Posts by Jim1348

1) (Message 6792)
Posted 30 Jun 2020 by Jim1348
Post:
Here are my results:
http://asteroidsathome.net/boinc/forum_thread.php?id=807&postid=6738#6738
2) (Message 6738)
Posted 22 May 2020 by Jim1348
Post:
It has been a while, so I thought I would compare the new CUDA version on different cards, and in particular compare it to the CPU version for efficiency.
Both of my machines are running Ubuntu 18.04.4 with the 440.59 (CUDA 10.2) driver.

Asteroids@home 102.15 Period Search Application (cuda102_linux)
GTX 1060: 72 watts, 33 minutes (0.55 hours) average per work unit => 40 watt-hours per work unit
GTX 1070: 105 watts, 24 minutes (0.4 hours) average per work unit => 42 watt-hours per work unit

Asteroids@home 102.13 Period Search Application (avx_linux)
Ryzen 2600 virtual core (all 12 cores running Asteroids): 7 watts, 1 hour 52 minutes (1.87 hours) average per work unit: => 13 watt-hours per work unit.

THEREFORE: The CPU work units are 3 times as efficient at the GPU work units.
3) (Message 6449)
Posted 16 Feb 2020 by Jim1348
Post:
I had five stuck for ten hours, but they just finished uploading a minute ago. I think things will get back to normal soon, though there is undoubtedly quite a backlog to clear up.
4) (Message 3426)
Posted 23 Jul 2014 by Jim1348
Post:
There were two basic version of the Pentium 4 in its later life: Northwood, which was good and reasonably power-efficient, and the later Prescott, which wasn't. I think with the 2 MB cache, you have the Prescott; the Northwood had 512 kB (L2). But the longer pipeline in the Prescott required a larger cache to ameliorate the effects of cache-misses.

Intel adopted the more energy-efficient Banias core (originally developed for laptop PCs) for their next line of CPUs, which became the Core and later Core 2 series. I still use a Core2 Duo (E8400) to support a couple of GPUs. It also works OK on Asteroid, but I would not use anything earlier.