A new Einstein@home ABP1 App for Windows is available for Beta Test at Beta Test Page.

Looks like using the pre-release MinGW gcc-4.4 significantly sped up the (Windows) Application.

This is a big package to download, as it contains the 3.11 ABP1 application as well as the current 3.05 S5R5.

app_info.xml does contain entries for ABP1 3.07 thru 3.10 and S5R5 3.05, tasks assigned to older apps will error out.

Please test and report.

BM

The installation path on the Beta Test Page for Windows (and probably the other OS too) is still not correct (pre BOINC 6.x). See also Message 98950.

Gruß,
Gundolf

The installation path on the Beta Test Page for Windows (and probably the other OS too) is still not correct (pre BOINC 6.x). See also Message 98950.

Gruß,
Gundolf

Loaded and running.

Is there any change on the (non-)SSE support - do you want me to try and fix the fan on the MMX?

Thanks. Fixed.

BM

Thanks. Fixed.

BM

Well, up to a point. That's the Windows 2000/XP default. There are others, both pre- and post-2K/XP.

See The Big BOINC 6 Answer Thread.

Is there any change on the (non-)SSE support - do you want me to try and fix the fan on the MMX?

Host 1758399, Core2 Q9550, 4 GiB, Vista64
v3.09 avg. CPU time 20.3k sec
v3.11 avg. CPU time 19.0k sec (4 tasks)
==> 6.4 per cent improvement.
Example

Host 1101891, Core2 T7300, 2 GiB, Vista32
v3.09 avg. CPU time 26.3k sec
v3.11 first task projected CPU time @50%: 24.5k sec
==> 6.8 per cent improvement.

One task started by v3.09 was completed (last 25%) by the new app on the laptop. It did validate.

BOINC v6.6.38 on both hosts. No overclocking. Graphics worked fine.
____________

Thanks. My rough impression is that the speed gain is larger on AMD than on Intel, at least with the Core2 architecture.

BM

On my 9550 Quad Ver. 3.09 averages 17500 seconds, Ver. 3.11 is a little faster at 16200 average.
Win. XP64
____________

My E8400 needs 14500s for 3.09 and now 13500 for 3.11 on Win7 64bit.
____________

FWIW, http://einstein.phys.uwm.edu/result.php?resultid=142544570 seems to have finished well. It took about 11.7 hours; with the previous version (3.10?), tasks took about 13 hours, as I recall.

BOINC won't download ANY E@H. APB1 or GW.

Project Date Message
Einstein@Home 10/9/2009 5:33:24 PM Message from server: No work sent
Einstein@Home 10/9/2009 5:33:24 PM Message from server: To get more Einstein@Home work, finish current work, stop BOINC, remove app_info.xml file, and restart.

Installed Windows pkg from Beta test page. After seeing the above, I examined app_info.xml file and saw the cr/lf characters were messed up. I cleaned them up and restarted, but got the same results.

Message in Boinc says:


10/9/2009 6:12:11 PM Einstein@Home Starting task p2030_53989_04040_
0035_G51.22-01.50.C_4.dm_138_0 using einsteinbinary_ABP1 version 309


However, I deleted the 3.09 exec.

Checking task manager, it is in fact using the 3.11


So far, so good !

Bill

When you downloaded the task it was 'branded' for the 3.09 app. That will not change regardless off the actual app you use to crunch the task. New tasks should be branded for 3.11.

(Anyway, I've been told that is how it works. ;) )
____________

Speed increase on Win. XP Athlon X2 4800 is:
32700 sec. for 3.09
30700 for ver. 3.11
____________

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300, Windows XP SP2 task 142497586 completed and verified. Seems faster.
From ~ 20500 sec to ~ 18500.
____________

Athlon XP 2800+ (SSE) - WinXP - Time improved from ~55.0ksecs to ~53.2ksecs

Athlon XP 3000+ (SSE) - WinXP - Time improved from ~48.5ksecs to ~46.8ksecs

Pentium dual core E6300 @ 3.6GHz - Time improved from ~17.5ksecs to ~15.7ksecs

Celeron dual core E3200 @ 3.2GHz - Time improved from ~18.9ksecs to ~17.3ksecs

Both the E6300 and the E3200 are 45nm chips that overclock like crazy at pretty much stock everything (they're running on Asus P5KPL-AM/PS + 2GB RAM costing $A50 + $A30 each and limited OC options) and both have ATI HD4850 GPU cards (HIS) which churn through Milky Way tasks in about 50secs per task. That's the equivalent of doing an ABP1 task on a CPU in 5mins!! The GPUs only use about 2-3 secs CPU time per GPU task so the EAH output is little affected.

Both these machines were tualatin celeron 1300s a couple of weeks ago and the total cost of the entire upgrade (CPU + GPU + mobo + RAM + PSU) was $A320 and $A280 respectively, ie about $US290 and $US250 respectively. It's amazing how much of a crunching beast you can create for $US250 these days.

____________
Cheers,
Gary.

Hi,

I did everything exactly as described on the Beta Test Page to run the new ABP1 Beta app. However I got these errors:

12/10/2009 07:23:39|Einstein@Home|Requesting new tasks
12/10/2009 07:23:44|Einstein@Home|Scheduler request completed: got 0 new tasks
12/10/2009 07:23:44|Einstein@Home|Message from server: To get more Einstein@Home work, finish current work, stop BOINC, remove app_info.xml file, and restart.
12/10/2009 07:23:44|Einstein@Home|Message from server: No work sent

When running the Beta app for 3.09 and 3.10 I did exactly the same and went without problems. What is wrong?
Can I delete the app_info.xml file without problems?

The pc is a Q6600, with Vista x86 Ultimate and BOINC 6.6.20

____________
Greetings from
TJ

Hi,

I did everything exactly as described on the Beta Test Page to run the new ABP1 Beta app. However I got these errors:

12/10/2009 07:23:39|Einstein@Home|Requesting new tasks
12/10/2009 07:23:44|Einstein@Home|Scheduler request completed: got 0 new tasks
12/10/2009 07:23:44|Einstein@Home|Message from server: To get more Einstein@Home work, finish current work, stop BOINC, remove app_info.xml file, and restart.
12/10/2009 07:23:44|Einstein@Home|Message from server: No work sent

When running the Beta app for 3.09 and 3.10 I did exactly the same and went without problems. What is wrong?
Can I delete the app_info.xml file without problems?

The pc is a Q6600, with Vista x86 Ultimate and BOINC 6.6.20

I did everything exactly as described on the Beta Test Page to run the new ABP1 Beta app. However I got these errors:

When running the Beta app for 3.09 and 3.10 I did exactly the same and went without problems. What is wrong?

Can I delete the app_info.xml file without problems?

I did everything exactly as described on the Beta Test Page to run the new ABP1 Beta app. However I got these errors:

This is a message from the server and not necessarily an error. I get similar messages from time to time. The server is quite fond of sending me some work and then informing me that to get more I will need to delete app_info.xml. I just wait a minute, update the project and if I'm due more work, the server will send some and usually with the same warning repeated. The server appears to be somewhat misconfigured but it's a relatively harmless thing.

I get the same type of message when Boinc asks for CUDA-work, I don't have a CUDA-app in my app_info so the server won't send any. (witch is the way I want it to be)
The problem is that the 6.6.xx series of Boinc won't show you what type of work it's asking for, just that it asks for work. To see what type of work it's asking for you need a cc_config.xml and enable <sched_op_debug>
____________

Nice 3.11 throughput improvement on my hosts compared to 3.09.

On my Q6600 WinXP Pro, running stock, ABP1 times came down from a 12-result average of 25,689 CPU seconds on 3.09 to an 8-result average of 23,564 on 3.11. So about 92% as much time required.
____________

First WU returned and validated; similar result. Typical 3.09 runs were low-to-mid 90k secs. This one took 83k (Old 1.8 GHz P4 WinXP).

____________
"Better is the enemy of the good." - Voltaire (should be memorized by every requirements lead)

I did everything exactly as described on the Beta Test Page to run the new ABP1 Beta app. However I got these errors:

This is a message from the server and not necessarily an error. I get similar messages from time to time. The server is quite fond of sending me some work and then informing me that to get more I will need to delete app_info.xml. I just wait a minute, update the project and if I'm due more work, the server will send some and usually with the same warning repeated. The server appears to be somewhat misconfigured but it's a relatively harmless thing.

It stopped with getting new taks last night and did not report the reday tasks automatically, but did a request for new work every 3 hours. When I looked at it this morning, I did a few manual updates with intervals of about 10 minutes with no luck of getting new work (the finished WU's where sent), therefore I posted this question.
The pc is now working for my work, but this afternoon I will upgrade to 6.10.13 and see what happens. I let you know.

Thanks all for the rapid response.

Although the speedup is not as impressive as we've seen on one of our test machines, this App isn't slower than 3.10 and apparently not causing trouble, so I made this the new "official" Windows App. Thanks for testing!

BM

Although the speedup is not as impressive as we've seen on one of our test machines, this App isn't slower than 3.10 and apparently not causing trouble, so I made this the new "official" Windows App. Thanks for testing!

BM

Although the speedup is not as impressive as we've seen on one of our test machines, this App isn't slower than 3.10 and apparently not causing trouble, so I made this the new "official" Windows App. Thanks for testing!

BM

So, time to remove the app_info.xml file?

Drain your cache first.

What is the way do install the 3.11 now.

Remove Wu's and just plump it in there?

Remove/Reinstall project and then copy the 3.11 files in there. ???

because i had errors with the new S5R6 wu's and that .XMl removal.


EDIT: just seeing that 3.11 beta isn't needed any more in the last post.

BERND PLz edit this BETA post that we must not download it and just use the standard as they are the same now.

Thanks.

Drain your cache first.

Yep, that's the recommended way. Although the app version is identical to the official one, the signature is not (there is no signature in the app_info.xml). If you just remove tha app_info.xml and restart the client, it will find the app binary doesn't match the signature, mark all results in progress as client error and start downloading the app again, this time with the correct signature.

BM

Drain your cache first.

Yep, that's the recommended way. Although the app version is identical to the official one, the signature is not (there is no signature in the app_info.xml). If you just remove tha app_info.xml and restart the client, it will find the app binary doesn't match the signature, mark all results in progress as client error and start downloading the app again, this time with the correct signature.

BM

I've found that we didn't compare this app with 3.10 CUDA app. It is important this time to understand - should we stick with 3.10 CUDA any longer or we should go further with the new app wich in fact may be faster and doesn't need any powerful graphic cards anymore. Are there any tests about this?

I've found that we didn't compare this app with 3.10 CUDA app. It is important this time to understand - should we stick with 3.10 CUDA any longer or we should go further with the new app wich in fact may be faster and doesn't need any powerful graphic cards anymore. Are there any tests about this?

Hi!

I think there is no universal answer to this. If you have a very fast CPU and a rather low-end GPU card, you might be better of with the CPU version. If you have a high end GPU but a not so fast COU, you might want to give GPU a try.

Since the GPU app is in an earlier development stage than the CPU version, certainly it is encouraged to use the GPU app to help find problems and to help improve it in the future.


CU
Bikeman
____________

I've found that we didn't compare this app with 3.10 CUDA app. It is important this time to understand - should we stick with 3.10 CUDA any longer or we should go further with the new app wich in fact may be faster and doesn't need any powerful graphic cards anymore. Are there any tests about this?

Could someone answer this question? I'm wondering if its worth it to me use the extra electricy and gpu time when I could use it for something else if its not speeding this up...

What if the goal is to get the most boinc points and you don't mind some extra work? I have been running the CUDA for ever since it came out a long time ago and have had 0 problems. So no use running it unless its faster in my book. I have a Q6600 @ 3ghz and a nvidia 275 GTX. Does anyone have any data on a machine like that which is faster?

What if the goal is to get the most boinc points and you don't mind some extra work? I have been running the CUDA for ever since it came out a long time ago and have had 0 problems. So no use running it unless its faster in my book. I have a Q6600 @ 3ghz and a nvidia 275 GTX. Does anyone have any data on a machine like that which is faster?