BOINC@AUSTRALIA FORUM

  • December 03, 2021, 01:51:06 PM
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

We have a Twiiter Account for the Team https://twitter.com/BOINCAUSTRALIA

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: 32 vs 64bit  (Read 12789 times)

SkyStation

  • Guest
32 vs 64bit
« on: August 08, 2009, 03:27:00 PM »

Hi,

Currently have all my crunchers working on 32bit linux instead of 64bit, any benefit of changing them over to 64bit with WCG (either science wise or personal wise, e.g. more points).

Would be a little time consuming to do so if not much benefit will leave them as-is but setup all new ones on 64bit.

SkyStation
Logged

Wang Solutions

  • Guest
Re: 32 vs 64bit
« Reply #1 on: August 08, 2009, 03:35:05 PM »

I believe all WCG apps are only 32 bit so from that point of view there is no real advantage in running them on 64 bit, however with a 64-bit BOINC client and the overall faster architecture, there is likely to be some small reduction in crunch time under 64 bit even without a specific app.
Logged

Furlozza

  • Guest
Re: 32 vs 64bit
« Reply #2 on: August 08, 2009, 03:50:46 PM »

I run WCG on both boxes, W$ 32 bit and Ubuntu 64 bit. Run times on Ubuntu are faster than on W$. Not too sure of the variation between 32/64 bit in Ubuntu for WCG, but if (as I mentioned elsewhere) you switched 12/16 cores to 64 bit Ubuntu just for aqua, there would be a chance to see if there is any differential in those cores crunching WCG as well.
Logged

veebee

  • Board Lord
  • ******
  • Aussie Karma: +1151/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4357
  • Tempo - Son of Bach....Supreme Ch & Aus No 1 !!!
Re: 32 vs 64bit
« Reply #3 on: August 08, 2009, 03:52:55 PM »

Hiya SkyStation ! welcome to the team/ boards...

Have to agree with Wang... under 64 bit you  would need to load the 32 bit lib files for projects like WCG and other who are solely 32 bit apps.

Would have to check whether Einstein  runs quicker under 64 bit OS, but there are some other Astronomical projects that have been more productive in 64 bit.

either way though, WCG is a low payer (I have been running it on 64 bit Ubuntu), but the value of the science is worth it ..(every now and then... I AM in it somewhat for the crdits..wouldn't have built a farm of multi-core machines if I wasn't).
Logged

 


i7-920 @ 3.4 Ghz - 12 GB DDR3 1333 -  GTX 660Ti + ATI HD 7950

Alienware i7- 2670QM @ 2.20 GHz  - GT555M



AA 3 to AA 31

veebee

  • Board Lord
  • ******
  • Aussie Karma: +1151/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4357
  • Tempo - Son of Bach....Supreme Ch & Aus No 1 !!!
Re: 32 vs 64bit
« Reply #4 on: August 08, 2009, 03:57:06 PM »

switched 12/16 cores to 64 bit Ubuntu just for aqua,

for AQUA ????  I switched from Ubuntu x64 to Win 32 because it crunched WAAAAY faster/ higher cr'hr under WinXP 32 bit !

Have since changed that machine to Win 7 x64, but Windows definitely blows my Ubuntu boxes away for AQUA..dont know why ...
Logged

 


i7-920 @ 3.4 Ghz - 12 GB DDR3 1333 -  GTX 660Ti + ATI HD 7950

Alienware i7- 2670QM @ 2.20 GHz  - GT555M



AA 3 to AA 31

Furlozza

  • Guest
Re: 32 vs 64bit
« Reply #5 on: August 08, 2009, 04:45:15 PM »

Veebs

have just join TheGnat to AQUA.... but remember that TheGnat is dual core, not quad and therefore may not be as fast as iGnatious even though TheGnat has a faster base core speed. iGgy is working out at around 200-220 crs per hr per core on current batch of wus which leaves GPU in the sand (so to speak) and core crunching of MW definitely in the dust (75-80 crs per core/hr)

So, when all settles down, will have Gnat doing AQUA on cpu and GPU on gpu whilst iGgy runs AQUA and WCG on cpu. To be competetive, Gnat will have to complete an AQUA wu in less than 16hrs (iGgy does current ones in roughly 8 hrs on all four cores.)
Logged

Wang Solutions

  • Guest
Re: 32 vs 64bit
« Reply #6 on: August 08, 2009, 06:20:05 PM »

Re AQUA, Windows is quicker than Linux, and 64 bit is quicker than 32 bit. But the difference between Windows and Linux is not as big as it seems, because the apps report the CPU time differently. With Windows, it reports the time that it takes, whereas with Linux it reports the time x number of CPUs used. So on a quad, the time advances 4 seconds for each second crunched when using 4 CPUs. So to get a fairer comparison, divide the time shown by the number of CPUs used on Linux to equate to the time shown on Windows. Even when you allow for that Linux is slower, but it is closer.
Logged

SkyStation

  • Guest
Re: 32 vs 64bit
« Reply #7 on: August 08, 2009, 06:53:24 PM »

Ok, have done a bit of reading about AQUA and is a project will give some time to, but not quite yet, getting 64bit centos onto the blade is easy, Windows (raid drivers) and some other Linux's for example, debian are a bit of a hassle due to network driver issues (drivers for debian are readily available but in the 'non-free' tree and not part of the initial pxe boot), I am in BNE while blade unit is in Syd, installing from virtual media at work is fine but unrealistic from home.

Primary goal in getting back into Boinc has been to get servers that would be wasted stress testing to do meaningful work instead while still fulfilling business goal of being stress tested. With that desire that the science is also beneficial but not going to a single commercial company (i.e. don't want our cpu cycles, power and cooling costs being donated directly to another company using it for their personal commercial gain). WCG fits this very well, aiming for all acheivable gold before starting any more projects.

Having said that shouldn't take long to get all the available gold badges :), expecting to get either Bronze, possibly Silver CEP, but unlikely due to receiving a bunch of beta wu's, at next update (as have been perferring those work units, but not always available) and have 2 projects very close to gold.

Will start with re-installing a blade with 64bit centos and seeing if makes any difference to WCG, after that may add Aqua at 50%, will let you know how it goes, as all systems are excatly the same (dual E5405, 16gb ram) apart from HDD's which don't matter should be a good comparison.
Logged

SkyStation

  • Guest
Re: 32 vs 64bit
« Reply #8 on: August 09, 2009, 05:22:43 AM »

Difference looks substantial, host went from reporting around 80 credits/h to 125 credits/h, but of course I went and did something stupid like attach host to aqua  :pcwhack: which will make verifing this improvment impossible till I convert another host or two later today.
Logged

SkyStation

  • Guest
Re: 32 vs 64bit
« Reply #9 on: August 09, 2009, 05:25:07 AM »

Oh, and by the way, according to WCG's website our team moved from 50th to 49th at last update  :dance:
Logged

Furlozza

  • Guest
Re: 32 vs 64bit
« Reply #10 on: August 09, 2009, 11:30:28 AM »

TheGnat seems to be standing still with the current AQUA wu sitting at 57% after 17hrs and 27 minutes. I know that it is expected to be slower on 2 cores as opposed to 4 or 8, but this had better be one of the big payers, cause if it ain't..... :hbang:

Logged

kashi

  • Forum Moderator
  • Board Lord
  • *****
  • Aussie Karma: +698/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2934
Re: 32 vs 64bit
« Reply #11 on: August 09, 2009, 01:11:23 PM »

Yes the recent 160 qubit tasks take 50% longer than the 128 qubit ones on my computer.  I have only completed one and was given 12,333 credit so unless the credit is reduced in the future, even though it may take you 30 hours on your dual core the Cr/Hr/Core will still be generous, slightly better than my 8 core in fact. :)

« Last Edit: August 09, 2009, 01:13:49 PM by kashi »
Logged

Dataman

  • Forum Moderator
  • Board Lord
  • *****
  • Aussie Karma: +2046/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3587
  • Madness Takes Its Toll - Have Exact Change Ready
Re: 32 vs 64bit
« Reply #12 on: August 09, 2009, 01:39:54 PM »

All of my machines, save one, are 64-bit. It is still hard to benchmark AQUA as every new batch has a changed science app with a "reviised" credit structure. A combination of AQUA MT CPU and GPUGrid GPU  are giving me the most credits/pound of electricity  :rofl: (even a couple of personal bests).  :wiggle:

Logged

Furlozza

  • Guest
Re: 32 vs 64bit
« Reply #13 on: August 10, 2009, 10:43:41 AM »

Well, TheGnat just finished his AQUA wu..... 31+ hrs run time per boinc manager and a credit of 12754.

Simple maths. 31*2=62. 12754/62=205 crs/hr

Nothing to sneeze at, better than TheGnat gets with MW or SETI so is going to be worth the occasional dip in the sea.
Logged

SkyStation

  • Guest
Re: 32 vs 64bit
« Reply #14 on: August 11, 2009, 08:02:06 PM »

Well, processed first Aqua WU the other day, took the system approx 11hrs, was (rouding to nearest credit) 11,489 credits, so 1044 credits/hr over 8 cores or 130 credits/hr/core, so theoretically I should be able to achive ~150,000 credits/day if devoted current systems to it :), definately much higher than WCG, have given 10% to Aqua and will stop all processing on WCG projects once get gold badge in the project.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.062 seconds with 20 queries.