Glad they fixed it. Until DiRT comes back up grab all of these you can. *-:)
If you have a 64 bit OS, Collatz or PG PPS Sieve are 2 to 3k a day better than Prima.
Thank you Slicker. This is on I7. If anyone compares AMD I'll post results.
Printable View
Glad they fixed it. Until DiRT comes back up grab all of these you can. *-:)
If you have a 64 bit OS, Collatz or PG PPS Sieve are 2 to 3k a day better than Prima.
Thank you Slicker. This is on I7. If anyone compares AMD I'll post results.
I'm getting Scheduler errors on 2 boxes.
1/17/2012 9:49:34 AM ___ primaboinca ___ update requested by user
1/17/2012 9:49:34 AM ___ primaboinca ___ Sending scheduler request: Requested by user.
1/17/2012 9:49:34 AM ___ primaboinca ___ Requesting new tasks for CPU and GPU
1/17/2012 9:49:35 AM ___ primaboinca ___ Scheduler request failed: HTTP file not found
I was getting those on mw after their server upgrade. Detaching and reattaching worked...resetting didn't.
Yeah, that worked for me as well. On one of my boxes I have to detach, restart the computer, then reattach. Only way to get it to work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Al McAdams
On it.
My problem with detaching was that I couldn't because of BAM. After I detached the project form my BAM account I cannot reattach it. BAM reports the project is down, which it is not. Stupid BAM!!! I ended up detaching all of my system from BAM. Now they are all happily crunching Prima.
Stupid BAM!
I've never used BAM, tried it years ago but too many screw up's ... I use either BOINCView or BoincTasks to control my Box's ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire$torm
I am working Prima also...Only need 47K now for a pretty MILL....:p
You are staying ahead of me. (~~)Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerdrinker
Maybe the two of us should make a decent run at Prima.? We are only small timers...Letīs have some fun!!Quote:
Originally Posted by denim
Yeah, the only reason I use BAM is to control resource sharing allocation. Its the only way that I am aware of that has that feature. I use BM or BOINCView for everything else.Quote:
Originally Posted by STE\/E
I'll give it another try for a few days. Looking at the top hosts, the credits aren't as good as on PG's PPS app (over 15K per day with my i7) which is almost triple what the top i7 is getting on Primaboinca. I'm not saying the credits at Primaboinca are rotten, but I know I can get more than 6K per day on both PG PPS and on Collatz. So, I have a feeling it should be retitled "Third Best Credits for CPU". Only time will tell...Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerdrinker
lol, ok.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slicker
Can you please let me know if that is what your seeing with your I7? I'll change it right away and tell everyone looking to max out to go to Collatz or which PG PPS LLR or Sieve?
Here's an i7 950 just like mine running Collatz CPU tasks: http://boinc.thesonntags.com/collatz...ames=0&state=3Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike029
86,400 seconds per day / 10,944.46 average seconds per WU * 378.89 average credits per WU * 8 threads = 23,928.73 credits per day.
Here's an i7 950 on PrimaBoinca: http://www.primaboinca.com/results.php?hostid=11633
86,400 seconds per day / 6357.57 average seconds per WU * 200.00 average credits per WU * 8 threads = 21,744.15 credits per day.
Here's my i7 950 on PG PPS Sieve: http://www.primegrid.com/results.php?hostid=233537
86,400 seconds per day / 97,526.49 average seconds per WU * 3,371.00 average credits per WU * 8 threads = 23,891.31 credits per day.
In other words, the 64-bit Collatz app and the 64-bit PG PPS Sieve both pay about 2K per day more than Primaboinca on an i7 950. Dirt still pays more than any of them when it is up and running.
Note: For 32-bit operating systems, PrimaBoinca pays better since the 32-bit Collatz and PG apps only pay about half as much for the 32-bit apps as the 64-bit apps.
Ah, man...why didn't I know this? Do'h! X_X I would totally have been running Collatz on the CPU if I knew it was that good. All my OSes are 64bit, so I'll be there in between the challenges! Looks like there's nothing better than it beside DiRT - and they have been quite out and down for the count this past month or so.
The runtimes in the Prima seems kinda high for me...Will look into that a little later....Gotta go rigth now...Quote:
Originally Posted by Slicker
Could it be the Primaboinca's linux app is a lot slower than the windows app?Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerdrinker
The numbers are in. http://www.primaboinca.com/results.p...ames=0&state=3
That's my own machine. 86400 seconds per day / Primaboinca average WU time of 7042.33 seconds * 200 credits per WU * 8 threads = 19,629 credits per day. So, I still do better on Dirt, PG PPS Sieve, and Collatz making Primaboinca #4, at least for 64-bit operating systems that is.
19K is still really good compared to most other BOINC projects, but I'll take the extra 20% PG and Collatz award. Sure wish DiRT would come back though....
Well. The one you link to is running Prima 7.06 app....I am running Prima 7.05 app - not sure what the diff. is thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by Slicker
7.06 is the current Linux version. 7.05 is the current Windows version. My most recent post showed my Windows maching running 7.05 and it was even slower than the Linux version.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerdrinker
I donīt get it. I got a sparetimer with LGA 775 9550 CPU....Itīs completing Prima WUīs under 6xxx seconds.....Itīs faster than a I7?Quote:
Originally Posted by Slicker
Eksamples:
117925 100308 16 Jan 2012 19:11:06 UTC 18 Jan 2012 18:36:13 UTC Completed and validated 5,636.11 5,557.04 200.00 primaboinca v7.05
117924 100307 16 Jan 2012 19:11:06 UTC 18 Jan 2012 18:36:13 UTC Completed and validated 5,672.79 5,591.19 200.00 primaboinca v7.05
117923 100306 16 Jan 2012 19:11:06 UTC 18 Jan 2012 19:48:30 UTC Completed and validated 5,687.91 5,578.94 200.00 primaboinca v7.05
117922 100305 16 Jan 2012 19:11:06 UTC 18 Jan 2012 19:48:30 UTC Completed and validated 5,690.95 5,621.17 200.00 primaboinca v7.05
I was going to participate in the WCG efforts for a bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerdrinker
Fixed title. Thanks Slicker
Apples to Oranges. You run 4 WUs at a time. The i7 950 runs 8 WUs at a time. While each WU finishes faster on the Q9550, the i7 950 runs twice as many at a time. Since it doesn't take twice as long to finish them, the i7 will get more credit per day (e.g. about 12K/day for your Q9550 vs. 19K/day for the i7 950).Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerdrinker
I knew that Slicker...I just find it kinda interesting that you only get 7K on 4 more cores. (are those Virtual cores?)
The Q9550 runs at 2.83 Ghz. The i7 950 runs at 3.07 Ghz. But, when the i7 uses hyperthreading, each thread only gets 1/2 of a core, so each WU runs at 1.535Ghz which is considerable less than 2.83 Ghz on the Q9550 and why it takes 7K seconds on the i7 versus 5.6K seconds on the Q9550. While I haven't tried it, I would assume that if I turned off hyperthreading, it would finish a WU in about 3.5K seconds.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerdrinker
But if I recall correctly, that 3.5K will only be realized if the app is very efficient. That is why hyperthreading works, because most Windows apps are very inefficient. Intel is just taking advantage of sloppy code.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slicker