Are huge differences in result runtimes normal for the same workunit? See WU 464030. The one result reported there finished in about 117 hours. Thats an Athlon X2 running Windows XP. My host, a Core Duo on XP is running one of the other results but is at 210 hours and still going at 82%. My reading has led me to believe that this app might terminate before 100% if it encounters 30 pulses, which appears to be the case when I saw the result of the other host. Perhaps my computer failed to find the pulses that the other computer found and is running further into the WU (I counted 14 ap_signals in the result file in my projects folder at this point). Or is the performance between the processors really this great? I do see that the benchmarks of the other host are higher but not by the same multiple as the difference in runtimes so far.
So is this something thats just favoring the other system or I'm running a bad unit? I've read things about Windows vs Linux performance differences, but haven't seen anything about AMD vs. Intel.
PappaVolunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 13 Nov 05
Posts: 1724
Credit: 3,121,901
RAC: 0
AlphaLaser
We are still early in testing, there many changes that will happen before AP could even be considered ready for prime time. So at this point MS vs Nix vs Intel vs AMD not to mention cache size... Right now we are brute forcing throuhg the data, no there is no finese... All we can do is make observations, and hope we get a Result returned Successfully (30 pulses aside).
I remember some nasty things that happened when we first started Enhanced.
So we watch and report what happened, we learn.
Regards
Al
aka Pappa
Are huge differences in result runtimes normal for the same workunit? See WU 464030. The one result reported there finished in about 117 hours. Thats an Athlon X2 running Windows XP. My host, a Core Duo on XP is running one of the other results but is at 210 hours and still going at 82%. My reading has led me to believe that this app might terminate before 100% if it encounters 30 pulses, which appears to be the case when I saw the result of the other host. Perhaps my computer failed to find the pulses that the other computer found and is running further into the WU (I counted 14 ap_signals in the result file in my projects folder at this point). Or is the performance between the processors really this great? I do see that the benchmarks of the other host are higher but not by the same multiple as the difference in runtimes so far.
So is this something thats just favoring the other system or I'm running a bad unit? I've read things about Windows vs Linux performance differences, but haven't seen anything about AMD vs. Intel.
____________
Thanks to Paul and Friends
Please consider a Donation to the Seti Project
AlphaLaser
Now there's a good sounding name for a project.
____________
AlphaLaser
Now there's a good sounding name for a project.
Using DC to figure out how to build a light saber. Now that'd be something neat. (Was watching a special on SW 30th, and how right now there is no technology around that could build anything near a light saber.)
____________
AlphaLaser
Now there's a good sounding name for a project.
Using DC to figure out how to build a light saber. Now that'd be something neat. (Was watching a special on SW 30th, and how right now there is no technology around that could build anything near a light saber.)
Check out the green lasers at wickedlasers.com
____________
It finally finished and validated OK, though I was granted 1,000 credits less than the claim, oh well :P
____________
Welcome to BETA (or I should say ALPHA when it comes to AP).
Check out http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/beta/workunit.php?wuid=464256.
I'm the poor slob that lost 1600 credits because of the Linux vs Windoze issue. Hang in there and eventually the growing pains will stop ;->
____________
!!Stupidity should be PAINFUL!!
