The 2665 project has cut my PPD down running Q6600's.
I have gone from approximately 2200 PPD to sub 1800 PPD.
Q9450 @ 3.2
Vista Ultimate 64
4 GB ram
Project: 2665 (Run 3, Clone 614, Gen 6)
12:33 Per 1%
Q6600 stock 2.4
Vista Home Premium 32
2 GB ram
Project: 2665 (Run 2, Clone 353, Gen 3)
16:50 per 1%
Same setup on different machine
Project: 2665 (Run 3, Clone 257, Gen 6)
16:55 per 1%
project 2665, project 2662, and improvements to come
Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team
-
Mobius0412
- Posts: 15
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 4:04 pm
Re: project 2665, project 2662, and improvements to come
A little OC helps:
Q6600 @ 3.0 GHz
Vista Home Premium 32
2 GB ram
Project: 2665 (Run 3, Clone 917, Gen 7)
14:50 per 1%
FahSpy estimates 1863 PPD
Q6600 @ 3.0 GHz
Vista Home Premium 32
2 GB ram
Project: 2665 (Run 3, Clone 917, Gen 7)
14:50 per 1%
FahSpy estimates 1863 PPD
-
larvi
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 3:53 pm
- Hardware configuration: [email protected], 2GB ram, 8800GTS G92, XP 32, SMP 5.91+Nvidia clients
E6750, 2GB ram, 9600GT, XP32, SMP 5.92 +Nvidia clients
E4500, 2GB ram, 8600GT, XP32, SMP 5.91+Nvidia clients
E6400, 2GB ram,Vista 64 bit, SMP 5.91 client
E2180, 2GB ram, XP32, SMP 5.91 client
P4 2.67Ghz, 1GB ram, Win98, 4.00 client
Athlon XP 3200+, 1GB ram, XP 32, 5.04 client
P4 2.67Ghz, 768Mb ram, XP 32, 5.03 client
Re: project 2665, project 2662, and improvements to come
Thanks Mobius,
My Q6600 at 2.88Ghz 2GB WinXP 32
Project: 2665 (Run 2, Clone 294, Gen 8)
About 15:30 per frame
Which is pretty much right in line with what you are seeing on Vista 32 taking in account the different clock speed. So it doesn't appear that Vista 32 is an issue, would like to see some times from someone running Vista 64 on a Q6600 to see how they compare. I'm not sure how much better a Q9450 is vs a Q6600 to compare with Leo's system.
My Q6600 at 2.88Ghz 2GB WinXP 32
Project: 2665 (Run 2, Clone 294, Gen 8)
About 15:30 per frame
Which is pretty much right in line with what you are seeing on Vista 32 taking in account the different clock speed. So it doesn't appear that Vista 32 is an issue, would like to see some times from someone running Vista 64 on a Q6600 to see how they compare. I'm not sure how much better a Q9450 is vs a Q6600 to compare with Leo's system.
Re: project 2665, project 2662, and improvements to come
Any hints on the A2 core release time frame?
Obviously I'm anxious to stop this dual smp crud, even though for the last 2 months I've gotten it FINALLY 100% stable!
Sunin
Obviously I'm anxious to stop this dual smp crud, even though for the last 2 months I've gotten it FINALLY 100% stable!
Sunin
-
toTOW
- Site Moderator
- Posts: 6359
- Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 10:38 am
- Location: Bordeaux, France
- Contact:
Re: project 2665, project 2662, and improvements to come
No ...Sunin wrote:Any hints on the A2 core release time frame?
Folding@Home beta tester since 2002. Folding Forum moderator since July 2008.
-
jrweiss
- Posts: 704
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:56 am
- Hardware configuration: Ryzen 7 5700G, 22.40.46 VGA driver; 32GB G-Skill Trident DDR4-3200; Samsung 860EVO 1TB Boot SSD; VelociRaptor 1TB; MSI GTX 1050ti, 551.23 studio driver; BeQuiet FM 550 PSU; Lian Li PC-9F; Win11Pro-64, F@H 8.3.5.
[Suspended] Ryzen 7 3700X, MSI X570MPG, 32GB G-Skill Trident Z DDR4-3600; Corsair MP600 M.2 PCIe Gen4 Boot, Samsung 840EVO-250 SSDs; VelociRaptor 1TB, Raptor 150; MSI GTX 1050ti, 526.98 driver; Kingwin Stryker 500 PSU; Lian Li PC-K7B. Win10Pro-64, F@H 8.3.5. - Location: @Home
- Contact:
Re: project 2665, project 2662, and improvements to come
Another couple data points:
E6850, P35 MoBo, 2 GB DDR2/1066, XP Pro 32
Proj 2665 [2/177/7]
Cores using 433 MB RAM + 520 MB Virtual
Total in use 1,255 MB RAM + 1,145 MB virtual
~1300 PPD, 20min:55sec/frame
Total system consumption 170 Watts (including monitor)
Q9450, X48 MoBo, 4 GB DDR2/1066, XP Pro 32
Proj 2665 [0/396/10]
Cores using 426 MB RAM + 513 MB Virtual
Total in use 1,114 MB RAM + 1,002 MB Virtual
~1700 PPD, 16min:05sec/frame [on 3 cores; GPU2 also running]
GPU2 Proj 4707[4/17/112]
Core using 13.5 MB RAM + 14.2 MB Virtual
~1500 PPD, 55sec/frame
Total system consumption 250 Watts (including monitor)
E6850, P35 MoBo, 2 GB DDR2/1066, XP Pro 32
Proj 2665 [2/177/7]
Cores using 433 MB RAM + 520 MB Virtual
Total in use 1,255 MB RAM + 1,145 MB virtual
~1300 PPD, 20min:55sec/frame
Total system consumption 170 Watts (including monitor)
Q9450, X48 MoBo, 4 GB DDR2/1066, XP Pro 32
Proj 2665 [0/396/10]
Cores using 426 MB RAM + 513 MB Virtual
Total in use 1,114 MB RAM + 1,002 MB Virtual
~1700 PPD, 16min:05sec/frame [on 3 cores; GPU2 also running]
GPU2 Proj 4707[4/17/112]
Core using 13.5 MB RAM + 14.2 MB Virtual
~1500 PPD, 55sec/frame
Total system consumption 250 Watts (including monitor)
Ryzen 7 5700G, 22.40.46 VGA driver; MSI GTX 1050ti, 551.23 studio driver
Ryzen 7 3700X; MSI GTX 1050ti, 551.23 studio driver [Suspended]
Ryzen 7 3700X; MSI GTX 1050ti, 551.23 studio driver [Suspended]
WU 2653 15 minute steps, 2665 30 minute steps, whassupwiddis
#2653 produces 1760 pts, ~15 min per step, finishes about 24-25 hours on this Phenom
#2665 produces 1920 pts. ~30 min per step, finishes about 48 hours
I see the 2653 has 77,583 atoms, 2665 has 14,170?
This doesn't seem reasonable? I see a lot of other posts about the 2665 EUE repeatedly, slow, etc. What's up with this?
Merged post with one of the 2 long running threads on this topic. No need for a 3rd. -7im
#2665 produces 1920 pts. ~30 min per step, finishes about 48 hours
I see the 2653 has 77,583 atoms, 2665 has 14,170?
This doesn't seem reasonable? I see a lot of other posts about the 2665 EUE repeatedly, slow, etc. What's up with this?
Merged post with one of the 2 long running threads on this topic. No need for a 3rd. -7im