Please help me optimise things

This forum is for discussions about the Motherboards.org Folding team. What is folding? Venture on in for a look.

Moderator: The Mod Squad

Postby Pette Broad » Wed Feb 27, 2008 11:31 am

I know next to nothing about Intel HT CPU's and I also had trouble with getting 100% CPU usage on a 3.4ghz unit. I think that if you have HT turned on in the Bios then you will only get 100% if you run 2 instances, 50% per instance. I turned off HT in the Bios and the usage went up to 100%.

I also have an Intel 3.06 and running 2 instances with HT turned on it gets about 150ppd.

Pete
Image
Pette Broad
Black Belt 5th Degree
Black Belt 5th Degree
 
Posts: 5490
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 12:01 am
Location: Flintshire, U.K

Postby Daft Ada » Wed Feb 27, 2008 1:26 pm

Pette Broad wrote:I also had trouble with getting 100% CPU usage on a 3.4ghz unit. I think that if you have HT turned on in the Bios then you will only get 100% if you run 2 instances, 50% per instance. I turned off HT in the Bios and the usage went up to 100%.

I also have an Intel 3.06 and running 2 instances with HT turned on it gets about 150ppd.

Pete


I think this is my issue also. I can't turn HT off because other things rely on it but I do agree with your analysis. Do you believe a slower return using 2 instances is better than using 1 instance? If you think I would gain more in the long term even though I know each WU would be slightly slower, then I will install a second instance :D
Daft Ada
Black Belt 1st Degree
Black Belt 1st Degree
 
Posts: 1358
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 11:03 am

Postby Pette Broad » Wed Feb 27, 2008 2:39 pm

Yes, you should give it a try and see what happens. My guess is that whatever you are running is hogging one of the virtual cores and that core is also the one that folding is using, leaving the other virtual core unused.

Pete
Image
Pette Broad
Black Belt 5th Degree
Black Belt 5th Degree
 
Posts: 5490
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 12:01 am
Location: Flintshire, U.K

Postby Karlsweldt » Thu Feb 28, 2008 8:20 am

The OS is the main controlling factor in how a processor's core(s) become employed. Normally, any program would benefit from a distributed work load, being processed faster than if only one core were in use. The OS (and the programming) work together to divide the work load, then recombine the output as it would normally result when only a single core were in use.
Your setup would be most proficient if the advanced SSE factors are available.

I note no real differences in process time, from running only a single WU versus two WUs. It may be only about 5% difference. I always finish every WU within 50~75% of the alloted minimal times.
As long as the operating links establish different folders and processes, there will be no interaction of the similar processes.
Unique locations and names of each process are important. I named one folder, in 'Program Files' on the "C" drive, as [Folding@Home1]. For the other process, it is on the "D" partition, in 'Programs', listed as [Folding@Home2].
Both are non-service launch setups. I manually start/stop the processes via a desktop link. The EMiii monitor process is started from the 'start' menu tab.
Start the processes first, then a few seconds later launch the monitor. Shut down the monitor program first, the a few seconds later each WU process. Should not be any problem with file corruption.
Would definitely like to get my second system back in the "folding" rote, but for the cost of about $15.00 monthly for the power, it is currently not feasible. I run the one system about 16 hours daily. It draws about 185 watts @120 volts. My utility cost per KWH is around 16 cents per. Far cry from only a few years back, when it was around ten cents per!! Thanks, you oil barons!
F@H.. to solve mankind's maladies.. in our lifetimes!
Karlsweldt
Mobo-fu Master
Mobo-fu Master
 
Posts: 20661
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 11:57 am
Location: 07438

Previous

Return to Motherboards.org Folding Team

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron