stephenbrooks.orgForumMuon1GeneralPermanently Selecting project type
Username: Password:
Search site:
Subscribe to thread via RSS
hades
2004-05-31 20:17:33
I would like my barton 3200+ to work on Phase Rot B and my P3 to work on chicane ... I have done this by removing the appropiate entries from the lattice file and the appropiate lattices from the /lattice folder; though they keep coing back when I send my results.  Is there any way to permanently set this?  I dont want to do solenoids to 15cm anymore.
Herb[Romulus2]
2004-05-31 21:32:54
Deleting the lattice file is enough, but change this line in the config file:

Update lattice files from web every N hours (0=don't): 0
excaliber[Free-DC.org]
2004-06-01 13:16:39
Just wondering, but is there a benefit to working on only one?  If there is, I might do that with my machines
AySz88
2004-06-01 14:37:33
Don't forget to manually send your results before deleting the lattice file - if it finds a result from a non-existant lattice it might give a [FATAL] error.  (At least, it did last time I tried it - Stephen said something about changing that)
Rocko
2004-06-01 21:42:21
quote:
Originally posted by excaliber[Free-DC.org]:
Just wondering, but is there a benefit to working on only one?  If there is, I might do that with my machines


The benefit is the program does only simulations for whichever type you choose (Chicane, PhaseRot, Solenoids)
I prefer to just to PhaseRotB on my Barton 3200, nothing more.I dedicate all my processor to just doing PhaseRotB, not randomly selecting between all 3 types.  More results are produced for one project type, which ultimately results in reaching higher yields faster.
Stephen Brooks
2004-06-02 01:24:46
(off-topic) I saw a review last night where a heavily-overclocked Barton-M (a 2500+ @ 2.5GHz) beat both the FX-53 and A64 3800+ in terms of raw FPU performace.  Since this is what I think Muon performance is most related to, you could have an extremely useful chip there.
DGROMS.com
2004-06-02 14:19:20
Back on topic, the easiest way to run a single project is to specify the project in the command line parameters not hack the rest of the files.  Just run "muon1 -c PhastRotB" and that is the only project that it will run.  I do this on a few of my machines
kitsura
2004-06-02 23:37:20
quote:
Originally posted by Stephen Brooks:
(off-topic) I saw a review last night where a heavily-overclocked Barton-M (a 2500+ @ 2.5GHz) beat both the FX-53 and A64 3800+ in terms of raw FPU performace.  Since this is what I think Muon performance is most related to, you could have an extremely useful chip there. 

Hmmm that's interesting, but unfortunately all my clients run on Intel CPUs and I would say no one in their right mind would consider buying a Barton CPU for a performance system.  Anyway the strengths of the FX-53 and A64 are their 64-bit capability not really their 32-bit performance.
Stephen Brooks
2004-06-03 03:05:08
quote:
Anyway the strengths of the FX-53 and A64 are their 64-bit capability not really their 32-bit performance. 
Take a look. All of the apps in that benchmark were 32-bit, so far as I know.  And you see that processor called "Prescott" that's always last or second-last?  Razz Also note that there are two Barton 2500+s in those graphs - the one down near the Prescott 3.2 is the non-overclocked one.
Fortunately Muon1 supports hyperthreading, so I think the Intel chips can win back some of their current deficit with that (in fact the Xeons in this machine get at least a 20% boost from it).

(off-topic#2) Iwill are cretins, but Muon1 might run well on an 8-way box too.
[TA]z
2004-06-03 06:30:24
quote:
Originally posted by kitsura:
quote:
Originally posted by Stephen Brooks:
(off-topic) I saw a review last night where a heavily-overclocked Barton-M (a 2500+ @ 2.5GHz) beat both the FX-53 and A64 3800+ in terms of raw FPU performace.  Since this is what I think Muon performance is most related to, you could have an extremely useful chip there. 

Hmmm that's interesting, but unfortunately all my clients run on Intel CPUs and I would say no one in their right mind would consider buying a Barton CPU for a performance system.  Anyway the strengths of the FX-53 and A64 are their 64-bit capability not really their 32-bit performance. 


My main performance system at home is a 2500+ Barton @ 2.1GHz

Running two HT 3.06GHz P4s at work and I still enjoy using my home system more Smile
kitsura
2004-06-03 07:47:41
quote:
Originally posted by Stephen Brooks:
quote:
Anyway the strengths of the FX-53 and A64 are their 64-bit capability not really their 32-bit performance. 
Take a look. All of the apps in that benchmark were 32-bit, so far as I know.  And you see that processor called "Prescott" that's always last or second-last?  Razz Also note that there are two Barton 2500+s in those graphs - the one down near the Prescott 3.2 is the non-overclocked one.
Fortunately Muon1 supports hyperthreading, so I think the Intel chips can win back some of their current deficit with that (in fact the Xeons in this machine get at least a 20% boost from it).

(off-topic#2) Iwill are cretins, but Muon1 might run well on an 8-way box too. 

Yes I know that AMD CPUs have always been better than Intel CPUs in terms of FPU performance but that's comparing apples with oranges.  If you're comparing an overclocked Athlon XP with dual channel and high bandwidth memory with a single channel A64 or the lower memory bandwith with FX-53 then the AXP will surely win.  That may change in the future with the introduction of A64 with support for dual channel, non-registered memory.
Pollock[Romulus2]
2004-06-03 08:03:03
All of you can debate CPU's forever.  Those shiny new super chips have been eating the dust from my old XP 2000+ in the stats.  Big Grin
Quality over quantity!  Razz
: contact : - - -
E-mail: sbstrudel characterstephenbrooks.orgTwitter: stephenjbrooksMastodon: strudel charactersjbstrudel charactermstdn.io

Site has had 17088934 accesses.