[BTBlomberg]

BOINC's estimates seam worthless so my estimates based on it may be crap so nevermind. So much for trying to guesstimate on a slow machine with BOINC's output. Real data when it's done.

[bobpalmer]

The wisdom files in the slots/{0,1,2,3} directories don't seem to match the wisdom.sah file generated by fft_test3. The file sizes and content are different.
projects/setiathome.berkeley.edu/wisdom.sah = 16976 bytes (reference)
slots/0/wisdom.sah = 6902 bytes
slots/1/wisdom.sah = 6903 bytes
slots/2/wisdom.sah = 6612 bytes
slots/3/wisdom.sah = 7383 bytes

I am running boinc 5.4.9 CLI version, and Alex's enhanced v5 worker. I killed boinc before regenerating the reference wisdom.sah file. I copied the new wisdom.sah file to the projects/setiathome.berkeley.edu directory, and also into each of the slots/{0,1,2,3} directories. So I know the wisdom files in the slot directories are not hold overs from an earlier source. Any ideas from the experts on why the wisdom files do not match? Since the slot wisdom files do not match the reference, it appears the worker is not using the results from fft_test3.

Putting all the wisdom files here overflows the post size limit.

[halimedia]

Thanks for v6, Alex! Great stuff!!
Results from G4s and G5s of all walks of life indicate speed gains between 5 and 13%. Excellent!

[ChillyWilly5280]

Wow, thanks to the great work done by Alex optimizing the Mac worker, I have now set SETI's resource share back up where it was before enhanced was introduced.

Rock 'n roll baby, lets find us some aliens!

[chboss]

Alex's new creation shows around 12% speed improvment over V5.
A big thank you!

[Thanar]

I would like to share Bob's query about whether putting the custom wisdom file in the project's directory adds something to the calculation speed or not. I would like to note that there is NO reference to the wisdom file in the app_info XML file.

[zombie67]

My question is: When I generate the wisdom file, does it matter if I am using my computer for other things at the same time? Is it somehow measuring the performance of my machine? Sorta like making sure you aren't using your internet connection while doing speed tests. Or do I want to have everything else shut down while it runs? Does it matter at all?

TIA

[Gecko_r7]

Originally Posted by zombie67

My question is: When I generate the wisdom file, does it matter if I am using my computer for other things at the same time? Is it somehow measuring the performance of my machine? Sorta like making sure you aren't using your internet connection while doing speed tests. Or do I want to have everything else shut down while it runs? Does it matter at all?

TIA

It's better to have as few processes running as possible.

[ChillyWilly5280]

Originally Posted by zombie67

My question is: When I generate the wisdom file, does it matter if I am using my computer for other things at the same time? Is it somehow measuring the performance of my machine? Sorta like making sure you aren't using your internet connection while doing speed tests. Or do I want to have everything else shut down while it runs? Does it matter at all?

TIA

Probably best to run it in single user mode, or console. Barring that, fire up Activity Monitor and quit all the other apps & background process' that you can without logging yourself out to do so (and then quit Activity Monitor too).

Here's a link to Gecko_r7's instructions on running fft_test3 in single user mode that I used successfully on three Macs:

fft_test3 in SU mode

[zombie67]

Originally Posted by ChillyWilly5280

Probably best to run it in single user mode, or console. Barring that, fire up Activity Monitor and quit all the other apps & background process' that you can without logging yourself out to do so (and then quit Activity Monitor too).

Here's a link to Gecko_r7's instructions on running fft_test3 in single user mode that I used successfully on three Macs:

fft_test3 in SU mode

I suspected as much. BTW, *great* instructions.

Question: Is it normal that when one boots singe user, you then need to mount the drive to write files?

It's been about 15 years since I've had the need to do that kind of stuff. But I don't recall having to mount drives in single user.

[ChillyWilly5280]

Originally Posted by zombie67

I suspected as much. BTW, *great* instructions.

Question: Is it normal that when one boots singe user, you then need to mount the drive to write files?

It's been about 15 years since I've had the need to do that kind of stuff. But I don't recall having to mount drives in single user.

I am by no stretch of the imagination even remotely knowledgeable about matters of the command line. But yes, you do. I imagine because when finished it writes the wisdom file to the drive. But I could be wrong.

[zombie67]

Originally Posted by ChillyWilly5280

I am by no stretch of the imagination even remotely knowledgeable about matters of the command line. But yes, you do. I imagine because when finished it writes the wisdom file to the drive. But I could be wrong.

Yes, I understand that you need to do that *now*. My question is has it always been that way for SunOS (bsd) or Solaris (svr4)? I don't recall the need to have to mount the drive in the past.

I guess it is sort of a safety issue. Since MacOS X i is created to be a consumer friendly product.

If someone, knowingly or unknowingly enters single user mode at startup, the unmounted drive (read only) set-up is propably configured to be the default. In that way, you prevent people who don't know what they're doing from messing up the computer.

A Sun system however, is not targeted at the consumer level, and therefore you propably don't have to mount the drive before performing tasks that requires the need to write to the drive, when in single user mode...

Just a thought :-)

[BTBlomberg]

Now I have to say I am seeing a about a 12% improvement overall vs. V5. My first one that was only about 8% but it went 26.667% with V5 and then ran V6 so no suprize. I guess that teaches mne to trust Boinc Completion times for estimating. I like those numbers a lot though.

[Knightrider]

Originally Posted by bobpalmer

on why the wisdom files do not match? Since the slot wisdom files do not match the reference, it appears the worker is not using the results from fft_test3.

The wisdom files are, as I understand it, generated 'on the fly' by the regular sah version of the worker, and the self generated ones were used more in hope than in certain knowlege that they would work. That said, Alex has now linked V6 to the fft3 wisdom files so they should be effective when running V6.

Originally Posted by Alexkan

v6:

G4 version
G5 version

Oh, and this is linked with the (slightly) faster FFTW compile I rolled for fft_test3, so that doesn't hurt, either.

K.

[bobpalmer]

Originally Posted by Knightrider

The wisdom files are, as I understand it, generated 'on the fly' by the regular sah version of the worker, and the self generated ones were used more in hope than in certain knowlege that they would work. That said, Alex has now linked V6 to the fft3 wisdom files so they should be effective when running V6.

K.

I'm now running v6, and it is still not using the wisdom generated by fft_test3. So the question is which program creates the slots directories, the worker (Alex's v6 in this case), or boinc? I'm running the command line version of boinc 5.4.9. There is no reference to the wisdom.sah file in the app_info.xml file.

-- bob

[bobpalmer]

Anybody else seen their Quad shutting down due to overheating while running SAH? Running with CPU performance set to highest. Both cores in CPU A are running significatly higher than CPU B when crunching. From Temperature Monitor I see the CPU A temperature fluctuate from 96C down to 74C, and back to 96C every 5-10 seconds. When the machine was new, and it was colder in the house, CPU A run hotter at about 85C, but did not fluctuate. This is the 2nd time it shutdown this week. It looks like the shutdown occurs when you hit 100C. I guess I'll have to switch CPU performance to Automatic. Here's the system.log entry from today's shutdown.

Jun 23 12:30:50 Bashful kernel[0]: SMU_Neo2_PlatformPlugin core dump:
Jun 23 12:30:50 Bashful kernel[0]: IOHWControls:
Jun 23 12:30:50 Bashful kernel[0]: [0] "BACKSIDE" Type:"fan-rpm" Id:1 TGT:1100 CUR:1097
Jun 23 12:30:50 Bashful kernel[0]: [1] "CPU B PUMP" Type:"fan-rpm" Id:7 TGT:3600 CUR:3625
Jun 23 12:30:50 Bashful kernel[0]: [2] "DRIVE BAY A INTAKE" Type:"fan-rpm" Id:0 TGT:1000 CUR:995
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [3] "CPU A INTAKE" Type:"fan-rpm" Id:2 TGT:3104 CUR:3103
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [4] "EXPANSION SLOTS INTAKE" Type:"fan-rpm" Id:8 TGT:1560 CUR:1561
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [5] "CPU B INTAKE" Type:"fan-rpm" Id:3 TGT:3104 CUR:3103
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [6] "CPU B EXHAUST" Type:"fan-rpm" Id:5 TGT:3200 CUR:3197
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [7] "CPU A PUMP" Type:"fan-rpm" Id:6 TGT:3600 CUR:3571
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [8] "CPU A EXHAUST" Type:"fan-rpm" Id:4 TGT:3200 CUR:3199
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: IOHWSensors:
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [0] "CPU A0 POWER" Type:"power" Id:13 CUR:51.47424 W
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [1] "CPU A1 POWER" Type:"power" Id:23 CUR:53.43072 W
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [2] "CPU B0 POWER" Type:"power" Id:33 CUR:45.17403 W
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [3] "CPU B1 POWER" Type:"power" Id:43 CUR:50.638 W
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [4] "CPU B0 VCORE" Type:"voltage" Id:30 CUR:1.14144 V
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [5] "CPU B0 DIODE TEMP" Type:"temp" Id:31 CUR:54.12288 C
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [6] "CPU B1 DIODE TEMP" Type:"temp" Id:41 CUR:57.14336 C
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [7] "CPU B0 CORE CURRENT" Type:"current" Id:39 CUR:37.15104 A
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [8] "CPU B1 CORE CURRENT" Type:"current" Id:46 CUR:40.26368 A
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [9] "MLB INLET AMB" Type:"temp" Id:9 CUR:29.36864 C
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [10] "CPU A0 VCORE" Type:"voltage" Id:10 CUR:1.16384 V
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [11] "BACKSIDE" Type:"temperature" Id:6 CUR:40.16384 C
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [12] "CPU A1 VCORE" Type:"voltage" Id:20 CUR:1.18944 V
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [13] "CPU A0 CORE CURRENT" Type:"current" Id:19 CUR:41.24832 A
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [14] "CPU A1 DIODE TEMP" Type:"temp" Id:21 CUR:99.6144 C
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [15] "CPU A1 CORE CURRENT" Type:"current" Id:26 CUR:41.40960 A
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [16] "DRIVE BAY" Type:"temperature" Id:4 CUR:39.32768 C
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [17] "TUNNEL" Type:"temperature" Id:1 CUR:35.57344 C
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [18] "TUNNEL HEATSINK" Type:"temperature" Id:2 CUR:32.16384 C
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [19] "CPU B1 VCORE" Type:"voltage" Id:40 CUR:1.15584 V
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [20] "KODIAK DIODE" Type:"temperature" Id:7 CUR:62.0 C
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [21] "CPU A0 DIODE TEMP" Type:"temp" Id:11 CUR:95.15360 C
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [22] "Slots Power" Type:"power" Id:3 CUR:25.14720 W
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [23] "gpu-diode" Type:"temp" Id:-1558188032 CUR:47.0 C
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: IOHWCtrlLoops:
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [0] "CPU A0 Liquid Cooling" Id:3 MetaState:0
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [1] "CPU A1 Liquid Cooling" Id:4 MetaState:0
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [2] "CPU B0 Liquid Cooling" Id:5 MetaState:0
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [3] "CPU B1 Liquid Cooling" Id:6 MetaState:0
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [4] "Clock Slew" Id:0 MetaState:0 "Dynamic Power Step"
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [5] "Drive Bay Fan" Id:1 MetaState:0 "Normal"
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [6] "U3/Backside Zone" Id:2 MetaState:0 "Normal"
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: [7] "PCI Slot Fan" Id:7 MetaState:0 "Normal"
Jun 23 12:30:51 Bashful kernel[0]: ---------------------------------

[alexkan]

Whoops...yeah, the crunchers aren't using the wisdom generated by fft_test3. However, at this point, I'm inclined to say that it doesn't matter. The improvement in FFT speed is negligible, especially since the FFTW_MEASURE planner setting (the one that SETI uses by default) is better than I previously thought.

To make things worse, I also realized that because of the way that SETI uses FFTs, the numbers that fft_test3 puts up don't reflect actual processing at all. I'll post a revised app if you want to see what performance is actually like when running SETI, but only if you're curious--there won't be any speed gains from running it.

[Knightrider]

Originally Posted by bobpalmer

Anybody else seen their Quad shutting down due to overheating while running SAH?

Yes: my quad is at the garage being repaired at the moment. The logic board and cpu's are being replaced. Still under warrenty thank goodness.

We must be carefull here, not to stray to far off topic. Start a new thread if this developes further.

They tell me that the quad is not built to run 24/7, which I was doing with seti and other dc's and it was going to sleep/shut down often. There are a few reasons why and running sah 24/7 with cpu set to max is one suspect, which may have damaged one of the cpu's by overheating. When I reduced the cpu level it ran longer before shutting down than it did at the high level.

Having two drives, which I also have, can apparently also cause overheating and is a ventilation design fault. I shall be getting an enclosure for the second drive.

Dust clogging up the 'radiator' is another problem, although I had cleaned that up about six weeks ago.

Static damage to a component is another possibility.

There are sleep/shut down osx/quad issues as well. Search the issue at the Apple support discussion groups.

Keep an eye on the red lights that may show up inside the front of the box.

Run the hardware test, if it will not run you may have a problem.


K.

Edit: It might be a good idea to continue this discussion at THIS thread.

K.

[Doug_Jones]

Running a Quad and haven't had any problems thus far. Been running V6 since it came out.

[arkayn]

v6 is installed on my eMac and I will see what it does for me.

[Gecko_r7]

Originally Posted by alexkan

Whoops...yeah, the crunchers aren't using the wisdom generated by fft_test3. However, at this point, I'm inclined to say that it doesn't matter. The improvement in FFT speed is negligible, especially since the FFTW_MEASURE planner setting (the one that SETI uses by default) is better than I previously thought.

To make things worse, I also realized that because of the way that SETI uses FFTs, the numbers that fft_test3 puts up don't reflect actual processing at all. I'll post a revised app if you want to see what performance is actually like when running SETI, but only if you're curious--there won't be any speed gains from running it.

It's interesting, but it doesn't make sense for you to do the extra work. Unless anyone else has a burning desire to to see it, it's not really necessary so don't worry about it. Onward and upward!

[Gecko_r7]

Hi Alex,

After reading Simon's comment on the S@H forum about graphics still being "drawn" even if not displayed, YIKES!.....
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum...d=32101#348677
Can you create a w/o graphics variant of v6 for those of us who don't care about pretty drawings?

[alexkan]

Originally Posted by Gecko_r7

After reading Simon's comment on the S@H forum about graphics still being "drawn" even if not displayed, YIKES!.....
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum...d=32101#348677
Can you create a w/o graphics variant of v6 for those of us who don't care about pretty drawings?

G4 version (no graphics)
G5 version (no graphics)

[Thanar]

I believe the graphics don't get drawn, until a graphics window is called, in which case, even after closing the graphics window the corresponding process remains open. That said, I believe that if using a CLI version of BOINC there is no chance you could end up with a graphics-calculating worker.

Of course, I could be wrong... Any inside info?

[brysonda]

Originally Posted by bobpalmer

Running with CPU performance set to highest. Both cores in CPU A are running significatly higher than CPU B when crunching. From Temperature Monitor I see the CPU A temperature fluctuate from 96C down to 74C, and back to 96C every 5-10 seconds. When the machine was new, and it was colder in the house, CPU A run hotter at about 85C, but did not fluctuate. This is the 2nd time it shutdown this week. It looks like the shutdown occurs when you hit 100C.

Not to stray too far off topic, but I thought I should reply with my observations using a quad with optimized seti for months now. In general there is definitely increased fan activity while computing seti, for obvious reasons. When the ambient temperature goes up, so does the speed of the fans. In temperature monitor all of the air cooled components show the daily fluctuations relative to ambient temperature. The memory controller is the hottest of these components, often approaching 65-70C on a warm day.

The CPUs, however, are a diffeerent story. The water cooling really kicks in as computation ramps up. Rather than fluctuating daily, they stay at a pretty constant rate. As my quad is of a single pump design, you can tell the order of the physical cores by the 0.5-1 degree increase per core from CPU A Core 1 to CPU B Core 2. That said, even on the couple of 95F days we've had here in Michigan, I have *never* seen the cores go above 70C.

So I guess long story short, I think the temperatures you are seeing could in and of themselves be indicative of a more serious problem.

Relatedly, I meant to post this a while back but never got around to it. I took a snapshot of the Temperature Monitor window a few days after switching from the stock enhanced worker to Alex's A5 enhanced worker. You can tell by the core temperatures that it works a lot more of the functional units consistently. Pretty sweet.

[beadman]

Originally Posted by alexkan

G4 version (no graphics)
G5 version (no graphics)

Thanks, Alex!
It's on my 1.67 GHz PowerBook G4 - I'll post results when I get a couple units finished.

beadman

[Gecko_r7]

Originally Posted by Gecko_r7

Hi Alex,

After reading Simon's comment on the S@H forum about graphics still being "drawn" even if not displayed, YIKES!.....
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum...d=32101#348677
Can you create a w/o graphics variant of v6 for those of us who don't care about pretty drawings?

Thanks Alex.
Running on the 1.33 G4 now.

[Knightrider]

Originally Posted by Thanar

I believe the graphics don't get drawn, until a graphics window is called, in which case, even after closing the graphics window the corresponding process remains open. That said, I believe that if using a CLI version of BOINC there is no chance you could end up with a graphics-calculating worker.

Of course, I could be wrong... Any inside info?

I read somewhere that if you didn't want graphics to interfere with crunching the best option was to remove the graphics from the screen saver folder, presumably the worker makes some kind of call to the graphics module. I don't know what would happen if you had the screen saver set to boinc when running the cli version??

K.

Quad still at the menders.

Originally Posted by Knightrider

I don't know what would happen if you had the screen saver set to boinc when running the cli version??

If it behaves like a project without a screensaver of its own, you'd get a simple, generic "BOINCsaver" display, horizontally scrolling text IIRC, and maybe the BOINC logo.

(Just dropping in to grab the graphicless v6 build, while Berkeley is doing weekly maintenance--thanks, Alex, and all!--as you were.)

[halimedia]

Thanks for the sans-graphics versions, Alex!

While I haven't done any ref-wu comparisons, I have some interesting observations to share:

62-credit WUs v5: approx. 8400s
62-credit WUs v6: approx. 7700s
62-credit WUs v6-nographics: approx. 6800s

It's a bit early to say if this trend will hold true, but if it does, this is another significant crunching speed increase!

[halimedia]

BTW, we're approaching pre-enhanced crunching efficiency:

Pre-enhanced: 1800s / 25 credits = 72 s/cr
Enhanced v6 nographics: 6800s / 62 credits = 110 s/cr

(numbers based on quad crunching at maximum processor performance)

Who would have thought - least of all crunch3r

[nikoniko]

Originally Posted by halimedia

BTW, we're approaching pre-enhanced crunching efficiency:

Pre-enhanced: 1800s / 25 credits = 72 s/cr
Enhanced v6 nographics: 6800s / 62 credits = 110 s/cr

(numbers based on quad crunching at maximum processor performance)

Who would have thought - least of all crunch3r

ooops it seems that my quad is running much slower than yours
I am running v6 no graphics and haven't seen the speeds you mention.
These are some of my results:
3,213.26 14.09 http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/worku...?wuid=83172558
3,065.89 14.09 http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/worku...?wuid=83172552
6,913.73 30.70 http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/worku...?wuid=83161270

results from my host
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/resul...hostid=2248990

by the way thanks for the enhanced version.

Nikolas

[beadman]

Two units complete with v6-no graphics:
First one is 15% v6 and 85% v6NG: 15,838 for 58.69 credits and is validated. Second one is all v6NG and is 15,616 for 58.69 credits, validation still pending. That's a 6.5% improvement on my 1.67GHz PowerBook G4.

Thanks, Alex!

beadman

[zombie67]

Originally Posted by alexkan

G4 version (no graphics)
G5 version (no graphics)

Thanks again for these. I am not sure I understand what these are, and I want to make sure.

I install these just like I did for v4, v5 and v6, right? And these are for use with BOINCManager? What happens if I accidently click "Show Graphics" by mistake?

Thanks again,
Erik

[Drash]

Just to say thanx to Alex - been following the thread, as always, but not giving too much feedback - my bad.

G4 v6NG feels somewhat faster than v6 - I've had 19,500 s and 21,800 s compared with previous 26,000 - 27,000s. Must admit I'm not religiously tracking what went with what version as I feel my 1GHz 1GB eMac is hardly cutting edge anymore - I just install what comes out roughly when it comes out . Still it all helps.

Thanks again.

[arkayn]

Installing the NG now.

[nikoniko]

Although all my WUs run in general faster than the others I still envy halimedia who achieves
110s/cr while I am still in 180-220s/cr.

What am I doing wrong;

on top of this there are people able to run the old client and claim more credit,
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/resul...hostid=1281640

[brysonda]

To chime in, 6NG seems to be about 7% faster than straight version 6 (when comparing a few similar work units completed on my Quad). This is not a very large sample, of course, but at least a good sign. As far as raw numbers, in general work units range between 115-135 s/credit with 6NG.

[Todd Madson]

Zombie: you can't click "show graphics" by mistake as it is grayed out in v6NG.

I've had it running since around 10 p.m. CST last night, more information on
the results as it arrives in the form of finished work units.

The first few results seem to be the times we used to get back in v4 of 5
of the pre-enhanced Alex crunchers which is great to see.

[arkayn]

My first unit came in at 18000, I was running about 22000.

[chboss]

Confirmed also here the NG version gains around 7% on my mac mini if I compare several results with the same credit.

[lepetitmartien]

Hi all back with a brand new G5 CPU at last…

installing the beauties alex did for us right now

[Doug_Jones]

How important are benchmark numbers you once your run a test?

If I recall on version 4 or 5, my benchmarks came out a lot better that what it shows under version 6. Do these numbers actually affect anything other than just to let you know how your system performs? Are these accurate?

Just a general question.

[brysonda]

The version of the seti client should not affect the benchmark any, as it is part of the core boinc client.

That said, It is my understanding that the benchmark numbers don't really mean anything under seti enhanced anyway. The credits for a workunit are based off of how many calculations (FFTs) are performed.

[BTBlomberg]

Just got rolling with V6 no-graphics this last weekend as I have been too busy to check for updates lately and finally got a WU that compares to ones I have still in my list. I had 2 WU with an average of 62.18 Points that averaged to about 42,000 sec each. My new 62.40 WU came in at 38,862.71 and I have several of the same size currently running or lined up in my cache. So 52 Minutes were shaved off a WU for my PBG4.

Looks to be a 7.5% speedup (reduction in processing time).

Nice. Every little bit helps. Now for a no-graphics version for G3 , but I supose I could do if I could get the stock worker complile setup figured out and compiled with graphics off. Just no time and low brain power to learn at this time. 49.5 hours reduced by 7-7.5% would be 45.75 hours on my iMac G3 333. When I get an extra $160 I may have to get one of those G4 swap out boards at 466 Mhz, not just for SETI but also to make the computer bearable for the kids.

[ritzl]

I just wanted to thank you all for this thread. It was incredibly helpful in sorting through the step by step to improve my PB G4 1.67 output. But especially, I wanted to thank Alex for his hard work in moving through three optimizations in a month or so.

Thanks, again!

Larry

[lepetitmartien]

And V6 works like a charm, thanks Alex.

[kennet]

I am new here and am hoping for some help.

I downloaded the V6ng. I replaced the Seti Unix Exec with the seti_enhanced-ppc-v6 in the BoincData file in Application Support. I believe that this has had no effect whatsoever. Do I have to get rid of Bonic Manager 5.4.9 altogether?

It is still working the same workunit, so no data was lost.

I have a G4 1Ghz AGP Graphics.

Thanks

Kenn

[Doug_Jones]

Originally Posted by kennet

I am new here and am hoping for some help.

I downloaded the V6ng. I replaced the Seti Unix Exec with the seti_enhanced-ppc-v6 in the BoincData file in Application Support. I believe that this has had no effect whatsoever. Do I have to get rid of Bonic Manager 5.4.9 altogether?

It is still working the same workunit, so no data was lost.

I have a G4 1Ghz AGP Graphics.

Thanks

Kenn

Hi Kennet,

Did you replace the "app_info.xml" file as well? Also, did you already have the enchance seti client installed (the one that the official app installs?)

-Doug