RE: setiathome on a UP1000

["Donsbach, Jeff" <Jeff Donsbach compaq com>]

What was the clock speed on that, Rich? How much L2 cache?

I just informally benchmarked an HP-UX i2000 Itanium system last week. It got 4:20 on the "Team LambChop" benchmark work unit. Not bad. It is still about an hour behind the fastest Athlon results posted though.

The "-nolock" bug is known, but there hasn't been a new client release since the fix was found. There shouldn't be any substantial performance difference between the Linux client and the Tru64 client. They were both built with "cxx". The Linux client was linked statically though with an EV5 libcpml, so that it would run on any Alpha/Linux system; even those that didn't have the Compaq runtime libraries installed (typical on Debian systems).

Jeff D


-----Original Message-----
From: Rich Payne [mailto:rdp@talisman.mv.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2002 8:56 AM
To: axp-list@redhat.com
Subject: Re: setiathome on a UP1000



5 hr 39 min 35.5 sec is the average from the UP1100 that used to be under 
my desk at API. That was running the Tru64 client though.

http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/stats/team/team_92419.html

--rdp

On 26 Apr 2002, jmd wrote:

> chris...
> 
> thanks. i will run it tonite. what are you times per work unit on the
> pc164? i am wondering what i can expect. the last time i ran seti on an
> alpha was on a PWS500 and the times varied. running under WinNT was
> substantially faster than the linux client.
> 
> thanks again..it running with -nolock now
> 
> jeff
> > 
> > 	Just run it with the '-nolock' option.
> > 
> > 	I see the same behavior on my PC164.
> > 
> > 	Chris
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Axp-list mailing list
> Axp-list@redhat.com
> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/axp-list
> 

-- 
Rich Payne
http://talisman.mv.com



_______________________________________________
Axp-list mailing list
Axp-list@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/axp-list