hwbot multipi - multithreaded superpi (open beta)

[RichBa5tard]

Hi guys,

I wrote a superpi app that calculates pi, but unlike superpi it dedects how many processor cores you have, and spreads the calculation over those available.

It works pretty well, but I need some feedback and comments on the length of calculation and stuff. It takes pretty long on a midrange processor (about 3 minutes on a 2ghz A64), but as it takes use of multiple cores, calculation on a decent dual core proc is about half. I think a 5ghz conroe may hit 30 seconds.

Some testruns i did:
Intel Pentium M 715 (1.5Ghz): 3m 18.815s
T2500 (mac osx), 2 cores: 1m 47.127s
T2500 (mac osx), 1 core: 3m 08.163s

I know some guys are going to nag because it's written in java, and you need a java vm installed, but as mac/linux user i'm tired of seeing windows-only benchmarks. This is one we can all enjoy.

If interested, you can betatest multipi v0.1. It runs on linux, mac, win32 and win64, but requires java 5 (1.5) to be installed. Just unzip and run multipi.bat or multipi.sh.

Comments and thoughts can be posted here:
http://www.hwbot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?id=196

Download:
http://www.hwbot.org/download/multipi-0.2.zip

[\Karting_freak]

heh
happily my kentsfield arrived in time

[RichBa5tard]

I'd love to see how a kentsfield would perform. Post yer results please.

[\Karting_freak]

i'll post 4sure.
need to get some hw first

[RichBa5tard]

Some interesting benches at OC Forums:
http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=472068

Core Duo T2500 1 core: 3m08s
A64 2.2Ghz: 3min
Core Duo T2500 2 cores: 1m45s
Woodcrest 3Ghz 4 cores: 32s

[Kunaak]

51 seconds here.
nothing fancy here.
DFI 975X.
1 gig of corsair 5400UL cas 4-3-3-10, 670 mhz.
E6400 at 3.6 ghz.

[Kunaak]

seems really reliable.
I only get a .05 second variation in time, when run over and over.

how about a really long version to play with?

like one that take 45 minutes or so?
32M is alittle too easy these days, since it's time has been cut in half with the introduction of these conroes and such.

[RichBa5tard]

Hmmm, what do you think, more iterations by default? A quad core can do it 30 seconds without too much tweaking, maybe that's too easy.

An average A64 need 3 minutes though. If I make it much harder it will take a long time on slower systems... and a part of the success of superpi is the time it takes to get your result.



- edit -
45 minutes on what? A single core, dual core or quad core?

[Kunaak]

well, how about alittle interactive menu then?

hit 1 for default.
hit 2 for long test.

then A64's have thier standard run, and Conroes have something alittle more challenging to play with.

[RichBa5tard]

I will certainly add that option. The finished version will offer a simple gui, like superpi has. This is just a beta to test the algorithm.

[Kunaak]

I look forward to trying it

[[cTx]Philosophy]

SWEETTT!!! this is what ive always wanted to be compiled, this will give a far better show of power for dualies and quads..
And it begins..
Thnx, downloading it in a sec.....
I got backdoor trojan virus warning when I opened it, is this normal?

Opty 165 @ 2.9
2X1024 PDP @ 243 2.5-3-2-5 1T

[k0nsl]

Pi calculated in: 03m 07.953s

Pentium D 805 @ 3.7GHz

:/

-k0nsl

[Avman]

57 seconds - A64 X2 3800+ at 3.0Ghz

[m0da]

02m 40.703s
specs in sig, ie/aim/services running in bg

[dinos22]

it's pretty short in length..........try and make it at least 10x longer i reckon

[dinos22]

Allendale @ 3.33GHz i run 24/7

[alpha0ne]

Nice proggy, many thanks RichBa5tard

[m0da]

57 seconds - A64 X2 3800+ at 3.0Ghz

beat an e6600 @same clock by 4s!! how!!?

[dinos22]

yeah there's something wrong there

[RichBa5tard]

Pi calculated in: 03m 07.953s

Pentium D 805 @ 3.7GHz

:/

-k0nsl

3m08s should be on the spot if it where only using 1 processor, but a 805 has 2 so your time should be ~ 1m40s. Can you verify it used both cores? At the beginning of the calculation, it should say 'dedected 2 processor cores' and 'started calculation core 1' and 'started calculation core2'.

[nn_step]

Thank you dear sir. Though I wish could look at the source to perhaps make a C version. So that it can run on the most stripped down OS

[RichBa5tard]

SWEETTT!!! this is what ive always wanted to be compiled, this will give a far better show of power for dualies and quads..
And it begins..
Thnx, downloading it in a sec.....
I got backdoor trojan virus warning when I opened it, is this normal?

Not normal no. I think it's your virusscanner which is set to warn you when running bat files.

If your java vm is properly installed, you can also just double-click the jar file.

[RichBa5tard]

Thank you dear sir. Though I wish could look at the source to perhaps make a C version. So that it can run on the most stripped down OS

Not being able to run on the most stripdown os is a drawback, i agree. But, i find the ability to run it too on a mac / linux / freebsd far more important, so i'm going to keep the program in java.

[RichBa5tard]

Some early conclusions:
- current amount of iterations seems ok, maybe it needs to be a bit more.
- dual / quad core is almost 2/4 times as fast as single core... maybe tax the memory a bit more so it doesn't get a cpu-only test?
- memory gets barely taxed, heavier use on memory would make it a 'better' test (for dedecting memory faults), lower the advantage of dual/quad core a bit, and make it a more 'real life' test.
- finding the sweet spot between 'not too short on a oc'ed quad core' and 'not too boring on a midrange single core' is frigging hard. : )
- p4 dual core seems to perform equal to single core? need verification of this
- x2 equal as fast as conroe at same speed? need verification