posted April 19, 2000 23:44         

------------------
-Brandon "Intelman34" Drew-
http://supermustangs.webjump.com
http://www.ctnews3d.com

IP: Logged

posted April 20, 2000 03:43         

IP: Logged

posted May 16, 2000 18:26         

FYI, I'm running an Athlon (lovin' every minute of it too), and I'm crunching a SETI packet every 14 hours. Is this something that will speed up the SETI@home client crunching?

IP: Logged

posted May 16, 2000 21:16         

IP: Logged

posted May 16, 2000 21:31         

It takes me about 6 and a half hours to finish a work unit on my Athlon 550 overclocked to 749mhz. My 200mmx and 233mmx systems take about 20 hrs for one

------------------
-Brandon "Intelman34" Drew-
http://supermustangs.webjump.com
http://www.ctnews3d.com

IP: Logged

posted May 17, 2000 16:20         

and I noticed you guys didn't even try to answer the 2 questions I posted, but I got all this info about stuff I didn't ask about

thank you, very informative, definitely kept to the thread topic

since my questions were relevant to this forum ("CMD client tips"), and indicated entry level ignorance of the command line client, and there are probably others out there who are also unaware of it at the moment, I'll repost my questions and answer them for those others who would like to know more about the "CMD client"

my questions were:

"command line client that came with SETI Cache"? What is this? Expound on it please.

and

Is this something that will speed up the SETI@home client crunching?

the answers I came up with are as follow:

1. the command line client is a SETI@home client that is "text-only" (funny term for a 16-bit, non-GUI, DOS client, hehe)

2. it improves SETI W.ork U.nit (WU) performance because it isn't drawing a pretty screensaver while it crunches the SETI packet; frees up lots of CPU cycles that would otherwise be wasted on drawing the pretty eye candy screensaver

3. it won't run under Win95 because technically it's compiled to run under WinNT (makes a bunch of calls that Win95 can't interpret); however it will run under Win98 with IE5 installed

4. you can get the text client for x86 class PCs running Win98 or WinNT here:

ftp://ftp.cdrom.com/pub/setiathome/setiathome-2.4.i386-winnt-cmdline.exe

ftp://alien.ssl.berkeley.edu/pub/setiathome-2.4.i386-winnt-cmdline.exe

ftp://setidata.ssl.berkeley.edu/pub/setiathome-2.4.i386-winnt-cmdline.exe

ftp://serendip.ssl.berkeley.edu/pub/setiathome-2.4.i386-winnt-cmdline.exe

5. the command line ("text-only", haha) version of the SETI client sped my WU processing up quite a bit (bad grammar, who cares). I went from crunching a SETI packet every 14 hours in NT on my 500 MHz Athlon to doing one every 9 hours 50 minutes! That's almost a 30% increase in speed versus the Windows GUI client. So it definitely speeds things along.

now a little unsolicited info of my own:

if you don't know about it already, there's a cool (I mean really cool) SETI utility that keeps track of the command line client real time, and it does all kinds of neat things like give you real time performance specs on your PC, comparisons to the performance of your system versus other hardware platforms, restarting the SETI client should it crash or get killed, etc, etc. It's called "SETI Spy" and you can get it here:
http://pages.tca.net/roelof/setispy

there you go! class dismissed

-cruncher

------------------
No wishin' for Athlons here. I build 'em and use 'em daily.

IP: Logged

posted May 17, 2000 16:31         

apologies for being a bit of a smart ass in that post, but I'm the type who likes to find out answers to questions I have, and if I don't get a straight answer to them directly, I'll dig on my own until I get them answered

I confess I am a bit of a smart ass by nature (probably has something to do with my IQ, I don't know..), and I constantly get told by my good friend from Texas: "Come on Jer.. Everybody likes a piece of ass, but nobody likes a smart ass"

His words of wisdom are true, but as I always tell him in response to his aphorism to me, "Yeah but Dave, nobody likes a dumb ass either"

totally off topic, I know, but hopefully it made you laugh !

-Cruncher

------------------
No wishin' for Athlons here. I build 'em and use 'em daily.

IP: Logged

posted May 17, 2000 18:29         

you got my apologies for being a smart ass in the post immediately following my post about the SETI command client

I meant no disrespect towards any one person or race in particular

I expected to get some answers on the command line client in this forum, as a fellow Team3DNow member has been pointing me to this forum in particular for a while now, for answers to questions I had about the command line client

I figure the answers I posted here should be more than enough to help out anybody with an x86 class PC running Windows 98 or NT who wants to make SETI process packets faster

no disrespect intended, I was just looking for help, and since I found the answers to the questions I had elsewhere, I figured it would be nice of me if I posted the answers I found to help others out here as well

I realize there are people out there who don't do as well with English as I do (and my French and Spanish are really awful), but this web site originates here in the States, it's primary language is English, and I'm doing the best I can to convey the ideas in the language I know best, in the least offensive way that I can, given the fact that I'm a smart ass by nature (hehehe)

again, my apologies if I offended anybody, it was not my intent

-Cruncher

------------------
No wishin' for Athlons here. I build 'em and use 'em daily.

IP: Logged

posted May 17, 2000 21:45         

2. I didn't know SETI cache provide you with a command line client, as I don't use SETI cache, but I think it is better to get what ever software from the offical site rather than in some other package.

3. the NT command line client CAN run in Win95, providing that the Winsock 2 update is installed.

4. You can download Kernel Toys from MicroSoft and use WinTop to monitor CPU time used by processes.

5. NT command line client is not the only x86 class client, there is also Linux, BeOS...etc, which speed things up more.

IP: Logged

posted May 18, 2000 17:41         

I lern sumthin' new every day!

2 days ago I didn't know squat about the command line client, and now here I are runnin' it!

1. I checked Task Manager in NT while running the command line client, and voila', no NTVDM and no WOW running! I further checked the program and guess what I found.. it am a 32-bit program designed to run in a DOS box! Clever bit of progamming there boyz! Well call me fooled!

2. IF you want to improve the rate (ie, SPEED) at which your system crunches SETI work units, THEN you should be using the command line client program, INSTEAD OF the GUI screensaver version of the client!

Remember here, I said IF you want your system to crunch them faster. It's your choice if you want to do them low and slow..

3. That's super that the NT command line client will run in Win95 with the Winsock 2 update...which begs another question: Why would anybody even want to run Win95 today..?

4. There are a ton of 3rd party utils in addition to MS'es to use to monitor all kinds of neat stuff going on under the hood of Windows as it runs. My favorite non-MS util of this type is TaskInfo2000. Get it here: http://www.iarsn.com/download.html

5. That's great about the other x86 command line clients. As I said above, 2 days ago I didn't even know there was a command line client. Most of what I posted in this forum was derived from my research from SETI and from various other sites that expounded on the command line client (as I posted above, I got essentially no info on the command line client here when I asked about it). So you understand if some of what I posted was in error, don't you. Thanks for being so understanding!

Now then, I noticed today that Team3DNOW has gone from number 43 in the rankings a few days ago to number 101 today. That's very interesting. I can guess why, I think. Instead of explaining to your group members in this forum about how to speed up the performance of their systems using the command line client, and putting the client onto whatever PC they run into with their registered user name to get credit for it, you guys really are giving out very little info to your members in this forum on how to speed things up or what tricks to do.

Instead you're doing this kind of nitpicking nonsense, making sure that you are absolutely right on these little tiny, totally unimportant points that do nothing to contribute to your team crunching packets any faster in order to get your stats up.

Goodness, talk about a waste of time! I believe this is what is called "Taking your eyes off the prize".

Think it over boyz. Remember, the more time you waste debating little itty-bitty points in order to prove yourself right, instead of helping your group members out to crunch more packets faster by posting the tips and tricks in this forum, the quicker you're going to slide down the SETI Team work units crunched pole..

it's your decision whether you want your group to sink or swim

think it over, but not 4 2 long now!

-Cruncher

------------------
No wishin' for Athlons here. I build 'em and use 'em daily.

IP: Logged

posted May 19, 2000 22:54         

IP: Logged

posted May 20, 2000 05:45         

IP: Logged

posted May 21, 2000 00:35         

Where do I send my bill? Dan Wertheimer?

IP: Logged

posted May 23, 2000 10:12         

Oh well back to the topic.

Two other item that will help

1) If Fast Find is running KILL it and take it out of the startup group.

2) Check your Anti-Virus program options and make sure it it set to scan Program Files Only. If you are scanning All you are scanning seti data file on every access. Slows you down some.

3) Do a CTRL/ALT/DEL and look for other running programs. If you do not know what it is you more than likely do not need it running, exceptions Explorer and SysTray. If you find odd ball programs running you might try posting them for opions.

Cruncher, don't worry about that IQ thing here, I even work for a guy that only has a 190 IQ and I don't let it bother me.
-Frank

IP: Logged

posted May 23, 2000 11:59         

IP: Logged

posted May 27, 2000 18:11         

If you are, what's your opinion of Roelof's Peak Processing Efficiency stats for the various processors list under the Performance section?

He's got the Athlon listed between the Intel Celeron and Pentium Pro in terms of processing Cycles per Floating Point Operation ("CpF").

He claims the Intel Celeron uses 6.8 Cycles to perform a FLOP (Floating Point Operation), the Athlon uses 7.5 CpF, and the Pentium Pro uses 8.0 CpF. He says a PII/PIII does 6.6 CpF.

IF I let my Athlon JUST crunch a SETI work unit, it does 5.5 CpF. If I cruise the web and let it crunch it does 6.5 CpF. These are nowhere near the 7.5 CpF he's got the Athlon down for.

He says in his documentation the CpF numbers he lists for the various processors are from Rat Bastard's SETI benchmark database (at Ars Technica). He said he took their benchmark numbers and added 10% to represent real world CpF numbers (that is, you're probably browsing while crunching a packet, not just crunching a packet).

But I don't buy those numbers.

If I'm doing 6.5 CpF while browsing, that's not even close to what he has listed for the Athlon, 7.5 CpF.

My 6.5 CpF while browsing shows this Athlon is actually more efficient than a PII/PIII, which he says is 6.6 CpF (he doesn't have to convince me of that; I've put my Athlon side by side against same speed PIIs and PIIIs and watched it smoke them in everything they did).

And when I let mine just crunch a SETI packet, it gets 5.5 CpF, which puts it way past the PII/PIII and between the PowerPC 750 (G3) (5.1 CpF), and the Sun UltraSPARC IIi (6.0 CpF).

Any other Athlon owners using SETI Spy spot this discrepancy? What do you make of this? How could the Athlon CpF he came up with be so off?

Oh and BTW, this thing isn't overclocked (I don't like overclocking). It's just dialed in (BIOS settings are optimized for the memory and system), and the OS is Windows 98SE. It's even using generic memory (CAS3!). I'm not using any special .DLLs, it's just the x86 command line client from SETI@home's web site..

What's up with this?

IP: Logged

posted May 27, 2000 23:20         

If you are refering to over colocking and optimum settings. Every inch that you can gain on a system and not degrade it's ability is what's up.

You say you do not like overclocking but have you tried it? Keeping in mind that the original stabitity of the machine is always the goal that I have when I overclock.
It is an ART to overclock and do it right.

My hard drive benchmarked at 3142 with Sandra and with a few new special dll's it is now wokring as a ATA66 benchmarked at 12677. Four (4) time faster and just as stable. The price for this increase in preformance $0.00 My dual celeron 400's @612 Mhz out preform dual P III 500's Price,
considerably less.

Anyway the last part of your post about not overclocking just got my goat. I have been overclocking since day one and have no problem with it. - Frank

IP: Logged

posted May 27, 2000 23:33         

IP: Logged

posted May 28, 2000 00:23         

So what is the question for me?

I have be at this for 25 years and am happy with what I do. You do not have to be. So please go away and leave me alone.

I do not suffer fools lightly.

- Frank

IP: Logged

posted May 28, 2000 11:58         

IP: Logged

posted May 28, 2000 17:08         

cruncher, i will try to aswer your question as best i can! you can run 2 of the same cpu`s on 2 of the same mobo`s and get 2 different scores in any test. they were most certainly using a average. my times for my athlon 650@702 vary from 6hrs and 3 minutes to as much as 6hrs and 37 minutes. now you may have the same cpu and mobo, but lets say you have better ram, or a faster hardrive, and you have optimized your system more efficiently, your system will propbebly outperform mine, but i`m still going to give my average. suppose i despise (spelling) intel? i can run a intel pIII 500mhz on all default settings, and make benchmarks look shitty, then i can optimise and overclock the hell out of my athlon and make it look like a super computer. if your athlon is performing to your satisfaction thats great, if its not, then lets work together to get it working right. myself im pretty pleased with mine, but i still look for any info on sqeezing just a little more from it. i hope this has been of some help.

IP: Logged

posted May 31, 2000 21:19         

DanBall, do you have a link directly to the story about the high school student? I know of a few students who need straightening out on this issue. I searched Ars-Technica, but couldn't find it.

Thanks!

Ken

IP: Logged

posted June 01, 2000 09:51         

IP: Logged