hrs ,that's with the CLi.Is she using the CLi?
 
Yep, all machines are running the command line client. But that is one of three machines that I have farmed out to family members, in hope of lowering my electricity bill. The only stipulation being that they leave Seti running as much as possible (They say I am rather anal about it). I have VNC on all three, so that I can check on Seti, and start it if required. I think that is a pretty good deal for them, they get decent computers at no charge, and with only 1 restriction (although it does slow down Seti because they are doing other things on the computer).
I recently reconfigured VNC (on the P-3 700 that my stepson has) to lock the local kb/mouse when I log on, as I got tired of complaining about Seti not running (he's doing a lot better now 😀)

 
I'm running the 3.03 version of the CLI. Last night, I ran 2 processes. Shutting down services I didn't need, and assigning processor affinity, my log shows that I crunched through a WU in a little over 3 hrs. The one I am currently working on is expected to have a total time of 3hrs 54min.

I am not overclocking my system, but am using both my processors at maximum usage. The system seems to crunch through WU's in good time, but the system is pretty well unusable unless I am only using 1 cpu at a time.

I'll keep crunching for a while and get a total of around 30 WU's done before I begin to calculate averages.
 
Wierd ,if you are using SETIDriver ,then leaving the priority at low should allow you to use your PC as normal ,even with both CPU's crunchin
Nice rig btw🙂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top