2 or 4 gb for Wcg with quad

[-Acid-]

hi peeps

just wondered if anyone had done any testing to see if boinc like 4 gb on a quad over 2gb

just changed mem to Ocz Flex XLC (2x 1gb) and wondered if i should , would it be worth it to get another set ?

xp 32bit only has 3.2 gb max, so i'd have to change to xp 64bit too
any major differences there too

All views welcome

[Movieman]

2 gig is more than enough..

[littleowl]

test show that 64bit win. does much better then any x86 so far. I am not sure on the ram but I don't see where having 4gb would hurt.

[WesM63]

I agree with Dave, 2gb is more than enough.

[ChaosMinionX]

Yeah, I never see anything close to 2GB usage from what I can tell.. I have 4GBs but BOINC/WCG doesnt even use up 2GB.

[fallwind]

I run my dedicated quad crunchers with 1GB! If you look in the task manager, you can get a good idea of what each task is using, both in real-time and peak (if you have the appropriate columns displayed.) FAAH uses about 105MB/task average and peaks at under 120MB. So 120MBx4=480MB. Other types of work units have similar mem usage. So yeah, 2GB is enough. The only time I have to shut down BOINC is to play Crysis.

[-Acid-]

so 64bit is a 1500 boost and 4 gig is a waste

okies guys suppose the other 2 gig could go to another quad

[[XC] serlv]

okies guys suppose the other 2 gig could go to another quad

Well, if it must...

[Movieman]

I run my dedicated quad crunchers with 1GB! If you look in the task manager, you can get a good idea of what each task is using, both in real-time and peak (if you have the appropriate columns displayed.) FAAH uses about 105MB/task average and peaks at under 120MB. So 120MBx4=480MB. Other types of work units have similar mem usage. So yeah, 2GB is enough. The only time I have to shut down BOINC is to play Crysis.

Blasphemy!
How's that little beastie doing ?

[Sparky]

1GB is enough.... I'd take that 4GB in 4x 1GB sticks and turn them each into a cruncher if I had the money that is

[fallwind]

Blasphemy!
How's that little beastie doing ?

Still crunchin at 4.2GHz, no problem. Looks like 19k/day with XP so x64 should be good for ~21k when I finally get around to reformatting.

Crysis is barely playable on high settings on my system, 25-35FPS. With BOINC running it stutters and freezes. With older games it's not a problem.

[Movieman]

Still crunchin at 4.2GHz, no problem. Looks like 19k/day with XP so x64 should be good for ~21k when I finally get around to reformatting.

Crysis is barely playable on high settings on my system, 25-35FPS. With BOINC running it stutters and freezes. With older games it's not a problem.

Looks like this thing at 4200 will just about equal the clovers at 3000..
Thats 16,800mhz=24,000mhz....amazing!

[-Acid-]

Still crunchin at 4.2GHz, no problem. Looks like 19k/day with XP so x64 should be good for ~21k when I finally get around to reformatting.

Crysis is barely playable on high settings on my system, 25-35FPS. With BOINC running it stutters and freezes. With older games it's not a problem.

wonder what the difference between your rig and mins is at 4.2 clock for clock

edit been reading up on your results and you do a faah 2hours 31 mins while i take 2hours 41 mins

[fallwind]

Clock for clock the Yorkfields are only very slightly faster than Kentsfields when it comes to crunching. I don't think we will see any significant changes to that until (maybe) Nehalem. With WCG it's all about clock speed and ops/clock. FSB, RAM speed, timings, special instruction sets etc are virtually meaningless.

[-Acid-]

noticed i done that wu at 4ghz too and not 4.2

i,m a higher fsb due to lower multi 9 to your 10

[fallwind]

edit been reading up on your results and you do a faah 2hours 31 mins while i take 2hours 41 mins

noticed i done that wu at 4ghz too and not 4.2

i,m a higher fsb due to lower multi 9 to your 10

What website are you reading this information from? I didn't know there was a way to tell who the other members of a quorum are.

[-Acid-]

you post up a screen grab on another post and i used that info

[fallwind]

OK, I see now. Well, 4.2GHz is 5% faster than 4GHz and 2h31m is about 6% faster than 2h41m so it makes sense.