| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Completed Research
Forum: Help Conquer Cancer
Thread: HCC Program updated to 6.08 |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 88
|
|
| Author |
|
|
pramo
Veteran Cruncher USA Joined: Dec 14, 2005 Post Count: 707 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
X0000090430971200707131158_ 2-- 608 Valid 3/27/10 03:44:06 3/27/10 23:07:58 4.10 34.0 / 156.9 <<<---- check points ;) X0000090430971200707131158_ 1-- 606 Valid 3/17/10 02:32:29 3/24/10 04:36:09 72.81 156.9 / 156.9 X0000090430971200707131158_ 0-- - No Reply 3/17/10 02:31:16 3/27/10 02:31:16 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 out of 3 or 4, my bigggest steal was this one X0000090420520200707201120_ 2-- 608 Valid 3/26/10 16:54:43 3/26/10 22:03:28 1.92 38.0 / 127.3 X0000090420520200707201120_ 0-- - No Reply 3/16/10 16:32:09 3/26/10 16:32:09 0.00 0.0 / 0.0 X0000090420520200707201120_ 1-- 606 Valid 3/16/10 16:30:54 3/19/10 23:51:35 32.15 127.3 / 127.3  |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
Strictly it is not a 'steal', just a bit of lotto, because the backward compatibility between 6.06 and 6.08 has saved the grid of creating a condition of many inconclusives needing a 3rd results to complete quorum of 2 run on 6.08, one (the 6.06) declared invalid. It also made a "run dry" unnecessary for the transition as had to be done when for instance the FAAH application was upgraded about 2 years ago. That gave major production loss on that project (we crunched other sciences in the meantime as is so great a feature of WCG :)
----------------------------------------The run time differentials are astounding... your's ran 1.92 hours and the original 6.06 task 32.15 hours. Had we had this program evolution 2 years ago, we'd be nearly finished now... but such is how computational biology evolves. We celebrate it has arrived now.
WCG
----------------------------------------Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! [Edit 1 times, last edit by Sekerob at Mar 28, 2010 1:51:38 PM] |
||
|
|
nasher
Veteran Cruncher USA Joined: Dec 2, 2005 Post Count: 1423 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
this all sounds wonderfull.. cant wait till i get my ddd2 bronze so i can click cancer on again.
----------------------------------------yes would love to see the project speed up (and hopefully expand so we can find more cures faster)  |
||
|
|
Bearcat
Master Cruncher USA Joined: Jan 6, 2007 Post Count: 2803 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Bearcat, You may still see the differences in runtime as I don't think we ever figured out why your machine was running longer. BUT, it could have been due to the page faults, which have been greatly reduced in this version. Give the new app a try and let us know if you still encounter longer runtimes than others. -Uplinger 2 days running this project under snow leopard and so far so good.  All wu's are under 2hrs to crunch.
Crunching for humanity since 2007!
---------------------------------------- [Edit 1 times, last edit by Bearcat at Mar 28, 2010 9:15:52 PM] |
||
|
|
TimAndHedy
Senior Cruncher Joined: Jan 27, 2009 Post Count: 267 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Comparison of my X240, E5200, and Q9550 systems. The X240 and E5200 are mildly overclocked and the Q9550 is running at 4.15.
----------------------------------------X240 Linux 64 bit. E5200 Linux 32 bit. Q9550 Vista 32 bit. Is the linux version that much faster? X2 240 X0000076131346200610111616_ 1-- htpc2 Pending Validation 3/28/10 14:23:47 3/28/10 18:10:17 1.24 31.7 / 0.0 X0000076120788200610251859_ 1-- htpc2 Valid 3/28/10 13:54:27 3/28/10 18:10:17 1.06 27.3 / 29.5 Q9550 X0000076800693200610262101_ 0-- QuadComputer Valid 3/28/10 17:31:47 3/29/10 02:07:06 1.43 38.6 / 40.0 X0000076131144200610040947_ 0-- QuadComputer Valid 3/28/10 15:59:39 3/28/10 22:58:05 1.36 36.8 / 33.9 My E5200 system is almost as fast. X0000076100042200610061717_ 1-- HTPC-1 Valid 3/28/10 08:29:12 3/28/10 16:39:04 1.57 24.2 / 18.9 X0000076071021200610202008_ 1-- HTPC-1 Valid 3/28/10 01:53:22 3/28/10 11:22:12 1.63 25.7 / 20.9 The previous version times on the X2 240 were X0000090921086200707301528_ 0-- HTPC-1 Valid 3/26/10 03:27:17 3/26/10 20:22:28 5.09 78.7 / 85.4 X0000090460890200707272234_ 1-- HTPC-1 Valid 3/17/10 13:07:59 3/18/10 05:23:49 5.17 77.8 / 77.8 350+% improvement [Edit 2 times, last edit by TimAndHedy at Mar 29, 2010 2:26:33 AM] |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
From 5.46 hours average run time week ending Friday to 3.12 hours average on Sunday. Whilst clearing out the 6.06 caches, we already have increased the project speed to 175% of what it was before.
----------------------------------------146,847 results validated in 24 hours. 
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
|
martin64
Senior Cruncher Germany Joined: May 11, 2009 Post Count: 445 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
From 5.46 hours average run time week ending Friday to 3.12 hours average on Sunday. Hm, how about increasing the WU size now? Regards, Martin  |
||
|
|
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher Joined: Jul 24, 2005 Post Count: 20043 Status: Offline |
If you look up, that was suggested as a future consideration. As it is each job is a discrete crystal analysis... that very long job number the identifier. No slicing and dicing as is for instance possible with HFCC or FAAH can be applied here.
----------------------------------------
WCG
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All! |
||
|
|
JmBoullier
Former Community Advisor Normandy - France Joined: Jan 26, 2007 Post Count: 3715 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Is the linux version that much faster? Linux might be a little more efficient than Windows, but the most important difference is the 64-bit mode vs the 32-bit mode which gives the bigger boost, particularly for the HCC project. |
||
|
|
TimAndHedy
Senior Cruncher Joined: Jan 27, 2009 Post Count: 267 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
but the most important difference is the 64-bit mode vs the 32-bit mode which gives the bigger boost Linux appears potentially to be much more efficient. The Q9550 is clocked at least 30% faster than the E5200. Both are 32 bit. Also since the 12MB of Cache on the Q9550 appears not to be helping at all. Does anyone have some times for the 64 bit Vista vs 32 Bit? I am curious about the efficiency. |
||
|
|
|