View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Pooh Bear 27 Prince
Joined: 28 Jan 2005 Posts: 1355 Location: Fond du Lac, WI
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
With that many processes running simultaneously, I wonder if Cache hitting or memory hitting is causing issues? I know it's not using much more than 1/2G, but there might be something there. Also is the memory paired or single? Just trying to think what else could help. _________________ Watch the movie about me The 4-1-4s: The Original Teenage Hackers (It is only about 12 minutes long.)
My lucky numbers are 121*2^4553899-1 and 3756801695685*2^666669±1
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lloyd M. Prince
Joined: 02 Mar 2007 Posts: 521
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
KWSN - Sir Brian C....... wrote: | Finally........
IT LIVES.... IT LIVES......
its getting hooked up to boinc after windowsupdate does it's SP2 stuff....
|
Smokin'! Congrats! _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
KWSN - Sir Brian C....... Stop calling me 'she'
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 Posts: 2032 Location: Judea, AD33, at a stoning with me mum.
|
Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 6:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pooh Bear 27 wrote: | With that many processes running simultaneously, I wonder if Cache hitting or memory hitting is causing issues? I know it's not using much more than 1/2G, but there might be something there. Also is the memory paired or single? Just trying to think what else could help. |
I think it might be memory/cache related... the mobo manual is really unclear how to install the dimms.... I have two dual ranked 1GB dimms and can't work out whether to put them in as Bank#1 & Bank#2 or Bank#1 & bank#3.
The dual dell 5120 which has four single ranked 512gb dims specifies Bank#1 & Bank#2 as one set and Bank#3 and Bank #4 as the other set ....
I might swap out the memory between machines, to see if that helps...
I've also noticed that thw single 6300 is quicker than the dual 5120. and the dual 5320 is slower still... note this is only apparent with the optimised apps... that standard seti app seems to have pretty consistent performance accross processors & the benchmarks are also cinsistent....
....thinks.....
I seem to remember an issue I had with crunchers optimised app a long time ago with dual core machines...
http://www.kwsnforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=5896
with the performance degredation scaling up with the number cores this seems strangley familiar.....
I might post something on Chicken's lunaitcs.at forum.......
Ni ! _________________ Oh, it's blessed are the meek!, Well I'm glad they'll get something as they have a hell of a time!
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
KWSN - Sir Brian C....... Stop calling me 'she'
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 Posts: 2032 Location: Judea, AD33, at a stoning with me mum.
|
Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 7:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
KWSN - Sir Brian C....... wrote: | Pooh Bear 27 wrote: | With that many processes running simultaneously, I wonder if Cache hitting or memory hitting is causing issues? I know it's not using much more than 1/2G, but there might be something there. Also is the memory paired or single? Just trying to think what else could help. |
I think it might be memory/cache related... the mobo manual is really unclear how to install the dimms.... I have two dual ranked 1GB dimms and can't work out whether to put them in as Bank#1 & Bank#2 or Bank#1 & bank#3.
The dual dell 5120 which has four single ranked 512gb dims specifies Bank#1 & Bank#2 as one set and Bank#3 and Bank #4 as the other set ....
I might swap out the memory between machines, to see if that helps...
I've also noticed that thw single 6300 is quicker than the dual 5120. and the dual 5320 is slower still... note this is only apparent with the optimised apps... that standard seti app seems to have pretty consistent performance accross processors & the benchmarks are also cinsistent....
....thinks.....
I seem to remember an issue I had with crunchers optimised app a long time ago with dual core machines...
http://www.kwsnforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=5896
with the performance degredation scaling up with the number cores this seems strangley familiar.....
I might post something on Chicken's lunaitcs.at forum.......
Ni ! |
hmm.... found this on Chicken's site.......
http://lunatics.at/windows/core-2-qx6700-ssse3-crunching-time.0.html
hmmm..... I'll see whether 2x1gb dual ranked is better than 4x512mb single ranked......... _________________ Oh, it's blessed are the meek!, Well I'm glad they'll get something as they have a hell of a time!
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
JerWA Prince
Joined: 01 Jan 2007 Posts: 1497 Location: WA, USA
|
Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 1:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, from that thread it sounds like memory bandwidth is a killer. I'd think 4x something would be best (dual dual channel if the MB supports it) but I think 2GB isn't enough. What got my attention the most is the memory they're using to support those overclocks, it's incredible stuff (way over what I had planned in my build).
One I saw mentioned specifically was this stuff:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820145169
That stuff is $130 more per 2GB than the (what I thought was expensive) memory on my build list. Yikes. _________________
Stats: [BOINC Synergy] - [Free-DC] - [MundayWeb] - [Netsoft] - [All Project Stats] |
|
Back to top |
|
|
KWSN - Sir Brian C....... Stop calling me 'she'
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 Posts: 2032 Location: Judea, AD33, at a stoning with me mum.
|
Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
the issue is with L2 cache coherency........
as the intel quads are in effect dual duals and so do not share the L2 cache across all four cores but the two "clusters" of two cores have 4mb each.... what happens is that to maintain coherency the cache has to be identical across all four (in a dual proc machine) clusters as the execution thread jumps from one core to another, so the cache has to be copied across clusters.....
This goes to show that the core 2 architecture isn't as horizontally scalable as intel would have you believe!!!! So much for Intels 72 core chip!!!
I think CPU affinity should minimize this but I don't know of any v5.x Boinc manager that enables this, I remember that a v4 client did this. anyone know of such a client?
Ni! _________________ Oh, it's blessed are the meek!, Well I'm glad they'll get something as they have a hell of a time!
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
KWSN - Sir Brian C....... Stop calling me 'she'
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 Posts: 2032 Location: Judea, AD33, at a stoning with me mum.
|
Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2007 1:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
there is.......
apparently crunch3r's back in the optimisation fold......
http://calbe.dw70.de/
_________________ Oh, it's blessed are the meek!, Well I'm glad they'll get something as they have a hell of a time!
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|