Fastest seti@murcers June 6-13

[MegaManX4]

bah, You can only see your last 30 WU's

[Mark F]

Is it the L2's fault?

Is that why one system with a P3-733 (256k L2, VIA133A) runs about as fast as the one with P3-558 (512k L2, BX). Or is it mostly the better memory throughput of the BX system?

Any ideas! Besides swapping prossesors in the systems. I need the greater CPU in the VIDEO system, than in my GF and daugter's system.

Mark F.

------------------
OH NO, my retractable cup holder swallowed a DVD...
and burped out a movie

[cjolley]

I get the impression that memory system throughput is very important, cache & all.
I am running a 142mz front-side-bus and have the fastest time of a normal (:P) PC.
I would be interesting to see the proccessor & FSB of the top systems.
chuck


------------------
ABit BF6, P3-650@923, 256mb@142cas3, 10gb IBM@7200, SB Live Value@3.0, Pioneer 104s DVD, Mitsumi CDRW@2x2x8, Acatel 1000 ADSL@1.5mb/sec, Linksys EtherFast NIC, LG 995e, USB mouse,Matrox G400 MAX!!!!

[jms]

Chuck,
you should get some CAS2 capable RAM. I read somewhere that you need 20MHz higher FSB to make up for the performance hit CAS3 gives you.
I think Rags mentioned in another thread that he is running at a VERY high FSB(170?), which would make sense.
A really nice benchmark program can be found here: http://www.fi.muni.cz/~xsmid4/

Jan

[This message has been edited by jms (edited 16 June 2000).]

[paulcs]

I have two very similar setups: a VIA Apollo Pro 133A-based system with a PIII @ 800 MHz and a BX-based system with a PIII @ 733 MHz. In both cases, the RAM is clocked at 133 MHz and the timings are set to 2-2-2.

The BX-based system seems to be beating the VIA system by about 15 minutes. There are work unit related variations, of course, but the BX system does seem to be a bit faster, despite the marginally slower clock speed.

They both appear to be faster than a third system, another BX motherboard and a 600 MHz Katmai, FSB @ spec.

I would think Mark's VIA system should be a lot faster than his BX-based system, simply because the VIA systems's FSB is faster and the CPU is considerably faster.

Mark, I'm using an Asus P3V4X motherboard, which has a few unique quirks, so I can't be sure if this is applicable to your motherboard. I've noticed that memory performance takes a *huge* nosedive if the memory bus is at 100 MHz, or if CL3-rated PC133 RAM is used. Also, and this is just bizzare, the board doesn't seem to like it if you set the timings manually.

Memory peformance is greatly enhanced if you are using CL2-rated PC133 RAM, running on a 133 MHz memory bus, and the timings are set by SPD @ 2-2-2. If I deviate from this configuration, my memory benchmarks go to hell, and I begin sticking pins in my Wenchi Chen voodoo doll.

Again, I'm not sure if this has anything to do with your situation, but I do think your VIA/733 MHz Coppermine system should be noticably faster than your Intel/558 MHz Katmai system.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

[This message has been edited by paulcs (edited 16 June 2000).]

[Mark F]

Wenchi Chen voodoo doll
havent stoped laghfing yet!!

The VIA is at 133 with memory set to 2-2-2(manually); the best I can get the Tyan board to run. The BX is at 124 with memory at 3-2-2 (PC100 and has been run at 133 3-2-2 mostly stable and 3-3-3 totaly stable).
The BX will do a WU from 5:40-6:12. The VIA runs 5:43-6:04 (based on last 10 WUs from each system). Running pretty cose to gether dispite the BX systems disadvantages; slower memory setting, slower FSB slower CPU. It's only advantage is the larger L2 (and BX chipset, maybe ).

Oh well, neither is running poorly so I'm not complaining, it's just strange.

If the 815 is even comperable to a BX@133 with the newer features; it bye-bye VIA.

Mark F.

Mark F.

------------------
OH NO, my retractable cup holder swallowed a DVD...
and burped out a movie

[paulcs]

The benches I've seen have it a little slower than BX-133 and faster than the VIA Apollo Pro 133A and even the i840 (w/RDRAM) on many tests.

Someone should find out who was on the i400BX design team and erect an Internet shrine in their honor. I hope they all got big raises.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

[Swing]

paulcs,

Flash your P3V4X BIOS to revision 1005. It is noticeably faster than version 1003 running 3DMark 2000 as a benchmark.

[Swing]

Jorden,

So, SETI@home version 1.06 is faster than 2.04?

[Jorden]

In my opinion it is, Swing.

But then again, 2.04 (??) calculates lots of other things as well, just look at the extra graphics they put in there, so my 1.06 is going faster, leaving behind data.

And I don't go for the top 1 spot in any league, just for a fast crunch !!

(never leave your crunching on when playing a 3D game !!! It will slow down the crunching process !! I had a WU that I stopped at 25%, after it said 14 hours... I quit playing my Star Trek Armada and let it run on it's own through the night: 6 hours 38 minutes !!)

Jord.

[Assimilator1]

Jorden

As to which version is fastest seems to vary between different PC's.On my Cel 550 v2.04 GUI reduced my WU times by 2hrs!:Q.
However a fellow team member of mine noticed no difference on his PII.
Perhaps the v1.06 is faster with bigger cache cpu's & the V2.04 faster with smaller cache cpu's?.Just a guess on my behalf though
At the end of the day there is only one way to know for certain ,try it

------------------
I guess I won't recruit for my team here TA