|
Jeff,
Your comment that the LINUX client doesn't seem to
slow down with WU's that have angle ranges in the 0.0 to 0.15 range is
interesting. Do you have any specific examples showing this?
Al
PS: As an aside I also suspect that the P4 is
faster with the high angle range WU's than the ATHLON Tunderbird (at similar
clock speeds).
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2001 6:24
AM
Subject: Re: Seti on Win2k?
If you are running win 2k pro, or win 98 i do not think you
will notice much difference. I am running Win 2k Adv. server on one machine
and at one time it was running Win 95 and it was faster on Win 95, but it is
now configured as a domain controller, is running DNS and a small web server
and FTP so it now has more overhead. in any case if you use the cmd line
version on what ever OS you run it will be somewhat faster than the screen
saver one. If you only have one computer the windows client is somewhat faster
than the linux client, but the linux client does not seem to slow down when it
encounters one with a lower than average angle range i.e. between 0 and .15 if
you do run the K6 series i have found through trial and error that it is
somewhat faster at processing seti if you have less ram try 64 or 128. I ran
enough benchmarks of seti on my old k6 series to find out it was measurably
faster with only 64 than 128 or especially 256, now the AMD T-Bird i run does
not seem to have that problem, or the Duron, or the PII and PIII processors,
but something in how the K6 series handled memory was not good...
Hope
that is helpful..
Broc Olson wrote:
whats better to run Seti on? Win 2k or
Win 98 se? I have an AMD
k6/2-500 and 256 megs of ram I can run it on either O/S, so Im just trying to get
suggestions Any info is
greatly appreciated Broc
Olson < Byark!>
|
