same CPU comparison
Moderator: HAL6000
-
- G'Day Mate!
- Posts: 894
- Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2002 4:28 am
- Location: Sydney Australia
- Contact:
same CPU comparison
I have three of my machines identical (!?) , except -
my first (sq-2) appears to be faster than the others.
of the three, they have
different fdd - one with, two without
different bios - 2 qq, one ru
different usb - one disabled in bios
different vga - all s3trio, but ...
all with 128mb ram, and seagate st32122a drives
but they're all pretty much identical, considering.
the sq-2 runs the setiqueue, but is the one with the disabled USB controller
and is also the fastest of the three
seems by about 20-30 minutes.
q. any ideas ...
q. seems (?) a good idea to disable the usb controller generally ?
unless of course you are using it.
my first (sq-2) appears to be faster than the others.
of the three, they have
different fdd - one with, two without
different bios - 2 qq, one ru
different usb - one disabled in bios
different vga - all s3trio, but ...
all with 128mb ram, and seagate st32122a drives
but they're all pretty much identical, considering.
the sq-2 runs the setiqueue, but is the one with the disabled USB controller
and is also the fastest of the three
seems by about 20-30 minutes.
q. any ideas ...
q. seems (?) a good idea to disable the usb controller generally ?
unless of course you are using it.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by Dave Rave on Fri Oct 24, 2003 9:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
bp6's 3 x dual @ 533
. . . . 1 x dual @ 466
. . . . 1 sngl @ 400
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.4ghz )]
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.66ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4C ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4B ghz )]
[( 1 x dual AMD 1800MP )]
[( 1 x P4 1600 )]
[( 1 x 500 ppga )]
3 x piii 866
. . . . 1 x dual @ 466
. . . . 1 sngl @ 400
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.4ghz )]
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.66ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4C ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4B ghz )]
[( 1 x dual AMD 1800MP )]
[( 1 x P4 1600 )]
[( 1 x 500 ppga )]
3 x piii 866
-
- Posts: 106
- Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 11:50 am
- Location: Yorkshire UK
- Contact:
yeah
a lil more info
give the full specs of each machine seperately...
and we'll be better able to tell you
a lil more info

give the full specs of each machine seperately...
and we'll be better able to tell you
!!! WARNING !!!
The following forums: www.bp6.com
are infected with the following VIRUS(s): Kuun.infected.all.posts.Win2K.user
The following IRC servers has been exploited: irc.bp6.com
with the Following Exploit: Kuun.lurks.using.mIRC.v5.82.exploit
The following forums: www.bp6.com
are infected with the following VIRUS(s): Kuun.infected.all.posts.Win2K.user
The following IRC servers has been exploited: irc.bp6.com
with the Following Exploit: Kuun.lurks.using.mIRC.v5.82.exploit
-
- G'Day Mate!
- Posts: 894
- Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2002 4:28 am
- Location: Sydney Australia
- Contact:
much as it's hard for me to tell, due to partial colour blindness, the graph is colour coded on the
but the question is....
moot.
sq-2,3 & 4 are the three lines all close together, ignore the line above for sq-5, it's the dual 466.
sq-2 is the faster, and the bright yellow.
it doesn't have the fdd, and if it had mattered, i think i'd have said the diff bios made a diff, so i think the ru isn't the sq-2.
that's all with smilies guys.
the usb was disabled in device manager, not bios.
I disabled all three machines usb....
the chart changed a bit recently... i think the 3 and 4 are improving a bit, but with a few 8 hour results, the graph can't be zoomed in to look at anymore ;-( stupid fast results
now it look slike 3 and 4 are faster, which with the sq-2 having the setiq, would make sense ? they're showing faster, wish I could manually colour-code the graph, i'd use some blue and green.

dammit, looking at my charts now, the sq-2 is above 17h30m and the other two are below....
so I've improved two with the disabling of the usb, and the faster one is now slower, but i don't know why



but the question is....
moot.

sq-2,3 & 4 are the three lines all close together, ignore the line above for sq-5, it's the dual 466.
sq-2 is the faster, and the bright yellow.
it doesn't have the fdd, and if it had mattered, i think i'd have said the diff bios made a diff, so i think the ru isn't the sq-2.

that's all with smilies guys.
the usb was disabled in device manager, not bios.

I disabled all three machines usb....

the chart changed a bit recently... i think the 3 and 4 are improving a bit, but with a few 8 hour results, the graph can't be zoomed in to look at anymore ;-( stupid fast results

now it look slike 3 and 4 are faster, which with the sq-2 having the setiq, would make sense ? they're showing faster, wish I could manually colour-code the graph, i'd use some blue and green.


dammit, looking at my charts now, the sq-2 is above 17h30m and the other two are below....
so I've improved two with the disabling of the usb, and the faster one is now slower, but i don't know why

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
bp6's 3 x dual @ 533
. . . . 1 x dual @ 466
. . . . 1 sngl @ 400
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.4ghz )]
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.66ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4C ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4B ghz )]
[( 1 x dual AMD 1800MP )]
[( 1 x P4 1600 )]
[( 1 x 500 ppga )]
3 x piii 866
. . . . 1 x dual @ 466
. . . . 1 sngl @ 400
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.4ghz )]
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.66ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4C ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4B ghz )]
[( 1 x dual AMD 1800MP )]
[( 1 x P4 1600 )]
[( 1 x 500 ppga )]
3 x piii 866
yeah
i've noticed that on some wu's i can process about 18%/hr
and others 14%
but i average out around 16%
it all depends on how much data was actually recorded...
you get a recorded wu that had very little radio signals... your gonna get a higher completion rate
i've noticed that on some wu's i can process about 18%/hr
and others 14%
but i average out around 16%
it all depends on how much data was actually recorded...
you get a recorded wu that had very little radio signals... your gonna get a higher completion rate
!!! WARNING !!!
The following forums: www.bp6.com
are infected with the following VIRUS(s): Kuun.infected.all.posts.Win2K.user
The following IRC servers has been exploited: irc.bp6.com
with the Following Exploit: Kuun.lurks.using.mIRC.v5.82.exploit
The following forums: www.bp6.com
are infected with the following VIRUS(s): Kuun.infected.all.posts.Win2K.user
The following IRC servers has been exploited: irc.bp6.com
with the Following Exploit: Kuun.lurks.using.mIRC.v5.82.exploit
-
- G'Day Mate!
- Posts: 894
- Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2002 4:28 am
- Location: Sydney Australia
- Contact:
gee, you guys all need to get your own setiq to play with. 
the graph is scaled accross the x-axis based on the AR of the wu....
you can see that with this chart of all my celeron systems, they all do they 'same' time for each different AR'd wu, based on relative speed.
also attached, a friends three systems with two amd's and a Piii
i like the idea of the system checking the usb ports....
sq-3&4 do now appear to be faster than 2....
you can see the line alone above, sq-5 (466) that it follows the other three lines very closely.....
the three lines should be pretty much intertwined and the same line.
the original post, shows sq-2 clearly 20-30 mins faster, the second post shows 3&4 now faster.....
so I suppose now, the question with all usb's disabled, why is sq-2 slow ? ;-(

the graph is scaled accross the x-axis based on the AR of the wu....
you can see that with this chart of all my celeron systems, they all do they 'same' time for each different AR'd wu, based on relative speed.
also attached, a friends three systems with two amd's and a Piii
i like the idea of the system checking the usb ports....
sq-3&4 do now appear to be faster than 2....
you can see the line alone above, sq-5 (466) that it follows the other three lines very closely.....
the three lines should be pretty much intertwined and the same line.
the original post, shows sq-2 clearly 20-30 mins faster, the second post shows 3&4 now faster.....
so I suppose now, the question with all usb's disabled, why is sq-2 slow ? ;-(
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
bp6's 3 x dual @ 533
. . . . 1 x dual @ 466
. . . . 1 sngl @ 400
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.4ghz )]
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.66ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4C ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4B ghz )]
[( 1 x dual AMD 1800MP )]
[( 1 x P4 1600 )]
[( 1 x 500 ppga )]
3 x piii 866
. . . . 1 x dual @ 466
. . . . 1 sngl @ 400
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.4ghz )]
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.66ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4C ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4B ghz )]
[( 1 x dual AMD 1800MP )]
[( 1 x P4 1600 )]
[( 1 x 500 ppga )]
3 x piii 866
if the disabling the USB card gets you faster, did you consider that the PSU is better supllying the MBO & the whole system, and that is why they are working faster!?!
also, you might check that by installing brand new PSU with 400 or 450 or even 500W on the BP6 machines...
if it works, that is the sollution!
it's always sthg about power...
also, you might check that by installing brand new PSU with 400 or 450 or even 500W on the BP6 machines...

if it works, that is the sollution!
it's always sthg about power...

-
- G'Day Mate!
- Posts: 894
- Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2002 4:28 am
- Location: Sydney Australia
- Contact:
finally, an answer, of no help
after two years.
when winter comes back, I might start those 4 up again, to see how they boinc.
but the power costs versus cpu rating hasn't been worth it as much as against my 2.4b 2.4c and now two dual 2.4 xeons

after two years.
when winter comes back, I might start those 4 up again, to see how they boinc.
but the power costs versus cpu rating hasn't been worth it as much as against my 2.4b 2.4c and now two dual 2.4 xeons
bp6's 3 x dual @ 533
. . . . 1 x dual @ 466
. . . . 1 sngl @ 400
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.4ghz )]
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.66ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4C ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4B ghz )]
[( 1 x dual AMD 1800MP )]
[( 1 x P4 1600 )]
[( 1 x 500 ppga )]
3 x piii 866
. . . . 1 x dual @ 466
. . . . 1 sngl @ 400
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.4ghz )]
[( 2 x dual xeon 2.66ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4C ghz )]
[( 1 x 2.4B ghz )]
[( 1 x dual AMD 1800MP )]
[( 1 x P4 1600 )]
[( 1 x 500 ppga )]
3 x piii 866