TPU's WCG/BOINC Team

[FordGT90Concept]

Yup, if the task no longer appears under the task tab, it was sent to their servers.

[Assassin48]

sweet

i have this 920 @ 3.68ghz and its going really fast!

[Mindweaver]

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

As proof of this, name one supercomputer for scientific research that is overclocked/operating beyond recommended parameters.

Well, if you can afford a supercomputer then you don't need to overclock.. but If you can't afford one then overclock.

I do not aggree with your, "Don't overclock statement". I have several rigs overclocked, and none of them have returned an error on that project. I have over 1000 results returned, and a gold badge to prove it.

They are all made from the same waffer, but different parts of the waffer result in a low, mid, and higher quality chip. The lesser chip is rated lower, because thats the stable spec's for the heatsink that's shipped with it.

I do agree with you Ford in not disabling the WU. And I do agree that an unstable overclock can return bad results. But, ruling out overclocking all together is foolish. If it wasn't for overclocking then I don't think processors would be where they are today. By overclocking slower chips forces the chip manufacturer to build faster chips, and cheaper chips. You not overclocking makes you one of the sheep.

[Chicken Patty]

One thing i'm noticing guys is that we usually have about 45% of our members returning results. Today we have over 50%. This is good, it'll be more of a difference to have our current members that are not returning results to start crunching, than to recruit new ones that crunch for a day and stop. Not pointing fingers at nobody so please nobody take this the wrong way. But if all of our 147 current members started to crunch, we'd be even more unstoppable

[p_o_s_pc]

I didn't have any results today(as far as i know) because i was messing around with the Phenom

[FordGT90Concept]

Originally Posted by Mindweaver

Well, if you can afford a supercomputer then you don't need to overclock.. but If you can't afford one then overclock.

Cost is irrelevant. They don't overclock them because it invalidates their results, increases their electric bills, and makes bad hardware much harder to diagnose.

Originally Posted by Mindweaver

I do agree with you Ford in not disabling the WU. And I do agree that an unstable overclock can return bad results. But, ruling out overclocking all together is foolish. If it wasn't for overclocking then I don't think processors would be where they are today. By overclocking slower chips forces the chip manufacturer to build faster chips, and cheaper chips. You not overclocking makes you one of the sheep.

Demand for faster chips come from the development industries be it drafting, drawing, application development, or game design. Businesses are the largest purchaser of cutting edge technology. If your statement was remotely true, most processors wouldn't have a limited CPU multiplier. The only processors that are intentionally catering to overclockers is those with unlocked multipliers and, because changing the heatsink voids the warranty, they legally don't cater at all.

Moore's Law pretty much guarantees that faster processors will come out even if demand is minimal because it is nonsensical to release slow/older processors when new processors cost the same or less than older processors to manufacture.

We also can't forget AMD and Intel fighting for first place.

Users that overclock comprises of an extreme minority of the segment.


Intel/AMD marking their chips for a specific speed is the same strategy as FAA certifying aircraft for flight worthiness. These are known-to-be safe parameters and exceeding those parameters means heading into no man's land. When you are dealing with a scientific or experimental workload (I deal with both), hardware problems are the last thing you want to deal with. Being a sheep means being safe. Better safe than sorry (in my case, wasting hours diagnosing a software problem when it originated in the hardware).

To me, it is completely contradictory why people would want to overclock when contributing to a scientific project. Yes, you get more points but, what good is it if it is wrong? I wish I knew what BOINC used to catch and counter computational errors. I hope two sets of hardware process everything so if they don't match, it is performed a third time to figure out who is right.

[Mindweaver]

Thanks for the info Ford. Put down your Thesaurus.. hehehe

[Paulieg]

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

Cost is irrelevant. They don't overclock them because it invalidates their results, increases their electric bills, and makes bad hardware much harder to diagnose.



Demand for faster chips come from the development industries be it drafting, drawing, application development, or game design. Businesses are the largest purchaser of cutting edge technology. If your statement was remotely true, most processors wouldn't have a limited CPU multiplier. The only processors that are intentionally catering to overclockers is those with unlocked multipliers and, because changing the heatsink voids the warranty, they legally don't cater at all.

Moore's Law pretty much guarantees that faster processors will come out even if demand is minimal because it is nonsensical to release slow/older processors when new processors cost the same or less than older processors to manufacture.

We also can't forget AMD and Intel fighting for first place.

Users that overclock comprises of an extreme minority of the segment.


Intel/AMD marking their chips for a specific speed is the same strategy as FAA certifying aircraft for flight worthiness. These are known-to-be safe parameters and exceeding those parameters means heading into no man's land. When you are dealing with a scientific or experimental workload (I deal with both), hardware problems are the last thing you want to deal with. Being a sheep means being safe. Better safe than sorry (in my case, wasting hours diagnosing a software problem when it originated in the hardware).

To me, it is completely contradictory why people would want to overclock when contributing to a scientific project. Yes, you get more points but, what good is it if it is wrong? I wish I knew what BOINC used to catch and counter computational errors. I hope two sets of hardware process everything so if they don't match, it is performed a third time to figure out who is right.

Overclocking is not black and white when speaking of errors. Simply make sure that your overclock is stable before using it for WCG.

[FordGT90Concept]

It is black and white in terms of introducing an extra dimension of risk. Intel, IBM, AMD, etc. guarantee their processors to work without error at the specifications they sell it as. If it errors in the first three years, you got a processor subject to infant mortality. If it survives beyond that, you can expect that processor to work for many years (decades) without error.

If you overclocked that processor (even for a year)--all expectations are thrown out of the window. The infant mortality phase grows because you begin testing it at a parameter it wasn't designed for. Making predictions beyond infant mortality on an overclocked processor are about as accurate as dropping darts from a commercial airliner at 30,000 feet trying to hit a board the size of a barn on the ground. Russian roulette has better odds.

[p_o_s_pc]

Originally Posted by Paulieg

Overclocking is not black and white when speaking of errors. Simply make sure that your overclock is stable before using it for WCG.

how do you recommend that? overnight of OCCT,orthos,CPU burn? I test mine using OCCT linpack for atleast 5hrs before i start WCG and if i get an error even once i run OCCT 24hrs is that a good way to do it?

[Chicken Patty]

5,643 points for me yesterday! Now we are rolling Not impressive for you guys, but for me its an improvement.

[Paulieg]

Originally Posted by p_o_s_pc

how do you recommend that? overnight of OCCT,orthos,CPU burn? I test mine using OCCT linpack for atleast 5hrs before i start WCG and if i get an error even once i run OCCT 24hrs is that a good way to do it?

5 hours of Linpack is more than enough. Basically, if I can pass 20 cycles of LinX I'm stable. This takes like a half hour. I'd say with OCCT Linpack, if you can pass an hour, you're good.

Originally Posted by Chicken Patty

5,643 points for me yesterday! Now we are rolling Not impressive for you guys, but for me its an improvement.

Excellent, CP. I can't wait to get back in to the 5000-7000 ballpark.

[Fitseries3]

whats all this occt/linX/linpack talk?

is it really that hard to find stable settings for boinc?

im not trying to be mean or arrogant here... im just wondering what different people have found from experience.

what OC is everyone on i7 running for crunching?

[Paulieg]

Originally Posted by Fitseries3

whats all this occt/linX/linpack talk?

is it really that hard to find stable settings for boinc?

im not trying to be mean or arrogant here... im just wondering what different people have found from experience.

what OC is everyone on i7 running for crunching?

It's really not hard at all to find stable OC settings for Boinc. There was just some discussion regarding the relationship b/t WCG errors and unstable overclocks. The LinX and Linpack talk is because it's the quickest way to know whether your cpu is stable.

My DO's are running at 3.6ghz 1.15v for crunching.

Oh, and when are we going to see our team captain back up and crunching?

[Fitseries3]

august 1st, 2009.

if im not back on you guys can bash me until i get running again.

im leaving tomorrow for AZ until the 1st.



i seemed to be able to get 4.3ghz crunching rather easily. i think thats why my electric bill was $34 higher than usual though.

but that $34 was gtx260 OCed and folding + i7 crunching at 4.3ghz 24/7.

i go back to work in august so $34 wont be but a few pennies from my pocket.

oh....

i think for i7 crunching it would be best to swap my 2x295s out for something like a 8800gs to keep the power consumption down.

perhaps the new gt220 cards are around $50?

[FordGT90Concept]

No single peice of software tests every possible scenario. Even if your computer is four hours Linpack stable doesn't necessarily mean it won't error given the right circumstances. Sure, I would recommend at least an hour of Linpack, Prime 95, or other stress test (these are good examples because they are scientific in origin) to establish at least a base line for stability but, that doesn't necessarily mean it stops there. You must be proactive at correcting errors so they are less likely to happen in the future. Errors don't help anyone.

As I said previously, an error is an error. If you get any errors at all, your system is running too hard.

[Fitseries3]

i used to run my e8600 24/7 at 4.8ghz on water. it would run occt, p95, linpack all day 24hours straight no problems at all.

but

once every 2 weeks it would BSOD and reboot while idling on the desktop.

temps where fine so that couldnt have been it.

it could have been a problem with windows though. who knows.

[Paulieg]

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

No single peice of software tests every possible scenario. Even if your computer is four hours Linpack stable doesn't necessarily mean it won't error given the right circumstances. Sure, I would recommend at least an hour of Linpack, Prime 95, or other stress test (these are good examples because they are scientific in origin) to establish at least a base line for stability but, that doesn't necessarily mean it stops there. You must be proactive at correcting errors so they are less likely to happen in the future. Errors don't help anyone.

As I said previously, an error is an error. If you get any errors at all, your system is running too hard.

We just shouldn't over think this stuff. If an error occurs, even after stability testing, just back down the OC. However, I've never seen a machine with a stable OC spit out errors in WCG.

[hat]

Just imagine if a supercomputer was overclocked, even only by 1MHz... all that extra computational power

[mmaakk]

Originally Posted by Chicken Patty

5,643 points for me yesterday! Now we are rolling Not impressive for you guys, but for me its an improvement.

7,635 for me yesterday!

CP: your words = mine

I'm very happy too

[Mindweaver]

Originally Posted by mmaakk

7,635 for me yesterday!

CP: your words = mine

I'm very happy too

Good Job mmaakk! Keep it coming!

[mosheen]

can only start crunching and folding next week. still waiting on my cpu.
what kind of points can i get with an e6300@4.2ghz??

[Mindweaver]

Originally Posted by mosheen

can only start crunching and folding next week. still waiting on my cpu.
what kind of points can i get with an e6300@4.2ghz??

Around 1.5k - 2.5k BOINC ppd.

[FordGT90Concept]

Originally Posted by Fitseries3

once every 2 weeks it would BSOD and reboot while idling on the desktop.

Idle clocks must push your processor's transistors just right then. Idle clocks are a very different workload from heavy ALU/FPU workloads.

Originally Posted by Paulieg

However, I've never seen a machine with a stable OC spit out errors in WCG.

It wouldn't be stable if it did, would it?

[mosheen]

Been crunching on my pentium m 1.7ghz for a week now.
Got 13,000 points only so far.