same CPU comparison

Team Stats :: http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/team_di ... amid=30229

Moderator: HAL6000

Post Reply
Dave Rave
G'Day Mate!
Posts: 894
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2002 4:28 am
Location: Sydney Australia
Contact:

same CPU comparison

Post by Dave Rave » Mon Sep 01, 2003 5:31 am

I have three of my machines identical (!?) , except -

my first (sq-2) appears to be faster than the others.

of the three, they have
different fdd - one with, two without
different bios - 2 qq, one ru
different usb - one disabled in bios
different vga - all s3trio, but ...
all with 128mb ram, and seagate st32122a drives
but they're all pretty much identical, considering.

the sq-2 runs the setiqueue, but is the one with the disabled USB controller
and is also the fastest of the three

seems by about 20-30 minutes.
q. any ideas ...
q. seems (?) a good idea to disable the usb controller generally ?
unless of course you are using it.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by Dave Rave on Fri Oct 24, 2003 9:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
bp6's 3 x dual @ 533
. . . . 1 x dual @ 466
. . . . 1 sngl @ 400
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.4ghz )]
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.66ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4C ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4B ghz )]
[( 1 x dual AMD 1800MP )]
[( 1 x P4 1600 )]
[( 1 x 500 ppga )]
3 x piii 866

Derek
Site Admin
Posts: 2479
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 3:55 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Post by Derek » Thu Oct 23, 2003 11:54 am

I would be interested to know if it’s the different BIOS version that’s slowing the machine down a bit. Is it the QQ machine that’s slower?

Disabling the USB controller won’t disturb anything.
-Derek

the_flames
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 11:50 am
Location: Yorkshire UK
Contact:

Post by the_flames » Thu Oct 23, 2003 12:19 pm

Which PC is Which line ?

and I generally disable things I wont be using like serial port 2 ect

kuun
Post-O-Matic
Posts: 1566
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 5:26 pm
Location: Tennessee
Contact:

Post by kuun » Thu Oct 23, 2003 6:52 pm

yeah

a lil more info :P

give the full specs of each machine seperately...

and we'll be better able to tell you
!!! WARNING !!!
The following forums: www.bp6.com
are infected with the following VIRUS(s): Kuun.infected.all.posts.Win2K.user

The following IRC servers has been exploited: irc.bp6.com
with the Following Exploit: Kuun.lurks.using.mIRC.v5.82.exploit

Dave Rave
G'Day Mate!
Posts: 894
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2002 4:28 am
Location: Sydney Australia
Contact:

Post by Dave Rave » Fri Oct 24, 2003 9:03 am

much as it's hard for me to tell, due to partial colour blindness, the graph is colour coded on the :arrow: :arrow: :wink:

but the question is....
moot. :wink:

sq-2,3 & 4 are the three lines all close together, ignore the line above for sq-5, it's the dual 466.

sq-2 is the faster, and the bright yellow.
it doesn't have the fdd, and if it had mattered, i think i'd have said the diff bios made a diff, so i think the ru isn't the sq-2. :roll:
that's all with smilies guys.

the usb was disabled in device manager, not bios. :oops:
I disabled all three machines usb.... :D

the chart changed a bit recently... i think the 3 and 4 are improving a bit, but with a few 8 hour results, the graph can't be zoomed in to look at anymore ;-( stupid fast results :evil:
now it look slike 3 and 4 are faster, which with the sq-2 having the setiq, would make sense ? they're showing faster, wish I could manually colour-code the graph, i'd use some blue and green. 8) :lol:

dammit, looking at my charts now, the sq-2 is above 17h30m and the other two are below....
so I've improved two with the disabling of the usb, and the faster one is now slower, but i don't know why :smash:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
bp6's 3 x dual @ 533
. . . . 1 x dual @ 466
. . . . 1 sngl @ 400
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.4ghz )]
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.66ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4C ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4B ghz )]
[( 1 x dual AMD 1800MP )]
[( 1 x P4 1600 )]
[( 1 x 500 ppga )]
3 x piii 866

Derek
Site Admin
Posts: 2479
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 3:55 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Post by Derek » Fri Oct 24, 2003 11:23 am

It could just be that some of the computers are receiving "harder" work units to compute through.
-Derek

HAL6000
SETI Guru
Posts: 246
Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 7:11 pm
Location: Bloomfield, NJ U.S.A.
Contact:

Post by HAL6000 » Fri Oct 24, 2003 6:40 pm

When you have USB setup windows reserves some resources to go out and check the usb ports every few cycles. If it is disabled you might see a little boost.

To really be able to tell you would need to run the sme wu on all 3 machines. For best results you would want to run the same wu several times.

kuun
Post-O-Matic
Posts: 1566
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 5:26 pm
Location: Tennessee
Contact:

Post by kuun » Sat Oct 25, 2003 12:32 am

yeah

i've noticed that on some wu's i can process about 18%/hr

and others 14%

but i average out around 16%

it all depends on how much data was actually recorded...

you get a recorded wu that had very little radio signals... your gonna get a higher completion rate
!!! WARNING !!!
The following forums: www.bp6.com
are infected with the following VIRUS(s): Kuun.infected.all.posts.Win2K.user

The following IRC servers has been exploited: irc.bp6.com
with the Following Exploit: Kuun.lurks.using.mIRC.v5.82.exploit

Dave Rave
G'Day Mate!
Posts: 894
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2002 4:28 am
Location: Sydney Australia
Contact:

Post by Dave Rave » Mon Oct 27, 2003 9:59 am

gee, you guys all need to get your own setiq to play with. ;-)

the graph is scaled accross the x-axis based on the AR of the wu....
you can see that with this chart of all my celeron systems, they all do they 'same' time for each different AR'd wu, based on relative speed.

also attached, a friends three systems with two amd's and a Piii

i like the idea of the system checking the usb ports....
sq-3&4 do now appear to be faster than 2....
you can see the line alone above, sq-5 (466) that it follows the other three lines very closely.....
the three lines should be pretty much intertwined and the same line.
the original post, shows sq-2 clearly 20-30 mins faster, the second post shows 3&4 now faster.....

so I suppose now, the question with all usb's disabled, why is sq-2 slow ? ;-(
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
bp6's 3 x dual @ 533
. . . . 1 x dual @ 466
. . . . 1 sngl @ 400
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.4ghz )]
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.66ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4C ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4B ghz )]
[( 1 x dual AMD 1800MP )]
[( 1 x P4 1600 )]
[( 1 x 500 ppga )]
3 x piii 866

KliK
Posts: 350
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 3:56 pm
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Contact:

Post by KliK » Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:47 pm

if the disabling the USB card gets you faster, did you consider that the PSU is better supllying the MBO & the whole system, and that is why they are working faster!?!
also, you might check that by installing brand new PSU with 400 or 450 or even 500W on the BP6 machines... :D

if it works, that is the sollution!
it's always sthg about power... 8)

Dave Rave
G'Day Mate!
Posts: 894
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2002 4:28 am
Location: Sydney Australia
Contact:

Post by Dave Rave » Tue Jan 17, 2006 2:36 am

finally, an answer, of no help :lol:
after two years.

when winter comes back, I might start those 4 up again, to see how they boinc.
but the power costs versus cpu rating hasn't been worth it as much as against my 2.4b 2.4c and now two dual 2.4 xeons
bp6's 3 x dual @ 533
. . . . 1 x dual @ 466
. . . . 1 sngl @ 400
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.4ghz )]
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.66ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4C ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4B ghz )]
[( 1 x dual AMD 1800MP )]
[( 1 x P4 1600 )]
[( 1 x 500 ppga )]
3 x piii 866

KliK
Posts: 350
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 3:56 pm
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Contact:

Post by KliK » Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:29 pm

if you don't need them, you can always sell them...there are always some guy interesiting in buying that kind of machinery! :)

or you can crunch with them some more...they don't use that many power, 'cause the 2.4GHz uses about 80W alone of electricity...

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest