|
1)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Why is SSE3 or PNI and SSE2 used for the same work units?
(Message 24990)
Posted 3 Dec 2012 by Fred J. Verster Post: Looking at some results, also on BOINC (7.0.28), I see SSE2 and SSE3(PNI*) Used for the same work? *Presscot New Instruction Set. Tasks are done by an I7-2600, with a very small OC and an C2Extreme X9650, running at 3.6 GHz. (20% OC) The 2 hosts. I don't see any difference in completion time, so I assume there is another reason? Maybe 'older hosts' are doing better/faster with SSE2 and later hosts SSE3? And are quite old if only SSE2 can be used. Or AMD CPUs, older types doesn't have SSE3 or PNI Or just testing which is better overall? SSSE3x and SSE4.1/4.2 usually is faster then SSE3/PNI. |
|
2)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Sorry to have to return those great wu's
(Message 24959)
Posted 16 Nov 2012 by Fred J. Verster Post: Well I just increased recourses for LHG, SixTrack and can run on 10 CPU cores with 3390 to 3560MFLOPS (Whetstone), Drystone =>10GFLOPS/CPU(core). Einstein is a big recourse hog, especially BRP4ATI/CUDA...;-) But do a good job in finding a lot of Pulsars, maybe they can detect a Quasar or Magnetar which emits a different "signal" or radiation or (very)strong magnetic field (>100Teslas/m?). |
|
3)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
error -177 resource limit exceeded
(Message 23794)
Posted 28 Dec 2011 by Fred J. Verster Post: ----[Snipped]----
Hmmm, nothing IMO, except isn't giving all memory-resources to BOINC, a little too much, Windows has some Services and Processes , too, which also need memory resources. Imagine what happens when you start using your computer with all memory resources assigned to BOINC, Windows can't use it's memory, swap-space and the entire disk-space available, a BSOD is what I would expect!? Trying to avoid this situation, I made a ~250GByte Disk-Partition for BOINC (6.12.34; 64bit) only, on a third (1TByte) (system;SATA II) hard-disk. But any (system) hard-disk will do, even an USB =/> 2.0/3.0 disk should work. Also, 8 threads, but only 4 GByte system memory, leaves 0.5GByte DRAM for each process or thread, using 8 GiG, on my I7(2600) host and running a memory hungry simulation ends up using 7.6GByte RAM! Answer is a bit late, but still applies ;-) By the way: Wishing all a Happy, fortunate and healthy 2012. |
|
4)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
no more work?
(Message 23785)
Posted 21 Dec 2011 by Fred J. Verster Post: Haven't seen work for the last couple of days, last work was send back a few days ago. Maybe I should add another host account, have 2 switched off and 2 running. |
|
5)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
error -177 resource limit exceeded
(Message 23746)
Posted 27 Nov 2011 by Fred J. Verster Post: ... Isn't a -177 error a timing error? I remember this happening at SETI@home, when using a GPU. I also run Rosetta and was amazed by the >700MByte WU RAM use. This host, now only does CPU jobs, a.t.m. (It has 2 EAH5870 GPU's) Sandy Bridge CPU's, use a dynamic turbo, too, if CPU load is low, clock frquency goes down. |
|
6)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Faulty Computers or Modified BOINC ?? Huge Credits
(Message 23745)
Posted 27 Nov 2011 by Fred J. Verster Post: Hi, I agree with former speakers, this should be impossible, displaying a normal 'run-time' and an unusual large CPU-time! If you were to drop the CPU speed to 1%, run-time would be affected, too. I've seen weird situations running several projects, with (very) different memory use, very high, >700MByte (Rosetta) per WU'. Also the use of (a) GPU(s), if possible, is reducing CPU load, time and (total)runtime. And I agree that one is only guilty if proven so. And computers can display weird or odd results, although, very uncommon. When seriously OC'ed, heat, a gamma-ray :), etc. Since I'm not familiar with the credit granting, anything with a 10 or 100 times higher runtime v.s. CPU time, or vice-versa, should raise a question and be looked at! |
|
7)
Questions and Answers :
Windows :
Can't reach site on Comcast network
(Message 22562)
Posted 26 Sep 2010 by Fred J. Verster Post: Hi, looks like some \'weird\' limitation, from ComCast ISP, since I\'ve got no problem reaching it. I do have trouble sometimes in reaching, sites on the East Cost of the U.S.A., f.i. SETI, when people from California can connect, I still can\'t, maybe the longer distance is a reason. It\'s hard to say, so many \'stations\' between my place (Zutphen in the Netherlands) and Berkeley. And policies from ISP\'s aren\'t that clear, sometimes. |
|
8)
Message boards :
LHC@home Science :
Anyone getting work units?
(Message 22406)
Posted 26 Jun 2010 by Fred J. Verster Post: 0 units for my Linux box. But I have 5 other BOINC projects giving me work, plus a virtual machine running SETI on Solaris. So I am never out of work. Yep, had some WU\'s on this VISTA 32 QUAD (Q6600), but just read a message :Server Status Up, Out of work 1009 workunits in progress 9 concurrent connections. Hope they soon do have some work. Do have some (9) back-up projects, too. |
|
9)
Message boards :
LHC@home Science :
Anyone getting work units?
(Message 22391)
Posted 18 Jun 2010 by Fred J. Verster Post: Yeah I just add the LHC and I haven\\\'t got units yet... Thanks for letting me now..... Since a few days, I got some work, not much, still better then nothing at all. Have a few hosts, still connected to LHC@Home and after 6 month\'s, maybe more, I got work, again. Seems ages, but it took them quite some time, to get the Collider working again! |
|
10)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
lhcathome.cern.ch blacklisting IP addresses?
(Message 21531)
Posted 6 Oct 2009 by Fred J. Verster Post: Hi, long time since I visited the LHC fora. My last, attempt to get some work, looks not so good: 6-10-2009 16:50:57 lhcathome update requested by user 6-10-2009 16:51:01 lhcathome Sending scheduler request: Requested by user. 6-10-2009 16:51:01 lhcathome Requesting new tasks 6-10-2009 16:51:06 lhcathome Scheduler request completed: got 0 new tasks. NO contact problem, here in Holland. [ADDED] Blocking IP adresses ??? |
|
11)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Can't get work
(Message 21530)
Posted 6 Oct 2009 by Fred J. Verster Post: Hi, still hoping to get some work. After having some trouble with BOINC versions 6.6.38 & 36. Especially on WIN VISTA 32bit Home Edition. It\'s a HP Pavillion with a Q6600 and 2 GiG DDR2 RAM Still missing SP2, have to be downloaded and installed, it took 34 times, to, finally install SP1, though. Seeing the last post, in this forum, it looks like there isn\'t much of a chance, getting work. Is the Large Hadron Collider, still out off order, or in some testing fase? |
|
12)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Fortran error reported, when running concurrently with a 64 BIT app.
(Message 20897)
Posted 31 Dec 2008 by Fred J. Verster Post: Hello, my first post here, but I noticed a rare fault, when running, 3 64BIT SSSE3 optimized SETI MB app. and 1 LHC Work Unit. No BSOD, but a notice about a FORTRAN error, ending in faulty result. A X9650 @ 3690MHz (410x9; 4.5.5.14 (2T) memory timings. Machine is stable and hasn\'t made an error, yet, that\'s why I, finally reported it. Fred J. Verster. |
©2025 CERN