UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
Get 3DNow! Message Board
Team 3DNow! SETI
Non-Intel client for SETI.
profile | register | preferences | faq | search
|
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
|
Get 3DNow! Message Board Team 3DNow! SETI Non-Intel client for SETI.
|
| Author | Topic: Non-Intel client for SETI. |
| Ragman Wish I had an Athlon |
 posted February 18, 2000 19:03  
Don't know if it speeds anything up or not but it is there: ftp://setidata.ssl.berkeley.edu/pub/setiathome-2.0.i486-nonintel-winnt-cmdline.exe [This message has been edited by Ragman (edited February 18, 2000).] IP: Logged |
| SubZero Wish I had an Athlon |
posted February 18, 2000 21:18
I'll give it a try and see. IP: Logged |
| Ragman Wish I had an Athlon |
posted February 19, 2000 00:42
It seems to run slower. I saw in the seti newsgroup it was primarily developed for the Cyrix since the current CLI version didn't work with it. IP: Logged |
| SubZero Wish I had an Athlon |
posted February 19, 2000 01:23
Yeah, It is taking about an hour longer than the other v2 client. Oh well, it was worth a shot. I have an old Cyrix I used to use for Seti. Has some bad RAM, or I would check it out on that. IP: Logged |
| fredro Priest of Athlon |
posted February 19, 2000 13:58
my personal experience is this. on my intel cpu, it was slower, but on my k6-2 it was about 15 minutes faster than the 386intel client, and on my athlon it looks to be about 5 minutes faster. could just be different units also. anyone else try this? IP: Logged |
| Burm Follower of Athlon |
posted February 19, 2000 19:06
If the performance is close to the base client then you need to run a number of units to see any differences as each WU takes a varying amount of time to process. ------------------ IP: Logged |
| fredro Priest of Athlon |
posted February 19, 2000 19:47
i agree with you burm, im on my 2nd unit on the k6-2, and it appears to be going 20 minutes faster this time (12hrs 22min) and the athlon is on its 2nd unit, but its speed is the same (6hrs 12min) i dont have any other non intel cpu`s except for a cyrix pr200, but its down being transformed. i got 4 machines down for motherboard, cpu videocard swaps. hey maybe sometime you and i can chat in icq, and you could tutor me in linux.  wheres my computer in linux? 
IP: Logged |
| SubZero Wish I had an Athlon |
posted February 23, 2000 22:41
So, this client is supposed to speed up work on Cyrix processors? I used to have a GX-180 that I used, but finally retired it and canabolized it for spare parts. A friend of mine gave me a motherboard with a Cyrix PR266 today. I am going to build a barebones with it and see what the client will do on that. IP: Logged |
| DanBall Follower of Athlon |
posted February 27, 2000 22:36
I currently (Until I get the new K6-2 500 that I ordered) have a Cyrix MII PR 300 (233 actual) in my computer because my AMD K6-2 500 was dying a slow (the BSOD's) death due to the fact that I didn't have the thermal gel between the CPU and HS&F. I myself prefer the graphical version because it starts automatically, and it has more options to control it's operation. [This message has been edited by DanBall (edited February 27, 2000).] IP: Logged |
| Franklin A. Childers Follower of Athlon |
posted February 28, 2000 19:01
You can add a short cut to the command line ver in the start up folder and it will start automatically also - Frank IP: Logged |
| SubZero Wish I had an Athlon |
posted March 11, 2000 00:04
Frank, That's a good idea about the startup shortcut for cmd-line. That is what I am doing now. I found enough spare parts to get the Cyrix up and running as my 4th Seti machine. I got it to overclock up to 300MHz, but wouldn't do 333 (board max). Oh, well. Using the Non-Intel 486 client under Win95B, I am getting a time of 27.76hrs. I just started working on the 2nd unit and this one is being run under Intel 386 client to see if there is any noticable differance. Will let yall know. IP: Logged |
| DanBall Follower of Athlon |
posted March 11, 2000 00:11
I had a Cyrix MII PR300 (3.5x multi by 66MHz FSB) that really runs at 233 MHz. I attempted to OC it to 3.5x by 83MHz FSB, 291 MHz, it worked almost, the BIOS detected it as a Cyrix MII/IBM 6x86 400, everything posted, Win98 started to load and then just stopped. On this Cyrix processor the max on it you can go is just 263MHz (3.5x by 75MHz FSB), just 30MHz over spec! Also of note all Cyrix MII run at 2.9v Core IP: Logged |
| SubZero Wish I had an Athlon |
posted March 21, 2000 23:23
Well, I have finished a couple units with the Intel client and Non-Intel client. Here are the average results, though not as different as I thought: Intel - 28.4 hrs. IP: Logged |
| DanBall Follower of Athlon |
posted March 30, 2000 18:04
The AMD K6-2 500 I have runs quite well at 5.0 x 112MHz FSB (560MHz) and 4.5 x 124MHz FSB (558MHz), but to have Win98 run stable I have to disable the L2 cache and run the memory at the AGP bus. The L2 cache (1024KB) can't handle FSB speeds faster than 100MHz. And I do have 96 MB of PC100 RAM IP: Logged |
| Franklin A. Childers Follower of Athlon |
posted March 30, 2000 19:41
DanBall, I have a couple of questions if you don't mind. 1) What kind of time are you getting on you machine per seti unit? 2) Can your machines run 5.5 x 100 MHz FSB or is the multiplier locked? 3) If they will run 5.5 x 100 and you were able to kick the L2 cache back in, then what kind of time would seti run? -Frank IP: Logged |
| DanBall Follower of Athlon |
posted March 30, 2000 20:16
Franklin A. Childers, my motherboard has a maximum multiplier of 5.0, so I couldn't do any higher sort of multiplier. Running the cmdline clients get 16.5 to 17.5 hours (v2.0 and 2.4). Running the graphical version gets 16-18 hours to sometimes 18-22 hours. I have the AMD K6-2 500 processor. Its just that my onboard L2 cache doesn't handle FSB speeds over 100MHz. IP: Logged |
| Franklin A. Childers Follower of Athlon |
posted March 30, 2000 21:20
OK next question, Does your BIOS allow for selecting a reduces AGP and PCI clock. ie. AGP set to 2/3 vice 1/1 and PCI set to 1/4 this would allow the CPU to be overclocked and not the rest of the system. You could also look at the BIOS to see if there are any settings that effect the L2 cache. I am sure that you have gone through all this but I just had to ask. - Frank IP: Logged |
| DanBall Follower of Athlon |
posted March 30, 2000 21:42
The Award BIOS on my Soyo 5ema+ has no setting that can change the dividers for the PCI and AGP clock, the only setting available for the L2 cache is to enable or disable it. I can't even change the CAS latency on my RAM, but I can change the RAM timing to 8ns, 10ns, normal, fast, and turbo. IP: Logged |
| BKman Wish I had an Athlon |
posted March 31, 2000 07:21
Hi DanBall, the Soyo 5ema+ actually supports a multiplier of 5.5. The settings for SW1 are off-off-on. You can download a new version of the handbook at http://www.soyo.de/manual/m5em1011.pdf IP: Logged |
| DanBall Follower of Athlon |
posted March 31, 2000 13:04
Hey BKman, thanks for the help, I will try out this setup on my motherboard. IP: Logged |
| Troodon Follower of Athlon |
posted March 31, 2000 17:43
The maximun multiplier doesn't depend of the mobo, it depends of the CPU. The K6-2 (with the CXT core) has a maximun of 6.0 (the setting for this multiplier is the same as for 2 of the "clasic" Pentium). IP: Logged |
| DanBall Follower of Athlon |
posted April 01, 2000 02:04
I tried the 5.5 x 100 on this Soyo 5ema+ and it actually slows SETI@home down, the memory is running at 100MHz and the cache is enabled, DRAM timing at turbo. I tried the 5.5 multiplier at 100 MHz at 2.2v got windows to load, but I couldn't access anything, Explorer caused Invalid page faults, so when I restarted, windows would load, but then do a auto restart, I then set it to 2.3v, it worked, but after about an hour I started to get the page faults again, so I just set the multiplier back to where it is supposed to be, and at the normal 5.0 x 100, S@H is faster, go figure. Maybe its because Soyo makes crappy motherboards IP: Logged |
| Troodon Follower of Athlon |
posted April 04, 2000 08:38
Try 2.4v. It seems to be a cooling problem. Do you have a good heatsink? Are you using thermal compund between h/s and K6-2? IP: Logged |
| DanBall Follower of Athlon |
posted April 04, 2000 21:01
I already tried 2.4v, the computer posts, and that's it, Windows doesn't even load up. The heat sink is about 1" tall, and it has a fan and there is thermal paste between the CPU and heat sink. I wonder what would happen if I set it to 2.1v. IP: Logged |
| DanBall Follower of Athlon |
posted April 07, 2000 17:33
I got it overclocked to 5.5 x 100 at 2.5 volts, it is just as stable as it is at 5.0 x 100 at 2.2 volts. Also of note all the previous versions of the graphical S@H (v1.06 to v2.03) are no longer on the FTP servers. The setiathome-i386-Winnt-cmdline version 1.3 and 2.0, and setiathome-i486-nonintel-winnt-cmdline version 2.0 are also not available anymore. IP: Logged |
| Masoch Wish I had an Athlon |
posted April 10, 2000 01:11
Hi folks, Try lapping your CPU and heatsink to make 'em perfectly flat. The flatter the surfaces, the better the contact, the lower the CPU temp. With a lapped cpu and a globalwin heatsink, my k6-3 400 @ 450 runs like a top at 45 Celsius -- Win98 runs w/o rebooting or major crashes for a coupla' days. I'd take the CPU higher, but I don't want to lower the stability. If you poke around, you can find lots of info about lapping on overclocking sites. The basic idea, tho, is you tape fine grit sandpaper to glass and rub the cpu in a figure-8 motion. You start with ~ 100 grit and move up to 600+ grit. Masoch IP: Logged |
| All times are ET (US) | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
All submissions are copyrighted by their respective authors and are not for re-use in any form without their explicit written consent.
Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.37
© Madrona Park, Inc., 1998 - 1999.