AMD XP Linux Fedora C4
Now running at 3.49 compared to 3.66 before, so a 5% boost then.

One odd thing is that sulphur_um_4.22_i686-pc-linux-gnu started running at nice level 0 directly after the download. After stopping and restarting it now runs at nice 19 as it should.

---

So, does this mean I should abort all my sulfur models and get new ones? :)

Just kidding ... :)

---

So, does this mean I should abort all my sulfur models and get new ones? :)

Just kidding ... :)

Hmmm, On an AMD 2000+ XPSP2, which was on SC4.19 @ Trickle 2.5, I did and now runs 8% better on SC4.22.

On an Intel PIII - 1000MHz XPSP1, which was on SC4.19 @ Trickle 4, I initialy did but reverted back after the first checkpoint because there was a performance degradation of 14% to 18%.

On a sister Intel PIII - 1000MHz Linux FC4, I reported a performance loss of 36%.

Due to Model performance variations, it is acually not accurate to compare the different models. But lacking a accurate testmodel (and the ability to plug it into the application)one has to do with it.

Earlier I have concluded that the Linux version was not good. But having more overview now, it seems to me the performance difference is influenced by 3 factors, being:

- Processor type: Intel vs. AMD
- Processor speed: slow vs. fast CPU (includes ss2 ss3)
- Used OS: Linux vs. Windows

So a relative slow intel cpu crunching SC4.22 on Linux gets the sum of 3 dips!

In this situation we get the best performance boost out of a certain machine if there is a conditional version push or if we could choose the version application ourselfs, instead of the latest version being pushed automatically to your machine.

---

So, it\'s very repeatable. Only Intel is having the slowdowns with this version.

I\'ll look into this

---

We\'ve released a new version of the sulphur cycle application
for the mac - version 4.22.
This version resolves the crash bug reported in earlier versions.
Apologies for the delayed release.
If you\'ve had problems prior to this, PLEASE reset the project and
download the latest version.

---

What deadlines are given for v. 4.22? The v. 4.19 wu I\'m working on has a deadline far far less than a year - which means BOINC practically only wants to run that one to meet the deadline... Other projects get no CPU time unless I force a temporary suspend of CPDN

---

Originally, there were 500 models with a short deadline of 4 or 5 months, because the results were needed ASAP.
Two months ago, a new batch of 50,000 were generated, with a deadline of about a year.
Mine was sent on 10 Oct 2005, and is expected back on 22 Sep 2006.
This is not set in concrete.
You appear to still be working on one of the original data sets.

If you look at this projects front page, 710 sulphur models have been completed, (although it is more than this, if you look at Project stats page).
So there is no real hurry.

thanks for the info :)

---

Back when Sulphur was being developed, someone said that an experimental version ran much better on AMD with a certain switched turned on --

Does anyone know if moves have been made to allow AMD processors to run the projects effcienetly? The whole \"Disable SS2/SS3 if it\'s not a Pentium IV\" was quite under-handed, and takes away a lot of processing ability from an otherwise VERY powerful AMD processor.

Matthew

---

<img src=\"http://boinc.mundayweb.com/one/stats.php?userID=2118&prj=4\">

Does anyone know if moves have been made to allow AMD processors to run the projects effcienetly? The whole \"Disable SS2/SS3 if it\'s not a Pentium IV\" was quite under-handed, and takes away a lot of processing ability from an otherwise VERY powerful AMD processor.

Well, it may be obscured in this thread because of all the posts about Linux performance loss by Intel, but this post showed the performance improvement by AMD in Windows with sulphur 4.22.