Mac os x support 2 quad cores.

But we don't know that it does not support more. There aren't any chips out yet to test that. I assume that OSX will support any number, as it is UNIX.

---

Reno, NV
Team: SETI.USA

Mac os x support 2 quad cores.

But we don't know that it does not support more. There aren't any chips out yet to test that. I assume that OSX will support any number, as it is UNIX.

They have servers that support more.

---

Jmarks

Mac os x support 2 quad cores.

But we don't know that it does not support more. There aren't any chips out yet to test that. I assume that OSX will support any number, as it is UNIX.

They have servers that support more.

Really? Which servers? I am aware of only the Xserve, which currently comes with only 2 dual core woodcrest Xeons. I assume you could manually replace them with quad core clovertown Xeons (like you can with the Mac Pro).

---

Reno, NV
Team: SETI.USA

Mac os x support 2 quad cores.

But we don't know that it does not support more. There aren't any chips out yet to test that. I assume that OSX will support any number, as it is UNIX.

They have servers that support more.

Really? Which servers? I am aware of only the Xserve, which currently comes with only 2 dual core woodcrest Xeons. I assume you could manually replace them with quad core clovertown Xeons (like you can with the Mac Pro).

"With Xgrid on Mac OS X Server, you can turn an ad hoc group of Mac systems into a low-cost supercomputer. By streamlining the process of assembling nodes, submitting jobs and retrieving results, Xgrid makes it easy for scientists, animators and digital content creators to run a single, very large project across multiple computers at once — dramatically improving performance and responsiveness"
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/specs.html

---

Jmarks

This conversation has evolved... Anyways, some thoughts.

Einstein awards more points for similar computers. In my mind, it has potential for astrophysics, but nothing as immediate as the medical potential of Rosetta.

SETI has optimized apps, but they have more processor power than they need and actually need cash donations more than processing power (they need money for server and backup equipment) [they actually have a dude crunching on a Pentium 60MHz!]. I think it'd be cool if we detected ETs, but still protein research could have an immediate impact on the quality of life here on Earth.

In the end: try to optimize your RAC for the project that inspires you the most. For me that's Rosetta & Folding (Rosetta being #1, and Folding allowing me to crunch on GPUs and PS3s).

---

Mac os x support 2 quad cores.

But we don't know that it does not support more. There aren't any chips out yet to test that. I assume that OSX will support any number, as it is UNIX.

They have servers that support more.

Really? Which servers? I am aware of only the Xserve, which currently comes with only 2 dual core woodcrest Xeons. I assume you could manually replace them with quad core clovertown Xeons (like you can with the Mac Pro).

"With Xgrid on Mac OS X Server, you can turn an ad hoc group of Mac systems into a low-cost supercomputer. By streamlining the process of assembling nodes, submitting jobs and retrieving results, Xgrid makes it easy for scientists, animators and digital content creators to run a single, very large project across multiple computers at once — dramatically improving performance and responsiveness"
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/specs.html

Yes, that is their DC/cluster implementation. But none of Apple's machines are currently available with more than 8 cores (on two chips).

---

Reno, NV
Team: SETI.USA

So a Q6600 should be able to do a bit more than half, or ~1300. And as much as ~1700 OC.

Well, there it is. It even broke 1700 RAC:

https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/show_host_detail.php?hostid=586752

---

Reno, NV
Team: SETI.USA

And it's still going up... I easily broke 1200 with this machine even without overclocking. I'm not sure why other Q6600 systems aren't doing better. Most of the ones I see are below 1000.

I'm not sure why other Q6600 systems aren't doing better. Most of the ones I see are below 1000.

Perhaps they are attached to multiple projects.

---

Reno, NV
Team: SETI.USA

Perhaps they are attached to multiple projects.

Could be... although I wonder how many Q6600 systems there are out there, and how many are Rosetta only.

Perhaps they are attached to multiple projects.

I know my quad is attached to more projects than any of my duals; greater project redundancy (in case one goes down), and also, it's fast enough that the turnaround on all the different WU is still good.
I would imagine many people do this, unless they're aiming for a top 100/1000 computer.

---

Crunching Rosetta as a member of the Whirlpool BOINC Teams

https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/show_host_detail.php?hostid=562651
!!!!!!!!
how it possible
4х core !!!!!

---

https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/show_host_detail.php?hostid=562651
!!!!!!!!
how it possible
4х core !!!!!

If you look thru the results there is a problem with wu 2138 and they are getting 1000+ rac look at the 4000 credit wu in number crunching tread.

---

Jmarks

I would like to take advice on hardware, as it looks like there is some tech freaks over there..... ;)

I use an old Mac G4 laptop, high end version from about 3 years ago.
The CPU is at 1.2Ghz, 512Mo RAM.
Im pretty happy with that. It is vastly enough for my every day use, and of course a bit slow for BOINC but i can keep pace with dead lines even with relatively big WU on Einstein.
My concern is more in the architecture of the computer. The FSB is at (please dont laugh) 133Mhz. Im not an hardware engineer, but i feel like a bus frequency as low as this just CAN'T allow the CPU to work at its best. Or am i wrong?
I know there is no need for the FSB to be as fast as the CPU, but that's 10 times!
I understand i doesnt play a role in pure CPU computation, but
since BOINC projects store about 130Mo to 260Mo on main memory, does this old fashioned FSB slow the overall process?
To be honest, when i bought this computer, the other brands (even with laptops) where in majority at 333Mhz FSB, wich seems a more fair CPU/FSB ratio.

(Sorry for my strange english, please correct me)

---

I would like to take advice on hardware, as it looks like there is some tech freaks over there..... ;)

I use an old Mac G4 laptop, high end version from about 3 years ago.
The CPU is at 1.2Ghz, 512Mo RAM.
Im pretty happy with that. It is vastly enough for my every day use, and of course a bit slow for BOINC but i can keep pace with dead lines even with relatively big WU on Einstein.
My concern is more in the architecture of the computer. The FSB is at (please dont laugh) 133Mhz. Im not an hardware engineer, but i feel like a bus frequency as low as this just CAN'T allow the CPU to work at its best. Or am i wrong?
I know there is no need for the FSB to be as fast as the CPU, but that's 10 times!
I understand i doesnt play a role in pure CPU computation, but
since BOINC projects store about 130Mo to 260Mo on main memory, does this old fashioned FSB slow the overall process?
To be honest, when i bought this computer, the other brands (even with laptops) where in majority at 333Mhz FSB, wich seems a more fair CPU/FSB ratio.

(Sorry for my strange english, please correct me)

Sure it does. That is one of the reasons Apple changed its total architecture to Intel for its Macs even though that forced them to rewrite their Os and software. This does not mean you need to buy a new Laptop if you are happy with what you have. Maybe you should just add some memory.

Ps For a Frenchy you write better then I do.

---

Jmarks

I would like to take advice on hardware, as it looks like there is some tech freaks over there..... ;)

I use an old Mac G4 laptop, high end version from about 3 years ago.
The CPU is at 1.2Ghz, 512Mo RAM.
Im pretty happy with that. It is vastly enough for my every day use, and of course a bit slow for BOINC but i can keep pace with dead lines even with relatively big WU on Einstein.
My concern is more in the architecture of the computer. The FSB is at (please dont laugh) 133Mhz. Im not an hardware engineer, but i feel like a bus frequency as low as this just CAN'T allow the CPU to work at its best. Or am i wrong?
I know there is no need for the FSB to be as fast as the CPU, but that's 10 times!
I understand i doesnt play a role in pure CPU computation, but
since BOINC projects store about 130Mo to 260Mo on main memory, does this old fashioned FSB slow the overall process?
To be honest, when i bought this computer, the other brands (even with laptops) where in majority at 333Mhz FSB, wich seems a more fair CPU/FSB ratio.

(Sorry for my strange english, please correct me)

Sure it does. That is one of the reasons Apple changed its total architecture to Intel for its Macs even though that forced them to rewrite their Os and software. This does not mean you need to buy a new Laptop if you are happy with what you have. Maybe you should just add some memory.

Ps For a Frenchy you write better then I do.

Your confusing FSB with memory data rates.

The G4 1.2GHz uses (normally) DDR266 which which is what you're comparing the 333 to they mean DDR333, which still uses a 133MHz FSB.

---

Team mauisun.org

I would like to take advice on hardware, as it looks like there is some tech freaks over there..... ;)

I use an old Mac G4 laptop, high end version from about 3 years ago.
The CPU is at 1.2Ghz, 512Mo RAM.
Im pretty happy with that. It is vastly enough for my every day use, and of course a bit slow for BOINC but i can keep pace with dead lines even with relatively big WU on Einstein.
My concern is more in the architecture of the computer. The FSB is at (please dont laugh) 133Mhz. Im not an hardware engineer, but i feel like a bus frequency as low as this just CAN'T allow the CPU to work at its best. Or am i wrong?
I know there is no need for the FSB to be as fast as the CPU, but that's 10 times!
I understand i doesnt play a role in pure CPU computation, but
since BOINC projects store about 130Mo to 260Mo on main memory, does this old fashioned FSB slow the overall process?
To be honest, when i bought this computer, the other brands (even with laptops) where in majority at 333Mhz FSB, wich seems a more fair CPU/FSB ratio.

(Sorry for my strange english, please correct me)

Sure it does. That is one of the reasons Apple changed its total architecture to Intel for its Macs even though that forced them to rewrite their Os and software. This does not mean you need to buy a new Laptop if you are happy with what you have. Maybe you should just add some memory.

Ps For a Frenchy you write better then I do.

Your confusing FSB with memory data rates.

The G4 1.2GHz uses (normally) DDR266 which which is what you're comparing the 333 to they mean DDR333, which still uses a 133MHz FSB.

Humm... no i put 333Mhz, but i realized then that it couldnt be. I should have wrote 266Mhz or *2 possibilities. But i thought, well it can figure what i want to know, so i let it like that.... ;). Thanks!

---

I would like to take advice on hardware, as it looks like there is some tech freaks over there..... ;)

I use an old Mac G4 laptop, high end version from about 3 years ago.
The CPU is at 1.2Ghz, 512Mo RAM.
Im pretty happy with that. It is vastly enough for my every day use, and of course a bit slow for BOINC but i can keep pace with dead lines even with relatively big WU on Einstein.
My concern is more in the architecture of the computer. The FSB is at (please dont laugh) 133Mhz. Im not an hardware engineer, but i feel like a bus frequency as low as this just CAN'T allow the CPU to work at its best. Or am i wrong?
I know there is no need for the FSB to be as fast as the CPU, but that's 10 times!
I understand i doesnt play a role in pure CPU computation, but
since BOINC projects store about 130Mo to 260Mo on main memory, does this old fashioned FSB slow the overall process?
To be honest, when i bought this computer, the other brands (even with laptops) where in majority at 333Mhz FSB, wich seems a more fair CPU/FSB ratio.

(Sorry for my strange english, please correct me)

Sure it does. That is one of the reasons Apple changed its total architecture to Intel for its Macs even though that forced them to rewrite their Os and software. This does not mean you need to buy a new Laptop if you are happy with what you have. Maybe you should just add some memory.

Ps For a Frenchy you write better then I do.

Your confusing FSB with memory data rates.

The G4 1.2GHz uses (normally) DDR266 which which is what you're comparing the 333 to they mean DDR333, which still uses a 133MHz FSB.

Humm... no i put 333Mhz, but i realized then that it couldnt be. I should have wrote 266Mhz or *2 possibilities. But i thought, well it can figure what i want to know, so i let it like that.... ;). Thanks!

You will have been correct, DDR266, DDR333 & DDR400 are all valid memory frequencies, but ALL use a 133MHz FSB. (You may know the memory speeds as PC2100, PC2700 & PC3200 respectively), they are just 'pumped' versions.

---

Team mauisun.org

I would like to take advice on hardware, as it looks like there is some tech freaks over there..... ;)

I use an old Mac G4 laptop, high end version from about 3 years ago.
The CPU is at 1.2Ghz, 512Mo RAM.
Im pretty happy with that. It is vastly enough for my every day use, and of course a bit slow for BOINC but i can keep pace with dead lines even with relatively big WU on Einstein.
My concern is more in the architecture of the computer. The FSB is at (please dont laugh) 133Mhz. Im not an hardware engineer, but i feel like a bus frequency as low as this just CAN'T allow the CPU to work at its best. Or am i wrong?
I know there is no need for the FSB to be as fast as the CPU, but that's 10 times!
I understand i doesnt play a role in pure CPU computation, but
since BOINC projects store about 130Mo to 260Mo on main memory, does this old fashioned FSB slow the overall process?
To be honest, when i bought this computer, the other brands (even with laptops) where in majority at 333Mhz FSB, wich seems a more fair CPU/FSB ratio.

(Sorry for my strange english, please correct me)

Sure it does. That is one of the reasons Apple changed its total architecture to Intel for its Macs even though that forced them to rewrite their Os and software. This does not mean you need to buy a new Laptop if you are happy with what you have. Maybe you should just add some memory.

Ps For a Frenchy you write better then I do.

Your confusing FSB with memory data rates.

The G4 1.2GHz uses (normally) DDR266 which which is what you're comparing the 333 to they mean DDR333, which still uses a 133MHz FSB.

Humm... no i put 333Mhz, but i realized then that it couldnt be. I should have wrote 266Mhz or *2 possibilities. But i thought, well it can figure what i want to know, so i let it like that.... ;). Thanks!

You will have been correct, DDR266, DDR333 & DDR400 are all valid memory frequencies, but ALL use a 133MHz FSB. (You may know the memory speeds as PC2100, PC2700 & PC3200 respectively), they are just 'pumped' versions.

Well, correct me if im wrong: i thought the FSB was carrying data from various elements of computer to others, like from memory to CPU. And memory frequency is the fonctional speed of the particular component. So a DDR333 with a 133Mhz FSB is quite useless... Am i wrong?

---

You will have been correct, DDR266, DDR333 & DDR400 are all valid memory frequencies, but ALL use a 133MHz FSB. (You may know the memory speeds as PC2100, PC2700 & PC3200 respectively), they are just 'pumped' versions.

No, you are quite wrong. Here's the maximum FSB speed supported by each memory type:
PC1800 FSB 100 MHz
PC2100 FSB 133 MHz
PC2700 FSB 166 MHz
PC3200 FSB 200 MHz

All DDR memory types are capable of downgrading their speed if put into a slower motherboard/CPU configuration. The slowest component (motherboard, CPU, or RAM) in a system controls the FSB speed so all components work together.