Message boards : Number crunching : comparision of computational power
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Perle
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 04
Posts: 81
Credit: 33,734,724
RAC: 27,362
Message 4708 - Posted: 31 Oct 2004, 17:03:26 UTC

Just as a point of comparison.

My old dog PIII 650 will complete a wu in about 2hr 40 min

My AMD atlon 2.0 will complete a wu in about 28 min

woots


ID: 4708 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile B-Roy

Send message
Joined: 1 Sep 04
Posts: 55
Credit: 13,290
RAC: 0
Message 4716 - Posted: 1 Nov 2004, 8:55:03 UTC - in response to Message 4708.  
Last modified: 1 Nov 2004, 8:55:21 UTC

> Just as a point of comparison.
>
> My old dog PIII 650 will complete a wu in about 2hr 40 min
>
> My AMD atlon 2.0 will complete a wu in about 28 min
>
> woots
>
>

I'm wondering how you have configured your amd, because my athlon64 3400 takes 27 min.
ID: 4716 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
William Smith

Send message
Joined: 17 Sep 04
Posts: 9
Credit: 4,507
RAC: 0
Message 4773 - Posted: 1 Nov 2004, 20:17:44 UTC - in response to Message 4716.  

> > Just as a point of comparison.
> >
> > My old dog PIII 650 will complete a wu in about 2hr 40 min
> >
> > My AMD atlon 2.0 will complete a wu in about 28 min
> >
> > woots
> >
> >
>
> I'm wondering how you have configured your amd, because my athlon64 3400 takes
> 27 min.
> <a> href="http://www.boinc.dk/index.php?page=user_statistics&project=sah&userid=588229">
>
The 'athlon64 3400' has no performnce increse over the normal athlons as they don't TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE 64 EXTENSIONS.
ID: 4773 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile JigPu

Send message
Joined: 1 Sep 04
Posts: 26
Credit: 600,998
RAC: 0
Message 4817 - Posted: 2 Nov 2004, 18:38:42 UTC - in response to Message 4773.  

> The 'athlon64 3400' has no performnce increse over the normal athlons as they
> don't TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE 64 EXTENSIONS.
Well, the 64 bit extensions aren't the only thing the Athlon64 has going for it. The onboard memory controller, different pipeline layout, etc all will make a diference. It kinda makes me wonder just what makes LHC run faster on a CPU. For SETI, gobs of L2 was key to low WU times, but LHC may (and probably is) different.


[url=//spreadfirefox.com/community/?q=affiliates&id=1015&t=85]
ID: 4817 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile B-Roy

Send message
Joined: 1 Sep 04
Posts: 55
Credit: 13,290
RAC: 0
Message 4894 - Posted: 4 Nov 2004, 18:31:44 UTC - in response to Message 4773.  
Last modified: 4 Nov 2004, 19:14:45 UTC

ID: 4894 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile bjacke
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 2 Sep 04
Posts: 39
Credit: 4,910
RAC: 0
Message 4895 - Posted: 4 Nov 2004, 18:38:59 UTC

Mine AMD Athlon 2800 XP+,2300MHz, 512Ram take 26min.




Greetings from Germany
Basti
ID: 4895 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Mahray

Send message
Joined: 18 Sep 04
Posts: 12
Credit: 31,580
RAC: 0
Message 4910 - Posted: 5 Nov 2004, 10:54:44 UTC - in response to Message 4895.  

About an hour and a half (or so) on my old Celeron 1Ghz. 384Mb RAM
ID: 4910 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
BigDawg

Send message
Joined: 23 Oct 04
Posts: 8
Credit: 1,602
RAC: 0
Message 4957 - Posted: 6 Nov 2004, 17:26:13 UTC
Last modified: 6 Nov 2004, 17:29:51 UTC

My Athlon64 3200 takes about 24 minutes.
I did notice about a minute or so improvement when i upgraded from pc2700 to pc3200 DDR. Might just be coincidence, not sure.



-----------------------------
Scotty, I need more power!!!!
-----------------------------

ID: 4957 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote

Message boards : Number crunching : comparision of computational power


©2020 CERN