Alright, I saw that RAH supports processors 500 MHz and above, but I really wanted to run this on my two Pentium II's. Both are 300 MHz.

I have to admit, I downloaded the file, but they have not yet gotten through the workunits. If the workunits expire in a month, the processor should be able to get through it in time, if it is on all the time, and devoted only to RAH (as mine are). Has anyone else tried an older processor like this, or have any thoughts on it?

Thanks, Bryan

---

https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/rah_requirements.php. Your prozessor is too slow. The values looks like terrible ;)

---

https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/rah_requirements.php. Your prozessor is too slow. The values looks like terrible ;)

I'm running a half dozen p2-300's. . as long as they have enough ram (at least 128), they return results. . . eventually :)

---

https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/rah_requirements.php. Your prozessor is too slow. The values looks like terrible ;)

I'm running a half dozen p2-300's. . as long as they have enough ram (at least 128), they return results. . . eventually :)

How do you managing all of your pc`s? lol :p

---

How do you managing all of your pc`s? lol :p

All of our machines are on a Microsoft domain. . one of our sysadmins created a batch file that runs on startup. . it checks to see if a c:boinc folder exists, and if not, installs the software and connects to this user. It works great, as we roll out new machines we don't have to worry about installing the client.

---

https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/rah_requirements.php. Your prozessor is too slow. The values looks like terrible ;)

Well of course the results will be slow. A P2 300 is 1/10th the clock speed of a P4 3Ghz, and due to improvements in processor architecture, it's somewhat slower than that in terms of actual number crunch power. But it will eventually produce results.

How do you managing all of your pc`s? lol :p

BoincView FTW.

FWIW, this computer is a 750 MHz AMD (a hair over twice the speed of your P2 300). It does OK, given that it's not a speed demon.

Bottom line to the OP, the P2 300 will produce results. If that's all you care about, then it has enough power.

Surprisingly, the one metric I care about (and it does make the AMD 750 the lowest I'll go) is "RAC vs power consumption." Since I have to pay for my own electricity, this becomes a concern.

---

I've got an old slow 300 MHz PII running. It's got 384 M of memory. The longest WU so far was over 24 hours of CPU time. I think you can see it at https://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/show_host_detail.php?hostid=4381

It will work. Just be patient.

Charlie

---

-Charlie

Some of the latest work units (that are taking 3 to 4 hours on a 2.7GHz Athlon 64) could take 2 days+ on a 300MHz Pentium II. I go by a similar metric as "dgnuff" although I draw the line much higher (for dedicated crunchers). I retired a 1.7GHz Celeron because it fell below that line.

Rather than run two slow machines that produce very little, I'd spend a little more to get one fast machine that does a lot more work. Cheaper in the long run when you have to pay for electricity and better for the environment too (unless you're running on solar power or the like :-)

But if you're running these PCs anyway (i.e. they're not "dedicated crunchers"), you might as well keep using them. Don't expect much credit but the project will welcome your work.

---

*** Join BOINC@Australia today ***

... Cheaper in the long run when you have to pay for electricity and better for the environment too (unless you're running on solar power or the like :-)

Oh yeah?

That just happens to be my house, BTW. :)

---

(unless you're running on solar power or the like :-)

Oh yeah?

That just happens to be my house, BTW. :)

Well, there ya go then :-) Power cost probably isn't an issue for you, although the number of PCs you could power with those panels probably has its limits, especially at night?

---

*** Join BOINC@Australia today ***