RE: Mersenne: christmas computer system?
You definitely want the video card with it's own memory. If you feel like doing some reading go to http://www.tomshardware.com Lots of info on the newest (and not so new) hardware there. Matt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Russel Brooks Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2002 8:55 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Mersenne: christmas computer system? Any comments or suggestions? I think I should also request the video card has all of it's own memory, right? I don't want the video to share the main memory for performance reasons, right? Cheers... Russ _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
RE: Mersenne: Synchronization ??
Must have. Mine only has 5. What I don't understand, is why the last 2 syncs have left an exponent that was done in May of last year. Matt > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Russel > Brooks > Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 9:01 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Mersenne: Synchronization ?? > > > Did we just have a Synchronization? > My exponents cleared list is now only 1 exponent long. > > Cheers... Russ > > __ > ___ > Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm > Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers > _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: Restarting several LL.DC checks
I have a question for the group. What would be the best way to restart 6 assignments I was working on. I just rebuilt all 6 of these PC's and had everything including the Prime files saved on a separate HD on a Server. That HD failed before I got the information off of it. It is unrecoverable. Lost over 3 GB's of data. :( Should I just install Prime again, set it up with the same name (on each PC) etc. and add the proper exponent to the worktodo file, or is there a better way to do this. I don't want to get the server confused over what I am doing. Thanks Matt _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.ndatech.com/mersenne/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: Prime Net Server
Is there scheduled maint. going on with the server today, or is this a unscheduled outage? Matt
RE: Mersenne: Re: Prime web site
Thanks for the feedback guys. Have a good weekend!! Matt > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of John R > Pierce > Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 7:02 PM > To: Mersenne discussion list > Subject: Re: Mersenne: Re: Prime web site > > > > > > Both WWW and FTP down from here. :-( > > > > there's a nasty new worm spreading like wildfire on unpatched > Microsoft IIS > web servers, and its primed to packet flood whitehouse.gov at > 5pm PST today > (midnight UTC friday) This could well have big chunks > of the net all > screwed up... _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: Prime web site
Anyone else having trouble hitting the web server?? _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
RE: Mersenne: ERROR 7: Server has run out of exponents to assign
I just sent in the results for an exponent and got the same error. According to the PrimeNet status page http://mersenne.org/primenet/ there are several thousand exponents available for factoring between 1340 and 1700. The server just isn't handing them out for some reason. Matt > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Kel > Utendorf > Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 3:43 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Mersenne: ERROR 7: Server has run out of exponents to assign > > > Hi All, > > Anyone else seeing this error? I'm trying to get exponents > to factor but > the server reports that there are none available...is that > right? Am I > seeing a server glitch? > > Thanks, > Kel > > > __ > ___ > Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm > Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers > _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
RE: Mersenne: Prime95 - V21.1.1 aka v21a
> Some Athlons are seeing a speed increase others are not. The two > that I know are not enjoying a speed increase are running under Win2K. > Maybe there is a bug in the way v21.1 determines if prefetch > is supported. > > For those Athlon owners that are not seeing a speed boost, try setting > CpuSupportsPrefetch=1 > in local.ini. This sure worked for me. Athlon 850MHz Testing M12328xxx Iteration Times V.20V.21V.21 with CpuSupportsPrefetch=1 added to local.ini 0.174 0.174 0.141 Athlon 1200MHz Testing M12899xxx Iteration Times V.20V.21V.21 with CpuSupportsPrefetch=1 added to local.ini 0.151 0.151 0.123 Both computers running Windows 2000 Server. Note that stopping Prime95 (leaving Prime in systray) then editing local.ini, then starting Prime wasn't good enough. I had to actually close the program, then restart Prime95. Matt _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
RE: Mersenne: Prime95 - V21.1.1 aka v21a
H, I am not getting any performance increase on my 2 Athlon's here, and I am 99% sure they are Thunderbirds. I just tried this new executable on 7 machines. Here are the numbers. PentiumIII 450MHz Testing M12441xxx Iteration Times V.20V.21 0.330 0.255 PentiumII 233MHz Double Checking M6144xxx Iteration Times V.20V.21 0.298 0.292 PentiumII 350MHz Testing M12316xxx Iteration Times V.20V.21 0.416 0.423 Athlon 850MHz Testing M12328xxx Iteration Times V.20V.21 0.174 0.174 Athlon 1200MHz Testing M12899xxx Iteration Times V.20V.21 0.151 0.151 According to Windows 2000 these 2 Athlon's are "Family 6, Model 4, Stepping 2" Pentium 166MHz Double Checking M6333xxx Iteration Times V.20V.21 0.601 0.607 Pentium 133MHz Double Checking M6333xxx Iteration Times V.20V.21 0.697 0.692 What I find interesting, is that I got an increase, albiet a very minor one, instead of a decrease in performance on the PentiumII 233 and the P133, yet my PentiumII 350 and P166 did decrease in performance, like everyone else is reporting. I wonder if the operating system has anything to do with this. The PII 233 and the P133 are running Windows 2000 Professional and the PII 350 and the P166 are running Windows 98 and 95 respectively. Matt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Bell Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 5:06 AM To: Mersenne List Subject: Re: Mersenne: Prime95 - V21.1.1 aka v21a > Note also that the Athlon *did* have a performance increase > on par with the Celeron 2 and P3 machines > > Eric Is it possible that the Athlon that didn't see the increase was an original Athlon (rather than a T'bird) and so didn't have the prefetch instructions? Michael. _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
RE: Mersenne: Slow CPU's in a Proliant 2500
I just wanted to thank everyone for all the great responses I got. I have decided to just leave it alone. Perhaps at a later time I will look into putting a Celeron in here as Aaron Blosser suggested. Again, thanks to everyone! You were all very helpful. Matt _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
RE: Mersenne: Slow CPU's in a Proliant 2500
Thanks for the response Ethan, it was quite helpful. Yes I did set the type and speed in Prime 95. I wish it was something obvious like that! The indexing service was set to manual and is now disabled. No change in times. I wasn't aware that running 2 instances on a dual machine would run 30% to 40% slower than a single instance (if I understand you correctly?) It looks like I may just have to live with it. I am loathe to change those chips when I am not sure it will help. Also, I'm not even sure I will be able to find them, even if I was inclined to change them. I will try your suggestion of running a double check on 1 CPU and LL test on the other, when these double checks are done. Thanks again, Matt -Original Message- From: Ethan Hansen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2001 8:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Mersenne: Slow CPU's in a Proliant 2500 Matt, Sorry for raising the obvious, but have you changed both the CPU type and speed values under the Prime95 Options->CPU menu? Another item to check are that you have disabled the blasted indexing service. It could explain the slight CPU time leakage you are seeing. That said, the ratio I typically see between Prime95 iteration times on a dual processor system with two instances vs. only one running is in the 1.3-1.4x range; i.e. the difference between your times of 0.448 and 0.325. I have seen a slight degradation of iteration time/MHz when upgrading from 500 to 1GHz processors, but not as much as you report. A way to boost overall throughput is to run double checking (with it's smaller memory footprint) on one CPU, and primality tests on the other. Regards, Ethan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Matt Goodrich Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2001 5:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Mersenne: Slow CPU's in a Proliant 2500 I have just upgraded a Proliant 2500 from dual PPro 200's to dual Pentium II 333 overdrive processors. According to Intel's website this is supported. Also Compaq offers this upgrade. Now before I upgraded, I was running double check's on 2 exponents, 668. I was getting about .515 second iteration times. Now that I have upgraded, I am only getting .448 second iteration times. Yes, the affinity is set properly. [SNIP] Interesting note here. If I run just 1 copy of Prime on either CPU I get .325 second iteration times. It doesn't matter which copy of the program or which CPU I run it on. It is only when I run both copies that it slows down to .448 seconds. BTW I am running Windows 2000 Server with the latest SSD from Compaq. [SNIP] Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated. Matt _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: Slow CPU's in a Proliant 2500
I have just upgraded a Proliant 2500 from dual PPro 200's to dual Pentium II 333 overdrive processors. According to Intel's website this is supported. Also Compaq offers this upgrade. Now before I upgraded, I was running double check's on 2 exponents, 668. I was getting about .515 second iteration times. Now that I have upgraded, I am only getting .448 second iteration times. Yes, the affinity is set properly. I have set the switches on the I/O board for 66/333 speed. I believe my problem stems from having the wrong ROM chips. The server, when booting, says the BIOS is version E24 which is associated with the PPro 200 processors. I went to Compaq's web site and found that the E50 version is for PII 333's. Downloaded the ROMPaq but it will not flash. It says there isn't a valid ROM Image on the floppy disk for the installed device. After searching Compaq's web site (with their lousy search engine I might add) I found an article that say's I probably need to replace the physical ROM chips. Now for my question. Has anyone here done this with this server (upgraded processors and had to change the ROM chips)?? I want to know if this will fix the problem, or is there something else going on? Interesting note here. If I run just 1 copy of Prime on either CPU I get .325 second iteration times. It doesn't matter which copy of the program or which CPU I run it on. It is only when I run both copies that it slows down to .448 seconds. BTW I am running Windows 2000 Server with the latest SSD from Compaq. This is what I have done to the server to try and resolve this: 1.) Ran Smart Start and used the system erase utility, then reconfigured the server, drive array etc. 2.) Reloaded Windows 2000 Server. 3.) Reinstalled Prime (both instances) and then brought my saved work back in. 4.) Flashed the BIOS to the newest version for the E24. I was hoping this might change something and let me flash with the ROMPaq I need, but it didn't work out that way. 5.) I also have stopped all unneeded services running in the background, such as IIS, Compaq agents, etc. Do you think Windows 2000 could just be stealing this many cpu cycles for itself? This box is not in a production environment. It is in my home. It isn't running Active Directory either. When I run just 1 copy though, task manager does show 3 to 7% activity on the idle processor. Hmm, maybe I should try NT Server 4.0 and see what happens. Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated. Matt _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
RE: Mersenne: Primenet?
No it's not just you. All mine since the April 12 have disappeared as well. Have lost 4 exponents and about 1.3 CPU years. Matt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Shane & Amy Sanford Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 2:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Mersenne: Primenet? Is it just me or did the Primenet database just get restored back to a April 12th version? I noticed my stats dropped back and it claims all my machines havn't checked in since April 12th (I know better).Also the exponents I've finished since that time are showing up in the Exponents Assigned column rather than the cleared section. Shane _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
Mersenne: Slowdown in iteration speed
I just finished a Lucas Lehmer test on exponent 9822067. My PII 350 was doing a iteration every .320 seconds. The next exponent it started was 103500203. It is now taking .421 seconds per iteration. I have a feeling this is due to the fact it is using a different FFT. Is my assumption correct or do I have a problem here. Would appreciate any information on this. As you can tell I know nothing about the math involved here. I got started on this because I downloaded prime 95 on the recommendation of a friend. He said it was a good way to stress test hardware. He was right about that! After seeing the web site and what George was trying to accomplish I decided to let my computers run it 24/7. They were on all the time anyways. I figured they might as well be doing something productive. Matt _ Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
