Hey wait a second, I think that's my host! (well one of them)
Impressive isn't it :)
It is a dual processor 2.0 G5 mac, running the optimized client from team macnn.....even I thought the numbers were a little out of whack. Too bad I couldn't get the 400+ it claimed for a unit.....
If they used as "smart" enough optimizer it will remove large portions of the benchmark code as it is "make-work" and if recognized is simply removed. There was a similar issue with the 4.19 vs. later where the optimizer's removal of code meant higher benchmark scores.
This gives rise to the interest to have the highest benchmark which results in higher than normal claims. Though averaging does bring those down some, it does lead to a slight upward "bias" ...
Anyway ... just food for thought ... I would go on but not sure you all care ... :)
Actually, it is optimized to use the altivec part of the G4+ cpus. So, I imagine it is still running the benchmarks, but doing so on the vector portion of the processor and getting a pretty good boost out of it. I also remember that whole benchmark compiling out thing and beleive they set up the code so that could no longer occur using normal tools (gcc, which Apple currently uses). The use of altivec enabled benchmarks is actually quite reasonable since the beta einstein client also uses altivec optimizations (and I am running that also).
"Just a few more"
)
Yeah, its quite remarkable what the Finns squeeze out of a Nokia smartphone.
Some thing is wrong cause a
)
Some thing is wrong cause a p4 3.0 is not that slow it should complete one in about 40000 ht or without ht in about 25000.
Link to Unofficial Wiki for BOINC, by Paul and Friends
Yeah, and benchmarks for host
)
Yeah, and benchmarks for host id 217081 are also very interesting....
13368.49 million ops/sec for integer speed ...
Hey wait a second, I think
)
Hey wait a second, I think that's my host! (well one of them)
Impressive isn't it :)
It is a dual processor 2.0 G5 mac, running the optimized client from team macnn.....even I thought the numbers were a little out of whack. Too bad I couldn't get the 400+ it claimed for a unit.....
If they used as "smart"
)
If they used as "smart" enough optimizer it will remove large portions of the benchmark code as it is "make-work" and if recognized is simply removed. There was a similar issue with the 4.19 vs. later where the optimizer's removal of code meant higher benchmark scores.
This gives rise to the interest to have the highest benchmark which results in higher than normal claims. Though averaging does bring those down some, it does lead to a slight upward "bias" ...
Anyway ... just food for thought ... I would go on but not sure you all care ... :)
Actually, it is optimized to
)
Actually, it is optimized to use the altivec part of the G4+ cpus. So, I imagine it is still running the benchmarks, but doing so on the vector portion of the processor and getting a pretty good boost out of it. I also remember that whole benchmark compiling out thing and beleive they set up the code so that could no longer occur using normal tools (gcc, which Apple currently uses). The use of altivec enabled benchmarks is actually quite reasonable since the beta einstein client also uses altivec optimizations (and I am running that also).