I\'m sure this has been discussed someplace, but what is the very best operating system to use w/BOINC, in order to get the very best number crunching performance out of the cpu\'s? Windows 2000 Pro, XP Pro, Server 2003; Linux, etc.

If it happens to be Windows, what is the best number crunching only settings?

With my Windows XP Pro system, I\'ve enabled HyperThreading in the bios for my 2.4C GHz P4. I\'ve disabled all ports such as serial, parallel, and USB. Disable the built in sound. I\'ve got 1 gig of DDR, so I disabled the pagefile.sys. I defrag my HD at least once a week. I\'ve Optimized Performance for Background Services. I\'ve set my video for performance. Is there anything else I can do for any added performance?

I\'ve also a Dual Athlon MP2800+ system running w/Windows 2000 Pro, w/essecially the same settings except for the HT and the pagefile.sys. This system has only 512 meg DDR, so the pagefile is running at 766 min/766 max on a second drive.

How about a RAMDrive?

Thx

I suggest looking/posting on the <a href="http://www.climateprediction.net/board/index.php">PHP version</a> of the board for these things. Some attempt is being made <a href="http://www.climateprediction.net/board/viewforum.php?f=21">here</a> to put together some relevant FAQ and issues such as RAM drive have been discussed at length on other parts of that board.

Carl has also prepared a <A HREF="http://cpdn.comlab.ox.ac.uk/cpu.zip">page</a> showing the relative performance of different machines, but these need to be treated with caution (eg, we don't know which ones repeatedly crash.

The verdict seems to be that the ultimate outfit at present would be a fast Pentium with HT enabled, with plenty of fast memory, a good graphics card, running Linux.

Sorry! I don't have one of those either.

This is just my own very unscientific observation but I have 2 2.4B P4 systems that originally were running Win 2K Pro and doing what I felt was a respectable job. I then switched these 2 machines over to YOPER Linux, and with everything else being identical both of these systems are now doing TimeSlices in 0.6 seconds less. With 10802 TimeSlices per Tickle that's a savings of approx 1.8 hours per tickle.

Now YOPER Linux is a fairly new distro which is optimized to take advantage of today's faster hardware and of course your mileage may vary.

SkyHook

&gt; This is just my own very unscientific observation but I have 2 2.4B P4 systems
&gt; that originally were running Win 2K Pro and doing what I felt was a
&gt; respectable job. I then switched these 2 machines over to YOPER Linux, and
&gt; with everything else being identical both of these systems are now doing
&gt; TimeSlices in 0.6 seconds less. With 10802 TimeSlices per Tickle that's a
&gt; savings of approx 1.8 hours per tickle.
&gt;
&gt; Now YOPER Linux is a fairly new distro which is optimized to take advantage of
&gt; today's faster hardware and of course your mileage may vary.
&gt;
&gt; SkyHook



Thx, I'll give it a try.

I am still looking for the best OS &amp; Crunch Times also, there is one thing you might try if you havn't already. I discovered it while setting my preferences for BOINC. My hard drive access setting was set to once a minute, I changed this to 600 sec (10 MIN)and my numbers jumped 25% on all computers. I just changed to 30 min to see if I get more!

Paul Dam


&gt; I'm sure this has been discussed someplace, but what is the very best
&gt; operating system to use w/BOINC, in order to get the very best number
&gt; crunching performance out of the cpu's? Windows 2000 Pro, XP Pro, Server 2003;
&gt; Linux, etc.
&gt;
&gt; If it happens to be Windows, what is the best number crunching only settings?
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; With my Windows XP Pro system, I've enabled HyperThreading in the bios for my
&gt; 2.4C GHz P4. I've disabled all ports such as serial, parallel, and USB.
&gt; Disable the built in sound. I've got 1 gig of DDR, so I disabled the
&gt; pagefile.sys. I defrag my HD at least once a week. I've Optimized Performance
&gt; for Background Services. I've set my video for performance. Is there anything
&gt; else I can do for any added performance?
&gt;
&gt; I've also a Dual Athlon MP2800+ system running w/Windows 2000 Pro,
&gt; w/essecially the same settings except for the HT and the pagefile.sys. This
&gt; system has only 512 meg DDR, so the pagefile is running at 766 min/766 max on
&gt; a second drive.
&gt;
&gt; How about a RAMDrive?
&gt;
&gt; Thx
&gt;
&gt;

Since I'm still fairly new I can't give a general answer.

But I can offer what my Systems offered so far in terms of average Seconds/Timestep (for others to compare) :

hadsm3 V4.03 :
2.2665 - AMD Athlon64 3200+ (2000MHz, 1024k L2), Win2000 SP4

hadsm3 V4.04 :
2.2807 - AMD Athlon64 3000+ (2000MHz, 512k L2), Linux 2.6.3
2.3036 - AMD Athlon64 3200+ (2000MHz, 1024k L2), Win2000 SP4
2.9357 - AMD AthlonXP 3000+ (2166MHz, 512k L2), Linux 2.6.3
3.1468 - AMD AthlonXP 2500+ (1833MHz, 512k L2), Linux 2.4.22
3.1587 - AMD AthlonXP 2800+ (2083MHz, 512k L2), Linux 2.4.20
3.3099 - AMD AthlonXP 2600+ (2083MHz, 256k L2), Linux 2.6.3
3.3111 - AMD AthlonXP 2700+ (2166MHz, 256k L2), Linux 2.6.3
3.3719 - AMD AthlonXP 2400+ (2000MHz, 256k L2), Linux 2.4.20
3.3908 - AMD AthlonXP 2200+ (1800MHz, 256k L2), Linux 2.6.3
3.5472 - AMD AthlonXP 2100+ (1733MHz, 256k L2), Linux 2.4.19
3.7861 - AMD AthlonMP 2800+ Dual (2133MHz, 512k L2), Linux 2.4.22
4.3471 - AMD AthlonMP 2000+ Dual (1666MHz, 256k L2), Linux 2.4.21
4.4892 - AMD AthlonXP-M 1800+ (1533MHz, 256k L2), WinXP SP1
[Notebook w/ Shared Memory VGA]

Those numbers naturally vary somewhat due to different Motherboards and resulting RAM performance.
The Dual Systems also share their Resources among different Projects, so I can't tell how well they would perform if they were running CPDN only.
Also, I don't know how much the different Models being calculated have an effect on the performance per Timestep.

You'll have to compare them with your own numbers.
Most Systems have their RAM performance set to 'SPD Timings' and are therefor a bit on the conservative side with focus on long-term stability due to the long exposure of a CPDN Model being calculated on each system.
___________________________________________
<p>Scientific Network : <a href="http://www.falconfly.de/network.htm">36200 MHz «» 8460 MB «» 776.6 GB</a> </p>

from looking at the cpu/cpdn "performance page" it looks like the Pentium 3.2GHz CPU's are consistently high. Probably helps that we moved to an Intel Fortran compiler on Win &amp; Linux! The dual 3.2GHz seem to give a "throughput" of a model a week, which is about the rate that the Cray we use at U. of Liverpool does a run!

&gt;
&gt; .....there is one thing
&gt; you might try if you havn't already. I discovered it while setting my
&gt; preferences for BOINC. My hard drive access setting was set to once a minute,
&gt; I changed this to 600 sec (10 MIN)and my numbers jumped 25% on all computers.
&gt; I just changed to 30 min to see if I get more!
&gt;
&gt; Paul Dam

That 25% looked interesting, so I tried it too - zero difference. :-(

<a href="http://www.nmvs.dsl.pipex.com/"><img src="http://boinc.mundayweb.com/cpdn/stats.php?userID=6&amp;team=off&amp;trans=off"></a>

Tried it too; Zero difference so far. I'll keep you posted after I start a new model in a couple days.