• 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.

What the hell are people using?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
yakko: Congrats on the wise decision. That machine should crank out the WU's. If I had the cash I'd switch out my 4 home boxes for dualies. My name's not Smith Barney and I hate having to make money the old fashioned way, earn it!

Anyone who wants to donate some cash can feel free to invest it in my front room. You know, raised floor, temp control, racks full of machines. You make the funds, I'll make the space. 😉

Off to work... 🙁 At least I get to visit my fleet! 🙂

Rob
 
everyone seems to be forgeting that he could be using more than one machine and that the 55 minutes could be his average time
 
No, because for the time to be average, the client would have to be run on multiple machines - in a multithreaded environment, not a multiprogrammed environment. No officially support multithreaded S@H client exists, and there's no way he could legally be doing them at that rate.
 
Good point BK, but:
If you are turning in 8 WU every 8 hours with an 8 processor machine are you saying your average time per WU is going to be 8 hours? Or is it going to be one hour?

(edit)
I understand there are 8 instances of the cli running so the average per cli is going to be 8 hours, but it tweaks the mind to potentially turn in 24 or 48 WU / day from one machine and have your average WU time still be 4 or 8 hours.
Because the cli is not multithreaded, you still do the WU one at a time each from a separate instance of the cli.
 
Each client keeps track of how long it took to work on it. Each context of the client would count up the time, so therefore, with the hypothetical 1 wu/processor/8 hours:

In one day:


  • Each processor would do 3 wu's
    Each context of the client would rack up a total of 24 hours of use
    8 clients * 24 hours = 192 hours of use
    8 clients crunch through 3 WU's in a day is 24 WU's
    192hours/24WU's = 8 hours/WU

There's no way it could be that low unless they had an outrageously overclocked Alpha EV68


 


<< I understand there are 8 instances of the cli running so the average per cli is going to be 8 hours, but it tweaks the mind to potentially turn in 24 or 48 WU / day from one machine and have your average WU time still be 4 or 8 hours. >>



I agree, but that's how a multiprogrammed environment works....
 
BK
It is possible to get sub 1hr WU times on older clients with those err....'special computers😉😱......
I seem to recall a really BIG team having at least 1 member doing similar WU times ,it might of been the Sun team.
I'm gonna look now..........
hmm
SGI SETI team have a few that are close ,but not much below 2 hrs
Ah ha! ,I've only spent a short time searching but I found the Compaq Computer Corporation team have quite a few members with sub 1.5 hr WU average times! (some of those mention Alpha EV6).
 
Some SGI workstations are pretty stinking powerful. (huh, kind of like &quot;Understatement of the week&quot😉
 
Most of us doing seti for 1-2 years or more have the bulk of our WU's done on the older 'faster' clients. I could do WU's in 3.5 to 4 hours each that now take me 6 to 6.5 hours on the same machine. This since around Feb, 2001.
 
BK
Fair enough ,just picking holes😉heh.
Wiz makes a good point though ,nearly 4500 of my WU's are on versions previous to v3.03
 
Yeah.. you guys that were around before the new client are lucky. Us newbs that get to compete with you have to crunch more for the same numbers.
 
Yes, like lane42 said, there weren't any 1.7G P-4's or 1.5G Athlons around then. In fact, I think I was crunching SETI units on a Celeron 300A@450 for most of my early WU's. The lowest my average time has gone is about 8.5hr/WU and that average is on the rise due to the 3.03 client. Still, if I wasn't greedy and running several P2-266 --> P2-350 boxes at work my average time would probably stay about the same.

In short, the new client sucks but the newer CPU's make up for the difference. In a perfect world we'd be running the 3.0 CL client on one of those slick new overclocked Athlons or P4-1.7G's. Drool... 🙂

Rob
 
lol Rob
I gave Tuffguy v3.0 CLi to benchmark his Athlon 1.6 GHz 🙂.It took it 2h48mins to finish the Ars WU!

BTW the most of the WU's I completed prior v3.03 were done on Cel 366 @ 550,PII 233,PII 350 @ 392,PIII 550,PII 333 @ 374,Cel 300A @ 464,PII 233 @ 280,&amp; an Athlon 700.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top