TAC Note: New project: Correlizer

[Rudy Toody]

Welcome, Neurodog!

 

[biodoc]

Good to have you in, Neurodog! :thumbsup:

 

[petrusbroder]

Hi all!

I'm joining in!

Very Welcome! :thumbsup:

 

[sangyup81]

OK switching all my CPUs back to correlizer! Let's make this push happen! =)

 

[petrusbroder]

Nice, sangyup81!

 

[waffleironhead]

For anyone running windows x64 I highly recommend joining the beta testing.
With the 1.07 beta there is now a windowsx64 app. My WU times have since dropped in half.

 

[petrusbroder]

Thanks for the info. Changed that for one of my computers - to test it first.

 

[Rudy Toody]

It's best to do both because they run dry on the betas once in a while.

I expect the little brown truck late Thursday, so I should have an AMD 1100T up and running shortly after that.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Anyone have problems uploading finished Correlizer WUs? I have 9 stuck in my transfers queue. It shows, "Retry in 14:00 (Project backoff: 1:30:00)".

I assume that means that it won't do any more WUs for an hour and a half, until transfers catch up?

Edit: Hmm. Site seems to be down. Server crash?
http://svahesrv2.bioquant.uni-heidelberg.de/correlizer/ down

Edit: Back up. Maybe maint.?

 

[Rudy Toody]

Check this page: http://svahesrv2.bioquant.uni-heidelberg.de/correlizer/stats.php to see the new stats choice: GPU models

As far as I can tell, nothing has be setup for execution yet. Stay tuned!

 

[biodoc]

I expect the little brown truck late Thursday, so I should have an AMD 1100T up and running shortly after that.

One more day!!

 

[sangyup81]

Anyone have problems uploading finished Correlizer WUs? I have 9 stuck in my transfers queue. It shows, "Retry in 14:00 (Project backoff: 1:30:00)".

I assume that means that it won't do any more WUs for an hour and a half, until transfers catch up?

Edit: Hmm. Site seems to be down. Server crash?
http://svahesrv2.bioquant.uni-heidelberg.de/correlizer/ down

Edit: Back up. Maybe maint.?

Ive had to do manual retries of uploads. Hopefully it can start working automatically again

 

[biodoc]

The TeAm is now in 3rd place!!! :thumbsup:

 

[Uppsala9496]

Had to get 10 F@H wu's on my updated main rig for the December race (planning ahead this year). Once the current wu completes I'll jump over to Correlizer.

 

[petrusbroder]

Welcome to the Correlizer "race-to-the-top", Uppsala9496! Your output is very much appreciated! :thumbsup:

 

[petrusbroder]

If we continue producing as we are now, we will be #2 in credits in less than 10 days!
Unless we increase our production to at least 75K/day (or better to more than 86K) we will be passed in 20 days by the "L'Alliance Francophone".
If we produce more than 86K we will be #1 in less than 80 days ...
That is worth of an effort!

 

[GLeeM]

After looking at over 100 Validated WUs (worth about 9.5 points each) and comparing the wingmans computer I decided I would try turning off HT on my i7 920 at 4.0 Ghz.

With HT off I upped the OC to 4.2.

The WUs now finish in half the time

But now I am only getting about 6.2 points each

Before turning off HT, I always got about 9.5 points, even when the wingman was doing the WUs in half the time. Now when I am doing them faster I never get more than 6.5?

Does the wingman get the same points?

 

[biodoc]

Some projects certainly have odd credit systems. My preference is for the fixed credit system. You may want to check your CPU benchmarks (boinc) with and without HT. I suspect they'll be the same. On those WUs where you had HT turned off and were getting low point awards, I was your wingman on some of those and yes, I received the same low point award! Please turn HT back on!! :biggrin:

 

[GLeeM]

I don't know what to think - now I am getting about 8.5 points per WU.

My benchmarks are now 4,265 and 12,239. Before I increased the OC I had about 3,500 and 11,000.
Some systems with higher benches finish WUs slower? Your 9550 is higher and your 2600 is lower.
About the only one to finish WUs faster is your X6! Rudy's X6 is about the same as my i7. Your OC must be higher than his?

 

[biodoc]

I'm not sure why my x6 is running faster than RTs. It's at 3.6 GHz now. All I did was increase the multiplier to go from 3.2 to 3.6 GHz. My 2600 is still on summer clock (4.2 GHz). It's getting cool enough now to ramp it up to 4.5 GHz. I never could get it to run stable at 4.6 GHz.

AMD chips really rock on this project.

 

[Rudy Toody]

I forgot to turn off the temp throttle back.

I jacked it up to 3.8GHz and knocked 1 full minute off each WU. 11:33 now!

 

[VirtualLarry]

I forgot to turn off the temp throttle back.

Is that safe? What are your core temps?

I jacked it up to 3.8GHz and knocked 1 full minute off each WU. 11:33 now!

Wow. My correlizer WUs are running about 25:13 at 3.0Ghz on my Q9300.

I'm trying to figure out how you are running nearly twice as fast as I am, with only 0.8Ghz more speed, considering my CPU supposedly has better IPC than the Phenom II chips, or at least equal.

 

[Rudy Toody]

Is that safe? What are your core temps?

Wow. My correlizer WUs are running about 25:13 at 3.0Ghz on my Q9300.

I'm trying to figure out how you are running nearly twice as fast as I am, with only 0.8Ghz more speed, considering my CPU supposedly has better IPC than the Phenom II chips, or at least equal.

Linux64?

Be sure you are crunching the Beta WUs. They go faster

 

[sangyup81]

Wow. My correlizer WUs are running about 25:13 at 3.0Ghz on my Q9300.

I'm trying to figure out how you are running nearly twice as fast as I am, with only 0.8Ghz more speed, considering my CPU supposedly has better IPC than the Phenom II chips, or at least equal.

I have several systems and let's just say AMD is favored in Correlizer.

I have a Phenom II unlocked to X4 and overclocked to 3.94 GHz and 2.92 CPU-NB and in the other room I have a Pentium G620 2.6GHz.

The Phenom II gets WUs done in almost half the time PER CORE. If Correlizer performance scaled perfectly to clock speed, the Phenom II should be 1.5x the speed not 2x. Given that Sandy Bridge should have better IPC, this is even more stunning.

 

[ZipSpeed]

Yeah, I was surprised how well my AMD rigs are crunching. My 1055T 3.5 GHz is is running at 17:18, i7 950 4 GHz at 27:43 and my X4 640 3.3 GHz even besting my 950 at 18:23!