Relly strange...
These are my new benchmerks results:
It's not that strange - archae86 mentioned earlier that benchmarks under Win98 are unreliable. In other words they can change significantly from run to run.
I've made your link clickable for ease of viewing.
Quote:
Better than a modern CPU!
Surely you are not serious! Your new floating point benchmark is only 833 which is considerably less than what you would expect from a really modern machine. In any case the benchmarks are quite useless as a means of comparison. A much better metric is simply the CPU time to crunch a task. If that is considerably longer than say 30 hours, you should seriously think about upgrading your hardware.
I asked previously about some details like type and speed of your CPU. If you don't know how to find this information get yourself a copy of CPU-Z which is an essential freeware program for the serious cruncher. It doesn't need to be installed - you just unpack the zip archive and run the .exe directly. It will tell you all you need to know about your CPU, RAM and motherboard, including how many RAM slots you have and what modules are in each slot.
Then come back and tell us the details that I requested previously.
Here I am...
Unfortunatly I not very practice with informatics!
My CPU is a Coppermine PIII 933 MHz.
Multiplier X7.0
Bus speed 133
I've got 1 slot SDRAM and slot 2, 3, 4 empty...
Here I am...
Unfortunatly I not very practice with informatics!
My CPU is a Coppermine PIII 933 MHz.
Multiplier X7.0
Bus speed 133
I've got 1 slot SDRAM and slot 2, 3, 4 empty...
So if you want to continue to use this PC, I'd really consider a RAM upgrade. Whoever told you that this is not possible was probably just wanting to tell you "Sorry, we don't have this kind of RAM anymore". Ebay comes to mind.
The next run on E@H will have workunits that complete in about half the time of the current ones (for half the credits, of course), so expect a throughput of a bit over one WU per day, or about 120 ... 140 credits per day.
Really useful that program!
I think I will try to enhance my CPU...
And the news you gave me are not so bad, because now I'm taking about 100 hours to coplete a WU!
How come you're reopening this very old thread :-).
Quote:
Hi folks!
Not vintage, but in some sense unusual computer on Sempron 145 (2.8 GHz, 1 Mb L2 cache) - my host 4266810.
I guess by "unusual" you mean "only has a single core" :-). I bought a couple of sempron 140s (2.7 GHz rather than your 2.8) about 18 months ago. From memory I paid about $34 per CPU. I wanted to see if an extra core could be unlocked and so have a very cheap dual core machine. The operation was entirely successful - it has been running (overclocked a bit as well) in a budget motherboard (cost $60). Unlocking the extra core causes it to be identified as an Athlon II X2 4400e processor - whatever that is - and it has been quite productive for such a low cost build. I did the same thing with some Phenom II X2 Black editions and turned them into X4s - also overclocked a bit. The machines are (mainly) still running and quite productive but do use a lot more power than Intel Wolfdale dual cores (or quad cores). So at the time I didn't persist with the experiment. I figured it was better to spend quite a bit more for the CPU and save on power costs in the longer term.
This host is one of my two sempron 140 "dual cores" and as you can see it is quite productive and crunching its tasks a bit faster than your 145 (and two at a time as well).
RE: However, it should work
)
Quite right. I don't know where I got the notion it was not SSE2 capable, but after your nudge the 6.05 ap is installed and running.
Thanks,
Peter
Relly strange... These are my
)
Relly strange...
These are my new benchmerks results:
http://einsteinathome.org/host/1198106
Better than a modern CPU!
RE: Relly strange... These
)
It's not that strange - archae86 mentioned earlier that benchmarks under Win98 are unreliable. In other words they can change significantly from run to run.
I've made your link clickable for ease of viewing.
Surely you are not serious! Your new floating point benchmark is only 833 which is considerably less than what you would expect from a really modern machine. In any case the benchmarks are quite useless as a means of comparison. A much better metric is simply the CPU time to crunch a task. If that is considerably longer than say 30 hours, you should seriously think about upgrading your hardware.
I asked previously about some details like type and speed of your CPU. If you don't know how to find this information get yourself a copy of CPU-Z which is an essential freeware program for the serious cruncher. It doesn't need to be installed - you just unpack the zip archive and run the .exe directly. It will tell you all you need to know about your CPU, RAM and motherboard, including how many RAM slots you have and what modules are in each slot.
Then come back and tell us the details that I requested previously.
Cheers,
Gary.
Here I am... Unfortunatly I
)
Here I am...
Unfortunatly I not very practice with informatics!
My CPU is a Coppermine PIII 933 MHz.
Multiplier X7.0
Bus speed 133
I've got 1 slot SDRAM and slot 2, 3, 4 empty...
RE: Here I
)
So if you want to continue to use this PC, I'd really consider a RAM upgrade. Whoever told you that this is not possible was probably just wanting to tell you "Sorry, we don't have this kind of RAM anymore". Ebay comes to mind.
The next run on E@H will have workunits that complete in about half the time of the current ones (for half the credits, of course), so expect a throughput of a bit over one WU per day, or about 120 ... 140 credits per day.
CU
Bikeman
Really useful that program! I
)
Really useful that program!
I think I will try to enhance my CPU...
And the news you gave me are not so bad, because now I'm taking about 100 hours to coplete a WU!
RE: I would have thought
)
You're quite right, it is in fact one of these:
http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/server-poweredge-r900?c=us&l=en&s=biz&cs=555
Dell PowerEdge R900
4 x Intel X7468 (6 core) - 2.67GHz, 16mb Cache
64GB RAM
Cheers!
Hi James! Congratulations
)
Hi James!
Congratulations for running the TOP host of Einstein@Home !
CU
Bikeman
Hi folks! Not vintage, but
)
Hi folks!
Not vintage, but in some sense unusual computer on Sempron 145 (2.8 GHz, 1 Mb L2 cache) - my host 4266810.
How come you're reopening
)
How come you're reopening this very old thread :-).
I guess by "unusual" you mean "only has a single core" :-). I bought a couple of sempron 140s (2.7 GHz rather than your 2.8) about 18 months ago. From memory I paid about $34 per CPU. I wanted to see if an extra core could be unlocked and so have a very cheap dual core machine. The operation was entirely successful - it has been running (overclocked a bit as well) in a budget motherboard (cost $60). Unlocking the extra core causes it to be identified as an Athlon II X2 4400e processor - whatever that is - and it has been quite productive for such a low cost build. I did the same thing with some Phenom II X2 Black editions and turned them into X4s - also overclocked a bit. The machines are (mainly) still running and quite productive but do use a lot more power than Intel Wolfdale dual cores (or quad cores). So at the time I didn't persist with the experiment. I figured it was better to spend quite a bit more for the CPU and save on power costs in the longer term.
This host is one of my two sempron 140 "dual cores" and as you can see it is quite productive and crunching its tasks a bit faster than your 145 (and two at a time as well).
Cheers,
Gary.