I am unable to run two instances of Prime95.

When I try to open the second instance, it closes out.

Can run one instance.

EDIT --> I can watch in TaskManager as the second instance of Prime95 appears, and then disappears, leaving only instance one running.

Thinking bad core on the cpu.

Sorry if i have missed it but have you run 2 instances of prime95
set the effinity to 0 on 1 and set other to 1. Let it run for awhile.

If your memory passes memtest i would try a new power supply. Weak power supplies can cause all kinds of problems. If a known good 350W power supply gives you the same results my guess faulty memory controller.

---

There seem to be many webpages that claim to be "memtest". Please provide a link for the Windows version of the one you are referring to, and I'll run.

Thanx!

If your memory passes memtest i would try a new power supply. Weak power supplies can cause all kinds of problems. If a known good 350W power supply gives you the same results my guess faulty memory controller.

Here is 1 you can run in the windows.
http://hcidesign.com/memtest/

---

Running it now. Wants 20 mins to run. Will post afterwards.

Here is 1 you can run in the windows.
http://hcidesign.com/memtest/

to run two instances of prime95 you have to install it a 2nd time to a different dir iirc :)

You learn something new every day! Silly me, thanx!

to run two instances of prime95 you have to install it a 2nd time to a different dir iirc :)

OK, not sure what, if anything, to make out of this. I may have run the tests wrong, and need to re-run.

Anyway, I have three 512mb's, and one 256mb, for a total of 1.792GB

When opened, MemTest says: "blah, blah, blah. You will need to run two copies of MemTest, and tell each to test 728MB of RAM."

So, I did. Even though 728 * 2 does not equal 1,792.

Very interesting, one version ran between 2.5 and 3.0 times faster than the other version.

Have no idea of any implications.

Running it now. Wants 20 mins to run. Will post afterwards.

Here is 1 you can run in the windows.
http://hcidesign.com/memtest/

And as far as benchmarking:

On my "old" Sempron 3400+, when I ran 24 hr wu's, credit ("old credit system") was approximately 260.

I basically let the X2 do its thing for 24 hours (29Aug06 20:00 EST to 30Aug06 20:00 EST - which should be universal time for the entire day of 30Aug06).

Given that I stepped up from Sempron to Athlon, from 3400+ to 3800+, and from single core to dual core, and compared with another cruncher with a similar X2 system, credit would have been expected in the 600 to 650 range.

My X2's grand total?

~ 180 credits claimed, ~ 225 credits granted.

X2's performance is below the Sempron 3400+.

Have you tried CPUz it's a good program can tell you alot about

your system and it's free, it might help.

---

to run two instances of prime95 you have to install it a 2nd time to a different dir iirc :)

You can do it via the command-line interface (I have two shortcuts set up, one for each core). Make sure that (unless you have 3 or 4GB ram) you run the smaller memory size test for one or both of the instances, otherwise it'll just be thrashing the hard disk.

Thermal throttling can also cause everything to slow down (starts at about 65c though).

---

The recovery partition is specific to that Compaq/HP model and the hardware etc it came with. If you used that to re-install a cut down version of windows after a hardware change, you are not getting a true picture of things.

---

The recovery partition is specific to that Compaq/HP model and the hardware etc it came with. If you used that to re-install a cut down version of windows after a hardware change, you are not getting a true picture of things.

This also came to me as i hit the bed. You are using a windows disc?
Also untill sorted try i stick of 512 in slot nearest cpu.

---

Granted. And maybe I'm "assuming" things, but the HP A1350N uses same mobo, and sports X2's. "Assume" Compaq/HP is using same "cut down" version of Win XP-H.

For arguments sake, where is a purchaser of a stock-low-end pc supposed to obtain a legal copy of the "full version" of Win XP-H? I already "purchased" a license when I bought the computer, so... it shouldn't have to cost me anything.

The recovery partition is specific to that Compaq/HP model and the hardware etc it came with. If you used that to re-install a cut down version of windows after a hardware change, you are not getting a true picture of things.

This also came to me as i hit the bed. You are using a windows disc?
Also untill sorted try i stick of 512 in slot nearest cpu.

I entered Bad Penguin's data into my little Excel spreadsheet for calculating the average credit per hour, and considering the 3800+ X2 processor is running at 2.0GHz it compared pretty well with my machines here.

It's a little bit on the low side with 5.7 credits per hour per GHz [my machines range between 5.9 and 6.9], but I don't think it's extremely low.

There is a number of factors that will affect the credits per hour... I also run 24 hours per WU - not that it should make any huge difference in credit per hour, but I think there's a little bit of overhead, which may mean that a shorter runtime gives a little bit less credit per hour.

I picked another random machine and it falls in the same range as my machines...

--
Mats

---

On the case of running dual cores: Do you see two work-units with status "Running" on your Boinc Manager?

In my previous post, I calculated the credit per work-unit, but looking at it, it doesn't look like you're returning a unit every three hours or so (not even every 6 hours, which you should if the system is running 24/7). Are you also crunching other projects, perhaps?

--
Mats

---

Yes, BUT... for every 4 to 5 "CPU time" seconds that wu1 advances, wu2 advances 1 second.

On the case of running dual cores: Do you see two work-units with status "Running" on your Boinc Manager?

Right now, since the Win XP-H reinstall, and the re-install of BOINC (from 5.4.09 to 5.4.11), I am 100% Rosetta, 6 hour wu's.

And "yes", it is not even returning them on a 6 hour basis.

I "suspect" that one core is attempting to run both, which "may" explain wu2 not advancing "cpu time" at the same rate as wu1, and why a 6 hour wu is taking longer than 6 hours to complete.

In my previous post, I calculated the credit per work-unit, but looking at it, it doesn't look like you're returning a unit every three hours or so (not even every 6 hours, which you should if the system is running 24/7). Are you also crunching other projects, perhaps?

--
Mats

Hmm, does sound strange indeed.

If you do Start Menu->Run... and type in "cmd" (without quotes) and "set NUMBER_OF_PROCESSORS", (again without the quotes) what do you get? It should say "2".

--
Mats

---

I'm sorry, I just don't understand.

My single core Sempron 3400+ was returning ~ 260 credits ("old credit system") per 24 hours.

My dual core Athlon X2 3800+ is returning ~ 180 "claimed credits", 225 "granted credits" per 24 hours.

How does that equate to "pretty well"?

I entered Bad Penguin's data into my little Excel spreadsheet for calculating the average credit per hour, and considering the 3800+ X2 processor is running at 2.0GHz it compared pretty well with my machines here.

It says "2".

Hmm, does sound strange indeed.

If you do Start Menu->Run... and type in "cmd" (without quotes) and "set NUMBER_OF_PROCESSORS", (again without the quotes) what do you get? It should say "2".

--
Mats