PPD Predictor Thread (prelim)

[sRHunt3r]

Nah I use all of them intermittently for gaming/ media server/ encoding.

I run HCC, HFCC and HCMD.

[radaja]

could someone please tell me how to change the name of the device
or give it a custom name?like what i circled in red in the pic below.

[sRHunt3r]

The names listed are the computer names as you have assigned them via the os, I am unsure if there is a way to change the way WCG displays them but you could just rename the pc

[radaja]

ok thats what i thought but,was just curious when i saw these cool names.
i guess i have to be more creative when i do my installs.but also mine always
has the name of my computer and the PC,like this bigtop-PC.and thats what
im trying to get rid of,the PC part

[ACEkombatkiwi]

ok thats what i thought but,was just curious when i saw these cool names.
i guess i have to be more creative when i do my installs.but also mine always
has the name of my computer and the PC,like this bigtop-PC.and thats what
im trying to get rid of,the PC part

If you are using Windows 7
*go to control panel system
*on the right click on change settings
*once that opens click on change
*then type whatever you want the computer name to be
*click ok and restart you PC

[radaja]

ACEkombatkiwi,thanks now i can change the i7-920 rig.

[onex]

mind the question, though, why not simply taking few days in a row from the points statistics, to see how the PPD goes,
the PPD per MHz is a nice gimmick, though it would be interesting to see how many point each system does usually..

it seems some were posting BOINC points and some were posting WCG points,
it is quite misleading.

[Vapor]

What's so gimmicky about PPD/MHz?

Take any of the numbers in my chart, multiply by system MHz, and it's a good estimate of what to expect from that machine for PPD.

Tracking PPD of systems and having a database of it is something we (almost) all want to do, but considering all the different settings we all run (hardware level and software level), the easiest way to distill the PPD numbers into usable information is to take systems with similar software settings (i.e., dedicated and OS/BOINC intalls) and divide by MHz so anyone can 'reconstitute' it into usable numbers for their own system

And it looks to me like everyone in this thread has been posting WCG points...and I know for certain that no BOINC points were used in my calculation for my chart.

[D_A]

could someone please tell me how to change the name of the device
or give it a custom name?like what i circled in red in the pic below.

The names listed are the computer names as you have assigned them via the os, I am unsure if there is a way to change the way WCG displays them but you could just rename the pc

Yes, they're just the names I gave each of the PCs. It's nothing to do with WCG, that's what they're called in the operating system.

[onex]

What's so gimmicky about PPD/MHz?

as an idea, a nice idea, (maybe better said?).

Dual X5450 (8 Threads) @ 3,6Ghz; WinXP x64; 3:273:00:01:42 6,422,064 9,326

hrm,
so what is that?
even at BOINC points it's unreasonable that these processors do so much,
at WCG points, it is extremely low...

**o.k,
so this is the results returned**,
newcomers would have a great deal of confusion, trying to understand it ..
and:

For example, this is my HTPC's data blurb from the Device Statistics page:
0:043:07:56:30 226,691

It's an i5 750 at 3500MHz running Win7 x64 and BOINC 6.10.43.

With this info, I can see I'm doing 20926 PPD at 3500MHz. That works out to 6PPD per MHz.

maybe i'm confusing something here, yet it seems quite hard to understand ...
how did you get 20926 a day, from this number?
0:043:07:56:30 226,691?

Take any of the numbers in my chart, multiply by system MHz, and it's a good estimate of what to expect from that machine for PPD.

yeah,
the issue, is Westmere, can be a lot of processors.., different cache, and gainstown too, and any other family..,
you see..?

[D_A]

maybe i'm confusing something here, yet it seems quite hard to understand ...
how did you get 20926 a day, from this number?
0:043:07:56:30 226,691?

Ok, that number translates to:
0 years, 43 days, 7 hours, 56 minutes and 30 seconds
and
226,691 points

[onex]

Ok, that number translates to:
0 years, 43 days, 7 hours, 56 minutes and 30 seconds
and
226,691 points

yeah, of course, this is understandable,
yet, where does the 20926 number (PPD) is coming from?
if you divide 226,691 by (even) 11 days, it still comes out 20608...

E:
huh ,

got a new title

[pfm3136]

yeah, of course, this is understandable,
yet, where does the 20926 number (PPD) is coming from?
if you divide 226,691 by (even) 11 days, it still comes out 20608...

E:
huh ,

got a new title

226691 (points) / 43.33 (wcg days (don't forget to convert to decimal)) * 4 (cores or threads) = 20926 PPD (average points per real day)

Vapor's i5-750 is at 3500MHz, so 20926 PPD / 3500MHz = 5,98 PPM (average points per megahertz)

From here, if you have an i5-750 you can make an educated guess at what will be your estimated average PPD by multiplying the 6 PPM by the speed of the processor.

[onex]

226691 (points) / 43.33 (wcg days (don't forget to convert to decimal) * 4 (cores or threads) = 20926 PPD

pff,
fine, that makes it simple.

it isn't that obvious from the posts, Vapor..,
newbies would have a very hard time figuring that out .

after that,
the graph makes much more sense now, (though it would been nice to get a clue about the differences between westmere different L2 cache sizes).

dual Harpertown seems to give only ~27736 for dual E5430, which is only about 18% more then a Bloomfield 920 at ~23408,
2*6MB L2 cache vs 4*256KB L2 and 8MB L3.
so maybe WCG is more L3 cache dependent,
yet why would it be ..,
HT, should not give any CPU such a close productivity to native cores, these are quite odd results :head scratching:.

[meanmoe]

HT, should not give any CPU such a close productivity to native cores, these are quite odd results :head scratching:.

Why shouldn't it? (I just don't know one way or another, that's why I'm asking.)

[D_A]

How much boost you get from HTT varies enormously, I'd guess depending on how much cache each thread is using and how often each thread gets blocked waiting for IO or something. A whole bunch of IO bound threads, with low cache usage, would benefit enormously while CPU bound threads would get less benefit.

In this case, what I mean by "low cache usage" is that the cache doesn't need to be refreshed massively every time the CPU changes the thread it's working on. You'd probably find there's a benefit to running a HTT enabled system on a single project (like HCC or FAAH) rather than several different projects.

[onex]

it should be project related,
maybe 25%-60?
rough estimate.

[ggdh]

pff,
fine, that makes it simple.

it isn't that obvious from the posts, Vapor..,
newbies would have a very hard time figuring that out .

All newbies are recommended to read the whole thread

0:053:07:08:59 197,914
53.29 days / 4 cores = 13.32 days running time

197914 points / 13.32 days = 14858.4 WCG PPD (should be POINTS)
14858.4 POINTS / 3600MHz = 4.13 PPD/MHz

Phenom II x4 @ 3600MHz = 4.13 PPD/MHz

[onex]

All newbies are recommended to read the whole thread

no, it's his fault,
i insist :P.

j/k,
totally missed it .

though it is worth mentioning through the OP as well .

[Rob_B]

Of all the numbers I think are undershooting real performance, I think it's Clarkdale. I'd expect Clarkdale to pull 4.1-4.5 PPD/MHz on a dedicated system (based on what other Nehalem derivatives do for PPD/MHz/core). The 3.8 PPD/MHz on the chart is from a single system used by multiple users....I hope I can get more data on Clarkdale soon

I have a Clarkdale I3-540 now and it is doing better than the 3.8 PPD/MHz that is on the chart now.

Not sure what it is doing exactly, because it is only running for 3 days now. And I'm still playing with the OC.

But the 2 full days that it has been running almost full time it did 4.4 PPD/MHz.
I will leave it like it is now for a few days and post the results here.

[Vapor]

I have a Clarkdale I3-540 now and it is doing better than the 3.8 PPD/MHz that is on the chart now.

Not sure what it is doing exactly, because it is only running for 3 days now. And I'm still playing with the OC.

But the 2 full days that it has been running almost full time it did 4.4 PPD/MHz.
I will leave it like it is now for a few days and post the results here.

4.4 is more inline with what I was expecting from Clarkdale (it's essentially half a Bloomfield). I'll update the chart when you get some more solid numbers

[pfm3136]

Changed my Q6600 @ 3200MHz from almost dedicated in Windows 7 x64 to fully dedicated in Ubuntu 10.04 X64.



It went from about 4.8 PPD/MHz to 5.7 PPD/MHz.

[Rob_B]

4.4 is more inline with what I was expecting from Clarkdale (it's essentially half a Bloomfield). I'll update the chart when you get some more solid numbers

Looks like that 4.4 was a little high. The first few days when I had this PC running I had been playing a little with OCing and maybe that messed up the numbers a bit.

So after 2 days running at the same speed I didn't touch the PC and let it do it's job.

This is what I got over 6 full days running all projects.

Clarkdale i3-540 @ 3533 MHz. HT on. Windows 7 x64. 24/7 cruncher.

05/06/10 0:003:12:28:55 12,855
06/06/10 0:004:09:22:58 15,972
07/06/10 0:004:17:53:36 16,259
08/06/10 0:003:06:48:50 11,679
09/06/10 0:004:19:40:40 18,183
10/06/10 0:003:08:00:24 12,418

That is 4.1 PPD/MHz over 6 days crunching. Not to bad for a PC that only uses 85 watt.

Now I let it finish all the WU that are downloaded and try it again with Ubuntu.

[pfm3136]

My average for my i3-540 is about 4.125 PPD/Mhz, and i also do some gaming/browsing/whatch movies.

Rob_B you might overclock it easily to 4000 Mhz, just stay below 1.3V and it will be energy efficient.
I choose that speed after reading this article on cpu overcloking vs Power consumption.

[Rob_B]

Rob_B you might overclock it easily to 4000 Mhz, just stay below 1.3V and it will be energy efficient.
I choose that speed after reading this article on cpu overcloking vs Power consumption.

I'm going to speed it up after I get it watercooled. I want it to run cooler and quieter.
But it can do 3694 MHz @ 1.15V and run WCG without problems.
Thanks for the link.