21)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Quad Core Intel Price Drops
(Message 44849)
Posted 10 Aug 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: I was able to nab of couple of these babies the other day; no doubt they will chew up some WUs pretty quick. I suppose the question now becomes whether they should be loaded with XP, Vista Basic, or Vista Premium. They come with Basic, but others have mentioned on the links below this post that if you call Dell they will upgrade to Premiuim for free. But on the same page it is mentioned that XP is a better environment for multi-tasking and stuff that uses more than one core. So, which should I put into these puppies for boinc? This is a bit beyond my pay grade. Thanks for the advice, fluffy. Here's the link, but I think I may have either misread the XP part or followed the link somewhere else for that idea about XP being better. click here |
22)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Quad Core Intel Price Drops
(Message 44693)
Posted 5 Aug 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: I was able to nab of couple of these babies the other day; no doubt they will chew up some WUs pretty quick. I suppose the question now becomes whether they should be loaded with XP, Vista Basic, or Vista Premium. They come with Basic, but others have mentioned on the links below this post that if you call Dell they will upgrade to Premiuim for free. But on the same page it is mentioned that XP is a better environment for multi-tasking and stuff that uses more than one core. So, which should I put into these puppies for boinc? This is a bit beyond my pay grade. |
23)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Quad Core Intel Price Drops
(Message 44602)
Posted 1 Aug 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: Yo Paydirt, can you contact me by email? I'm at gerryr @ floodlight.org. I need to contact you regarding the system we talked about earlier in this thread. |
24)
Message boards :
Rosetta@home Science :
Windows 64
(Message 41777)
Posted 2 Jun 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: No. In most cases the difference is negligable, that is why the developers have not felt too much pressure to make a 64bit version. The FPU (Floating Point Unit) is virtually unchanged in the two types of CPU, since most projects use the FPU almost exclusively there is often no performance gain. As mentioned before simap has a fairly large gain, because that project spends less time using the FPU than most projects. Programs really gain from the 64bit CPUs if they need large blocks of memory, or if they do a large proportion of integer operations. How large are the blocks that you mention? Predictor uses lots of memory (750 mb+ if memory serves, then 1 - 1.5mb for the last 20% of the WU), and I got a response from one of my posts here many moons ago on these boards that there are talks of a memory pig WU from Rosetta that would take advantage of hosts with lots of memory like mine. Would these WUs benefit greatly from the 64 bit version? |
25)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Quad Core Intel Price Drops
(Message 41620)
Posted 29 May 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: Hey Gerry, I've been pricing out systems recently to get a gauge for the total cost of a new system... I didn't see your system "below", did you forget to attach. Anyhow, this is what I would do for you. Actually, it was the one mentioned in Who?s post a few down from here. In any case, your suggestion sounds interesting. Contact me at gerryratfloodlight.org. |
26)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Quad Core Intel Price Drops
(Message 41558)
Posted 28 May 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: In the past couple of weeks I've sort of decided it is nearing time to upgrade again, probably before the end of summer. So, now comes the hard part. What is the best cruncher combo to buy since the prices are dropping? Is the one below the best? Also, I don't need anything more than a standard video card since I don't crunch with the screensaver; this machine will be a cruncher made to crunch, and double as my desktop. Should I order the parts online and then give them to my computer store to assemble (this combo will not be their standard offering), or should I get someone else for that? Never tried to put together my own cruncher before, so help is definitely needed. |
27)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
TFlops
(Message 40624)
Posted 10 May 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: There is probably a few Predictor@home crunchers looking for a protein folding home as well, though IMHO the Seti thing is probably the main reason. Not sure how long the P@h project will be semi-beta while they run some testing on a windows version of a linux/mac compiled program that is difficult to transition. |
28)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
TFlops
(Message 40447)
Posted 6 May 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: Maybe I'm missing something: BOINCstats has Rosy at about 52+ TFlops. Are you getting your numbers from somewhere else? Perhaps the projected Spiderman gross this weekend? Please remember when posting to the message boards that TerraDollars are different than TeraFlops. :-) |
29)
Message boards :
Rosetta@home Science :
Windows 64
(Message 40370)
Posted 5 May 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: Since I am not a computer buff, I have a question. Since windows 64 is getting information twice as fast to crunch as windows 32, will there be a significant increase in performance, or am I missing something? |
30)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
TFlops
(Message 40279)
Posted 3 May 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: 52 TFlops... WOW... Actually, I thought I read that it was more like 150 TFlops, but that was ages ago. Perhaps I might be wrong on this. I have many times thought that if BOINC could get maybe 1 to 1.5 million crunchers consistently crunching, I think the idea could really realize its potential for all of the projects. I have many times wondered how to get from here to there though. |
31)
Message boards :
Rosetta@home Science :
How can we bring more users to the Rosetta project?
(Message 40022)
Posted 29 Apr 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: I think it would be a great idea as well, though I could not help the way I would like. There are a couple of ideas that myself and others have discussed in the past many moons and many suns ago that might help, especially the Rosetta Banner that was talked about to spruce things up on the home page. The Rosetta Banner was discussed here, and the Rosetta Desktop image idea was discussed here. Hope this helps |
32)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Anyone could give more details about RAC?
(Message 39992)
Posted 28 Apr 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: Newbie Q&A thread gives some general infomations about RAC. An URL "http://boinc-wiki.ath.cx/index.php?title=RAC" is given at the end of the post. But I cannot visit that page. Anyone could help? I just copied and pasted your URL into my browser. Seems to be okay now. |
33)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Quad Core Intel Price Drops
(Message 39955)
Posted 27 Apr 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: Actually, why even dream of a quad-core anyway, when the buzz will soon be toward GPUs. Or are you implying GPU machines for crunching and gaming, and quad-core tech for the home PC for everything else? |
34)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Recent Average Credit Drop-off
(Message 39952)
Posted 27 Apr 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: So far as things you might do... Set General Preference to leave applications in memory while preempted. Use the current recommended BOINC release. Set your General Preference for connect to network every... days to at least 1. Allow BOINC to use at least 150MB per active Rosetta thread (General Preference for both active and idle % of memory). Avoid ending BOINC and turning off your computer. And rest assured that the Project Team has improved checkpointing being tested on Ralph right now (although if you are crunching 24/7 you won't likely see any improvement from that change). Turn off the screensaver, Rosetta does not need this to do the calculations. Close (not "exit") the BOINC Manager window when you are not looking at it. Get a friend to crunch Rosetta too, on your account ;) ...there's a quick double right there! You know, it just occured to me that your post should be modified with bullet points and put on the FAQ or somewhere for others access who want to optimize their crunching power with their general preferences. Perhaps this has already been done, but you covered all or most of the bases. |
35)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Recent Average Credit Drop-off
(Message 39950)
Posted 27 Apr 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: [snip]....Get a friend to crunch Rosetta too, on your account ;) ...there's a quick double right there! Dirty cruncher! Dirty cruncher! :-) |
36)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
TFlops
(Message 39747)
Posted 23 Apr 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: Any ideas why there is an increase lately in the TFlops the last few days? The only thing I can think of off hand is that there are a bunch more new users to boinc in the same period. Not sure why though. |
37)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
80 cores, not science fiction ... it is real! 1.2 TERA!
(Message 39619)
Posted 19 Apr 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: Quad-Core Processors to Go Mainstream by 2009 For awhile now I've wondered when the chip makers will eventually hit the performance/sale wall for the home or small business PC. In other words, when will the chips become so powerful that it will become a waste to market more powerful chips to this market, since the added power will become a non-issue? I wonder if the quad-core chips might just hit that performance wall; it seems to be pretty difficult to ask too much from even a dual-core nowadays. Other than video editing, few need the extra power these days. Any thoughts on this? |
38)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
80 cores, not science fiction ... it is real! 1.2 TERA!
(Message 39552)
Posted 18 Apr 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: Slightly OT, but... Go Rosetta!!! So should I upgrade next year, or wait until 2009 when the multi-cores will be much more than eight-core processors. Ughhhh! |
39)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
80 cores, not science fiction ... it is real! 1.2 TERA!
(Message 38810)
Posted 1 Apr 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: Doh! I was thinking recently about the memory requirements of multi-core processors. I don't know if this has been discussed or not, but if multi-core processors are all the rage in a few years, as it seems they will be, will not the motherboard makers also have to respond with motherboards that have a major increase in memory capacity? Think about it; 8-core or 16-core processors in a few years: how much memory will these hogs have to take to run 8 or 16 cores of BOINC? Or am I missing something basic here? It seems to me that the memory requirements might add substantially to the cost of an upgrade to these CPUs. What's the scoop on future memory for multi-cores? |
40)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Raytheon Develops World's First Polymorphic Computer
(Message 38418)
Posted 26 Mar 2007 by Gerry Rough Post: "In laboratory testing MONARCH outperformed the Intel quad-core Xeon chip by a factor of 10," You should not have posted this: the envy factor rises in proportion to the news of better technology. Is envy not a sin? ;-) |
©2024 University of Washington
https://www.bakerlab.org