Posts by Falconet

1) (Message 7047)
Posted 7 Sep 2020 by Falconet
Post:
You were 42 when I checked it yesterday!
2) (Message 7041)
Posted 6 Sep 2020 by Falconet
Post:
Like this?

http://asteroidsathome.net/boinc/top_users.php

You are ranked 42 by recent average credit!
3) (Message 7039)
Posted 5 Sep 2020 by Falconet
Post:
Hope you get what you need.

Good luck.
4) (Message 7029)
Posted 19 Aug 2020 by Falconet
Post:
The Hubble Asteroid Hunter project has finished.
But the Catalina Outer Solar System Survey Project has launched just a week ago, hoping to find new Trans-Neptunian Objects (TNOs)

https://www.zooniverse.org/projects/fulsdavid/catalina-outer-solar-system-survey
5) (Message 6213)
Posted 16 Mar 2019 by Falconet
Post:
Any updates?
6) (Message 3607)
Posted 17 Sep 2014 by Falconet
Post:
Any news about the OpenCL app?
7) (Message 3243)
Posted 18 Jun 2014 by Falconet
Post:
what withrow money. not found withrow option


What? This isn't about money. You can't make any money with distributed computing volunteering projects.
8) (Message 3169)
Posted 7 Jun 2014 by Falconet
Post:
Any news on making the app official?
9) (Message 3131)
Posted 31 May 2014 by Falconet
Post:
During the last week I made another benchmark, this time under a more realistic setting:

- I used ten WUs from the current batch (well, last weeks batch to be more specific: 150893_1, 150893_12, 150893_2, 150893_28, 150893_29, 150893_3 150893_30, 150893_31, 150894_4 and 150894_5) and calculated the average from the elapsed time speedups again. The minimum and maximum speedups are also included below.
- the FX-8350 was again running at 4.0 GHz (no turbo, no throttling)
- within BOINC another three tasks with Crunch3r's FMA4 app were running concurrently (using an app_config.xml and the 'mode noBS' switch of the benchmark package)
- this time the reference app was period_search_10210_windows_x86_64__sse2.exe, the fastest stock app from the first run, so the baseline was 'higher' than in the first benchmark run

By using ten test WUs and running three BOINC WUs concurrently I guess I got some more realistic figures here. One thing to be noted is that some workunits tend to run a bit faster with the SSE3 app while others are faster with the SSE2 app. I noticed the same during another benchmark with one of my intels (Ivy Bridge i7). However, in both cases the differences are minimal, so it doesn't matter much if you run 64bit SSE2 or SSE3. YMMV.

Results:

32bit plain: -130.33% avg. (max. -124.79%; min. -135.50%)
64bit SSE3: +0.13% avg. (max. +1.82%; min. -1.56%)
64bit AVX: -32.97% avg. (max. -31.17%; min. -34.81%)
64bit FMA4: +10.91% avg. (max. +12.35%; min. +9.68%)

Again a significant speedup of approx. 10% with the FMA4 app and no big difference between 64bit SSE2 and 64bit SSE3. AVX is out of the game again.


Nice, hope the project's admins test and make the app official.
10) (Message 3053)
Posted 18 May 2014 by Falconet
Post:
http://www.boincunited.org/period_search_10210_windows_x86_64_bd_fma4_gcc.zip

Copy that and past in the address bar.
11) (Message 3021)
Posted 11 May 2014 by Falconet
Post:
Not bad. Your tasks are running a little faster than the i7's.


Not really. If I compare the results against my i7 (hostid=88982) I see the avx there finishing faster (5,671 .. 6,332), but fma4 seems to be faster than sse or avx on fm2+ APU's. And this is the smaller one of the both available A10's.

All in all I would say it's an advance. Thaks to Crunch3r!


I see. By the way, the app is checkpointing with me.
12) (Message 3016)
Posted 11 May 2014 by Falconet
Post:
Not bad. Your tasks are running a little faster than the i7's.
13) (Message 3014)
Posted 11 May 2014 by Falconet
Post:
First fma4 wu validated.
A10-7700 8,764.78, i7-3770 11,695.72
https://asteroidsathome.net/boinc//workunit.php?wuid=16225158

Looks like the app has no checkpointing; after nVidia lockup I had to restart the pc, the wu startet from 0% but with the time already used.

5 more waiting for validation.


That is strange. I am fairly sure that mine checkpointed...
14) (Message 3009)
Posted 10 May 2014 by Falconet
Post:
I am not sure. It may reduce the gap between AMD and Intel but more testing is required.


That would be NICE, reducing the gap I mean.


Indeed it would.
15) (Message 3004)
Posted 9 May 2014 by Falconet
Post:
I am not sure. It may reduce the gap between AMD and Intel but more testing is required.
16) (Message 3000)
Posted 9 May 2014 by Falconet
Post:
It is for Windows. I only have one A8-6500.
I have a link but I don't want give it without the author's permission.
An app_info file is already included and configured (only needs to be placed in the project's folder).
17) (Message 2998)
Posted 9 May 2014 by Falconet
Post:
I have tested the app but only ran 4 tasks with it.

http://asteroidsathome.net/boinc/results.php?hostid=13438&offset=0&show_names=0&state=4&appid=

Against an i7-4770, my A8-6500 3.5GHZ took 10,996.37 CPU time vs 9,167.34 CPU time on the i7.

Against an i7-3770, mine took 9,752.09 CPU time vs 7,808.02 CPU time on the i7.

Against an i5-4570, mine took 10,705.40 CPU time vs 7,551.07 CPU time on the i5.

The other task was ran against a GPU.

So, they take longer but the i7's and i5 have much larger Floating Point and Integer figures than mine. I don't even know what clock they are running.


My A8-6500:

Measured floating point speed 1523.05 million ops/sec
Measured integer speed 6243.76 million ops/sec

i5-4570:

Measured floating point speed 3496.34 million ops/sec
Measured integer speed 14860.04 million ops/sec

i7-3770:

Measured floating point speed 3688.48 million ops/sec
Measured integer speed 13060.77 million ops/sec

i7-4770:

Measured floating point speed 3563.17 million ops/sec
Measured integer speed 14800.09 million ops/sec


I think this needs more testing. Hope the project scientists are interested in testing this.
18) (Message 2924)
Posted 21 Apr 2014 by Falconet
Post:
Have you tested the app any further?