| Author |
Message |
|---|
John Honorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
                 
|
|
We're looking for anyone running 64-bit Linux to help test version 1.0.10 of the gcwsieve program.
If you are able to help, please email pgsieving at yahoo dot com.
p.s. for 32-bit users, version 1.0.9 and 1.0.10 are the same. Upgrade if you like, but it's not necessary.
____________
|
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
Update: Unfortunately there have been no takers on the previous post. However, others testing the Linux x86-64 build have reported significant improvements in speed using versions 1.0.10 and 1.0.11.
We are still looking for anyone willing to do additional testing. :)
EDIT:
Results from a test run using the Cullen 2M file at p=1000e9 on a C2D @ 2.67GHz:
version 1.0.9 64-bit: 61 kp/s
version 1.0.11 32-bit: 83 kp/s
version 1.0.11 64-bit: 100 kp/s
Link to the latest versions:
http://www.geocities.com/g_w_reynolds/gcwsieve/
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
Linux is faster than windows?
(mine on cullen 2m is about 42000per second) |
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
Linux is faster than windows?
(mine on cullen 2m is about 42000per second)
No, not exactly. It's the 64-bit Linux that's faster. The 32-bit Linux and 32-bit Windows are about the same.
My Athlon 64 3400+ @2.19GHz w/1.25GB RAM is doing ~43-44 Kp/s using 32-bit Windows which is similar to your 42 Kp/s. I presume you're using 32-bit Linux.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
Linux is faster than windows?
(mine on cullen 2m is about 42000per second)
No, not exactly. It's the 64-bit Linux that's faster. The 32-bit Linux and 32-bit Windows are about the same.
My Athlon 64 3400+ @2.19GHz w/1.25GB RAM is doing ~43-44 Kp/s using 32-bit Windows which is similar to your 42 Kp/s. I presume you're using 32-bit Linux.
NO!!!Mine is athlon64 4600+ @2.41GHz, 2G RAM but on windows platform. |
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
Linux is faster than windows?
(mine on cullen 2m is about 42000per second)
No, not exactly. It's the 64-bit Linux that's faster. The 32-bit Linux and 32-bit Windows are about the same.
My Athlon 64 3400+ @2.19GHz w/1.25GB RAM is doing ~43-44 Kp/s using 32-bit Windows which is similar to your 42 Kp/s. I presume you're using 32-bit Linux.
NO!!!Mine is athlon64 4600+ @2.41GHz, 2G RAM but on windows platform.
You should be doing better than me...
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
Still interested in someone who tests?
I could use a vmware debian 64 on a semperon 2800.
No very fast, but should still be possible to use.
BTW there is a version .12
____________
|
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
Still interested in someone who tests?
I could use a vmware debian 64 on a semperon 2800.
No very fast, but should still be possible to use.
BTW there is a version .12
Thanks for the offer. While 64-bit Linux gcwsieve currently has testers, we can always use more help.
If you wish to participate, you could visit the Welcome thread, download the 64-bit Linux version and reserve a small (1G-5G) range in either the Cullen thread or Woodall thread.
When you report back your factor results, you could also provide info on what rates you experienced.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
From Geoff Reynolds, the creator of gcwsieve.
[quote]The main loop for SSE2 and x86-64 machines is now 100% assembly instead of a mixture of C and inline assembly, and tries to read memory in a more predictable way.
The 32-bit executable runs about 15% faster on my P4, and the 64-bit executable runs about 60% faster on my C2D. (64-bit is now almost twice as fast as 32-bit on the C2D).
And i can confirm!
I am running on ubuntu 64 and it takes less than 50% of time on my 32bit
system.
Lennart |
|
|
|
|
Linux is faster than windows?
(mine on cullen 2m is about 42000per second)
No, not exactly. It's the 64-bit Linux that's faster. The 32-bit Linux and 32-bit Windows are about the same.
My Athlon 64 3400+ @2.19GHz w/1.25GB RAM is doing ~43-44 Kp/s using 32-bit Windows which is similar to your 42 Kp/s. I presume you're using 32-bit Linux.
Just for compare. 1.0.14 version of gcwsieve.
Running Ubuntu64bit on Q6600 2.4Ghz 2G Ram
Cullen 2M-10M 1300-1302 Range on XP 32bit
Cullen 2M-10M 1400-1420 range on Ubuntu
gcwsieve
version 1.0.14 32-bit: 84 kp/s on one core using XP
version 1.0.14 64-bit: 197-199 Kp/s on one core using Ubuntu64bit .
Running 2m-3m on C2D 6400 2.13 2G Ram
Range in both case 220-240G
gcwsieve
version 1.0.14 32-bit: 136-140 kp/s on one core using XP
version 1.0.14 64-bit: 290-294 Kp/s on one core using Ubuntu64bit .
Lennart
|
|
|
|
|
Linux is faster than windows?
(mine on cullen 2m is about 42000per second)
No, not exactly. It's the 64-bit Linux that's faster. The 32-bit Linux and 32-bit Windows are about the same.
My Athlon 64 3400+ @2.19GHz w/1.25GB RAM is doing ~43-44 Kp/s using 32-bit Windows which is similar to your 42 Kp/s. I presume you're using 32-bit Linux.
NO!!!Mine is athlon64 4600+ @2.41GHz, 2G RAM but on windows platform.
You should be doing better than me...
Why that happen? |
|
|
|
|
|
Since I have never use Linux/ubuntu before(LOL), I don't know about the working situation on that. Can anyone tell me? |
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
Since I have never use Linux/ubuntu before(LOL), I don't know about the working situation on that. Can anyone tell me?
You can learn more about it here: http://www.ubuntu.com/
Also, check out this site for dual boot options: http://apcmag.com/node/5162/
____________
|
|
|
|
|
Since I have never use Linux/ubuntu before(LOL), I don't know about the working situation on that. Can anyone tell me?
You can learn more about it here: http://www.ubuntu.com/
Also, check out this site for dual boot options: http://apcmag.com/node/5162/
No. I don't mean that.
What I mean is that after entering Linux/ubuntu, how to get the sieve start working?
And when it is working, what can I see?
p.s:I have not installed it right now, but using a LIVE CD.
|
|
|
|
|
Since I have never use Linux/ubuntu before(LOL), I don't know about the working situation on that. Can anyone tell me?
You can learn more about it here: http://www.ubuntu.com/
Also, check out this site for dual boot options: http://apcmag.com/node/5162/
No. I don't mean that.
What I mean is that after entering Linux/ubuntu, how to get the sieve start working?
And when it is working, what can I see?
p.s:I have not installed it right now, but using a LIVE CD.
You made some dir,s Example c1 & c2
Then put the Sievingfiles in there.
All even gcwsieve
Edit your commandfile ( gcwsieve-command-line.txt )
Open terminale go to your c1 dir. enter ./gcwsieve
Then you shold se the same as in windows cmd window.
Lennart
|
|
|
|
|
Since I have never use Linux/ubuntu before(LOL), I don't know about the working situation on that. Can anyone tell me?
You can learn more about it here: http://www.ubuntu.com/
Also, check out this site for dual boot options: http://apcmag.com/node/5162/
No. I don't mean that.
What I mean is that after entering Linux/ubuntu, how to get the sieve start working?
And when it is working, what can I see?
p.s:I have not installed it right now, but using a LIVE CD.
You made some dir,s Example c1 & c2
Then put the Sievingfiles in there.
All even gcwsieve
Edit your commandfile ( gcwsieve-command-line.txt )
Open terminale go to your c1 dir. enter ./gcwsieve
Then you shold se the same as in windows cmd window.
Lennart
I missed the step of "Open terminale go to your c1 dir. enter ./gcwsieve"
thank you lennart
EDIT:but now I got this
gcwsieve 1.0.16 -- A sieve for Generalised Cullen/Woodall numbers n*b^n+/-1.
ERROR: Failed to open input file `sieve.txt'.
Also, I want to know how to stop it. |
|
|
|
|
|
EDIT:but now I got this
gcwsieve 1.0.16 -- A sieve for Generalised Cullen/Woodall numbers n*b^n+/-1.
ERROR: Failed to open input file `sieve.txt'.
Also, I want to know how to stop it.[/quote]
CTRL-C Whit terminal window aktive.
You must have all files in the direktory.
Lennart
|
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
EDIT:but now I got this
gcwsieve 1.0.16 -- A sieve for Generalised Cullen/Woodall numbers n*b^n+/-1.
ERROR: Failed to open input file `sieve.txt'.
Also, I want to know how to stop it.
CTRL-C Whit terminal window aktive.
You must have all files in the direktory.
More specifically, you don't have your gcwsieve-command-line.txt file in the directory so gcwsieve is looking for the default "sieve.txt" file. The gcwsieve-command-line.txt over-rides that by telling gcwsieve the input file name.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
actually, I download both things on the web,including gcwsieve,readme,gcwsieve-command-line.txt and a sievefile(ranges of numbers)
I put them into a same file.But it doesn't work.(a screen look like cmd in windows) Instead, if I double click gcwsieve(I assume it is a .exe LOL), it will run "under background" and a factor file will still created.
Maybe I type something wrong in the terminal.
So, please tell me what to type IN DETAIL!
thanks alot |
|
|
|
|
actually, I download both things on the web,including gcwsieve,readme,gcwsieve-command-line.txt and a sievefile(ranges of numbers)
I put them into a same file.But it doesn't work.(a screen look like cmd in windows) Instead, if I double click gcwsieve(I assume it is a .exe LOL), it will run "under background" and a factor file will still created.
Maybe I type something wrong in the terminal.
So, please tell me what to type IN DETAIL!
thanks alot
I think you have all files in the direktory.
Open terminal
cd Desktop
cd "your dir name"
If you have gcwsieve and gcwsieve-command-line.txt and the sieve file
nor sure what you are sieving but same name in command file
then keyin ./gcwsieve
Then enter
it wold say
gcwsieve 1.0.16 -- A sieve for...........
try that.
Lennart |
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
actually, I download both things on the web,including gcwsieve,readme,gcwsieve-command-line.txt and a sievefile(ranges of numbers)
I put them into a same file.But it doesn't work.(a screen look like cmd in windows) Instead, if I double click gcwsieve(I assume it is a .exe LOL), it will run "under background" and a factor file will still created.
Maybe I type something wrong in the terminal.
So, please tell me what to type IN DETAIL!
thanks alot
Yes, you can double click gcwsieve.exe and if there is a gcwsieve-command-line.txt file in the same directory, it will read it and run based off those inputs.
As for starting it in terminal, I default to Lennart. :)
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
Really want to thank both of you.
It works now. |
|
|
geoffVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 3 Aug 07
Posts: 99
ID: 10427
Credit: 343,437
RAC: 0
|
|
If anyone is able to test gcwsieve on Athlon64 or 64-bit Pentium machines it would be helpful to know the relative speed difference between the 32-bit and 64-bit executables.
To test the 32-bit executable on a 64-bit Linux system you will need either to install 32-bit system libraries, or use the statically-linked executables (in gcwsieve-X.Y.Z-linux-ARCH-static.tar.gz).
For Core 2 machines the 64-bit executable is typically about 1.9-2.0 times faster than the 32-bit one. If it is slower than that on the Athlon64 or Pentium then I may be able to improve the code for those machines, but I'll need someone with access to one to do testing of some trial programs.
|
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
|
Using gcwsieve version 1.0.18
Woodall 4M<n<5M; p=650G-675G
AMD Athlon64 3400+ @ 2.19GHz with 1.2G RAM
Windows XP 32 bit ~59000 p/s; L1 cache 64KB; L2 cache 1024KB; Using SSE2 code path; no prefetch
Live CD Ubuntu Linux 32 bit static ~59000 p/s; L1 cache 64KB; L2 cache 1024KB; Using SSE2 code path; no prefetch
Live CD Ubuntu Linux 64 bit ~100000 p/s; L1 cache 64KB; L2 cache 1024KB; no prefetch
I used -vv in my gcwsieve-command-line file to get the additional information.
Linux 64 bit roughly 67% improvement over 32 bit on my machine.
____________
|
|
|
geoffVolunteer developer
Send message
Joined: 3 Aug 07
Posts: 99
ID: 10427
Credit: 343,437
RAC: 0
|
|
I have found one difference between the AMD64 and Core2 that probably accounts for most of the speed difference in the 64-bit code: The cvtsi2sdq/cvtsd2siq instructions have latency 12/10 on AMD64, but only 4/3 on Core2. It may still be possible to hide these latencies by unrolling the main loop further, it will require some experimentation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am now running gcwsieve 1.0.20 Linux 64 x86
The change from 1.0.16 is 5% faster.
Tested on Ubuntu 64bit
Woodall 3M-4M 2700-2800G 292 200 p/sec
Cullen 3M-4M 1700-1800G 385 000 p/sec
Running core 2 Quad 6600 2.4 Ghz
Lennart |
|
|
|
|
|
Any change we see a 64bit linux sieve boinc app soon?
____________
|
|
|
JohnHonorary cruncher
Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 06
Posts: 2875
ID: 2449
Credit: 2,681,934
RAC: 0
|
Any change we see a 64bit linux sieve boinc app soon?
It's on the to-do list along with 32bit Linux. How soon? I don't know.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
How are these 64 bit Linux bins coming along ??? Any ETA ??
____________
|
|
|
|
|
How are these 64 bit Linux bins coming along ??? Any ETA ??
They tested yesterday. No good result's.
Hope they solve it soon.
Lennart
____________
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Any ETA for the 64bit bins ?
____________
|
|
|
RytisVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 22 Jun 05
Posts: 2653
ID: 1
Credit: 102,502,418
RAC: 79,631
                   
|
Any ETA for the 64bit bins ?
Maybe this weekend, but no promises.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thx Rytis m8.
Finally got the Ubuntu 64bit up and running with xp dual boot today, and also got the 64bit boinc cc up and running.
So I'm eagerly awaiting some 64bit bins, fingers crossed for the weekend
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
BTW, there are some XP tweaks that can be made "out off the box", like setting all the fancy gui and sliding off, which does add some performance to an XP system.
Are there similar "tweaks" for Ubuntu or linux in general ??
____________
|
|
|
|
|
Any ETA for the 64bit bins ?
Maybe this weekend, but no promises.
I guess it was a nogo Rytis m8 ??
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
Today I got a strane message:
Host Project Date Message
debian64.achim.xxx PrimeGrid 06/11/2007 13:33:58 Message from server: (There was work but not for the applications you have allowed. Please check your settings on the website.)
I never saw this actively before, but might be old.
This box allows only 64bit linux.
I agree there was work for other platforms, and I have only the sieving applications allowed, but I can not see any work for my platform, regardless of the application (Sieve, llr).
____________
|
|
|
RytisVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 22 Jun 05
Posts: 2653
ID: 1
Credit: 102,502,418
RAC: 79,631
|
I agree there was work for other platforms, and I have only the sieving applications allowed, but I can not see any work for my platform, regardless of the application (Sieve, llr).
It's probably just BOINC server issuing strange messages, but I'm not sure what's causing it. There is no 64bit linux work as of yet.
____________
|
|
|
|
|
[There is no 64bit linux work as of yet.
Still waiting....
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
And still a nogo or ??
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
Any ETA Rytis m8 ??
____________
|
|
|
RytisVolunteer moderator
Project administrator
Send message
Joined: 22 Jun 05
Posts: 2653
ID: 1
Credit: 102,502,418
RAC: 79,631
|
Any ETA Rytis m8 ??
Not really...
____________
|
|
|
|
|
|
I saw the mesage from the server changed:
before I got:
Host Project Date Message
PrimeGrid 11/12/2007 14:46:17 Message from server: (There was work but not for the applications you have allowed. Please check your settings on the website.)
PrimeGrid 11/12/2007 14:46:17 Message from server: (there was work for other platforms)
PrimeGrid 11/12/2007 14:46:17 Message from server: No work sent
PrimeGrid 11/12/2007 14:46:17 Scheduler request succeeded: got 0 new tasks
PrimeGrid 11/12/2007 14:46:12 Sending scheduler request: To fetch work. Requesting 86400 seconds of work, reporting 0 completed tasks
Now I get:
Host Project Date Message
PrimeGrid 12/12/2007 14:48:40 Sending scheduler request: To fetch work. Requesting 86400 seconds of work, reporting 0 completed tasks
PrimeGrid 12/12/2007 14:47:40 Scheduler request succeeded: got 0 new tasks
PrimeGrid 12/12/2007 14:47:35 Sending scheduler request: To fetch work. Requesting 86400 seconds of work, reporting 0 completed tasks
Means the server does not reply any more the messages.
As the status tells me there is in general enough work, I assume something might be on the way
Achim
____________
|
|
|
 pschoeferVolunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 20 Sep 05
Posts: 686
ID: 845
Credit: 2,910,184,413
RAC: 199,509
                             
|
Means the server does not reply any more the messages.
As the status tells me there is in general enough work, I assume something might be on the way
It's more likely an effect of that problem: http://www.primegrid.com/forum_thread.php?id=782
____________
  |
|
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately I assume you are right.
Thanks
____________
|
|
|
