1) Forums : Technical Support : Q6700 Performance (Message 7806)
Posted 20 Jan 2009 by Sysadmin_Ed
Post:
The Asus instructions for the motherboard stress the system won\'t even boot unless both the 24 pin EATXPWR and the 4 pin ATX12V connections are made. This is one area where manufacturers are liable to be very different but it is probably worth re-reading your manual just to be sure.

Incidentally, my power supply is rated at 550w and it is also running a GTX260 graphics card.

Phoneman1


Thanks... yeah, like you, the 4-pin ATX12V (the 2x2) is what I\'m using. I have read and re-read the manual until I\'m cross-eyed and there\'s nothing more to be gleaned from it.

There\'s a couple of support sites that I can ask to see what they say.

My power supply is 650w and I\'m running a low-end graphics card.

Ed
2) Forums : Technical Support : Q6700 Performance (Message 7804)
Posted 20 Jan 2009 by Sysadmin_Ed
Post:
About 18 months ago I ran some tests on my old Pentium 4 1.9 Mhz machine. I noticed a drop in performance when I added a PCI card with additional 4 USB ports and again with a network card (RJ45 connnector). I suspect it was acombination of reduced current available and also bus contention on the motherboard. So if you have added any non-essential hardware best remove it if you can, less is definitely more in this game!

Phoneman1


Hmmm - voltage... When I was building the machine the Gigabyte GA-EX38-DS4 mobo doc said that if I was using an \"extreme\" type processor, then on the ATX_12V_2X/ATX socket/2x4 12V Power Connector it recommended that I use a 2x4 (8-pin) power connector configuration rather than a 2x2 (4-pin) configuration. This mobo socket and the connector was defaulted to a 2x2 config as you had to remove protective covers to use the 2x4 config.

However, it didn\'t say NOT to use the 2x4 configuration if I wasn\'t using an extreme processor (how\'s that for a bunch of negatives), and I thought about this for a while, but decided to play it safe and just use the 2x2 configuration. I was afraid that I would blow something otherwise.

I\'m wondering if the CPU is getting enough power? It would seem to me that it would malfunction in that case, producing invalid BOINC work units or they would blow up frequently. Neither is the case - the system is VERY stable. But I don\'t know much about CPU voltages.

So what should the voltage read? I\'ve got speedfan installed so I can see all the mobo readings.

Otherwise, there isn\'t any overly taxing PCI cards or expansions, and I didn\'t install any of the power-conserving or throttling software that came with the mobo.
3) Forums : Technical Support : Q6700 Performance (Message 7802)
Posted 20 Jan 2009 by Sysadmin_Ed
Post:
Phoneman,

That certainly DOES help. Thanks for your response. I know now that what I\'m seeing is not TOO terribly off the norm, although there IS something going on that is degrading things a bit.

My CPU benchmarks last night dropped to 5400 Dhrystones. It could be the Comodo firewall/AV I recently installed, but task manager doesn\'t show these tasks gaining much CPU time. In fact, whenever I run task manager, it usually shows 25%/25%/25%/24% for all four cores running BOINC projects, with 1% showing for task manager itself (adding to 100%).

I\'ve disabled unnecessary or unwanted XP services, and done other various XP tuning tricks, but I didn\'t see very much difference.

If I could get to 6000 without O/C then I\'d be satisfied.
4) Forums : Technical Support : Q6700 Performance (Message 7798)
Posted 19 Jan 2009 by Sysadmin_Ed
Post:
I\'m not sure where else to post this so here goes...

I\'m starting to think that I might have a configuration problem with my Q6700-based system (XP SP3 32-bit).

When I run BM\'s CPU benchmarks, I consistently get about 5600 to 5800 Dhrystones on this system now. When the system was just built (quite bare) and didn\'t have ANYTHING additional running (like AV), I was only getting around 6000 Dhrystones.

However, when I look at other people\'s machine stats I see 6800 to 7200 Dhrystones being the norm on this chip and with the same O/S. I know that not everybody is overclocking their machines.

I\'m at a loss to understand this performance difference. The CPU clock multiple is 10 so the CPU is at 2.66 GHz (right where it should be), it\'s got 1066 memory in it...

If any of you have non-overclocked Q6700 CPUs and you\'re way above me in the benchmark, I\'d like to know what you suggest that I take a look at.

Thanks
5) Forums : Technical Support : Message from Server:Server error: can\'t attach shared memory (Message 6388)
Posted 29 Jun 2008 by Sysadmin_Ed
Post:
I\'m getting these messages right now, also.
6) Forums : Technical Support : \"You used the wrong URL\" message (Message 4937)
Posted 8 Feb 2008 by Sysadmin_Ed
Post:
Upper-/lowercase problem?

BOINC currently compares the URLs case sensitive (even though the protocol, server and domain part should not be), so if you typed \"http://Cosmologyathome.org/\", BOINC will report it as an incorrect URL.

You can see what URL you are attached to in the account file for cosmology in your BOINC directory. When you double-click it, it should open in the web browser or in an editor and show the <master_url> entry.


p.s.: please do not post the complete file here, it contains your account ID.

AHA! Here\'s the line from xml file:

<master_url>http://www.cosmologyathome.org/</master_url>

I don\'t remember typing in the \"www\"... oh well, I\'ll finish the enqueued WUs, detach, and then reattach to the URL without the \"www\".

Thanks for your help.
7) Forums : Technical Support : \"You used the wrong URL\" message (Message 4934)
Posted 7 Feb 2008 by Sysadmin_Ed
Post:
I\'m getting these messages:

2/7/2008 4:25:43 AM|Cosmology@Home|You used the wrong URL for this project
2/7/2008 4:25:43 AM|Cosmology@Home|The correct URL is http://cosmologyathome.org/
2/7/2008 4:25:43 AM|Cosmology@Home|Using the wrong URL can cause problems in some cases.
2/7/2008 4:25:43 AM|Cosmology@Home|When convenient, detach this project, then reattach to http://cosmologyathome.org/

I\'ve already done what it asked me to do - detach and reattach with the stated URL - once before and the messages are back.

What\'s going on?
8) Forums : Technical Support : Files camb_scalarcls.chk and camb_tensorcls.chk (Message 4494)
Posted 18 Jan 2008 by Sysadmin_Ed
Post:
I drained the Cosmology@Home queue (allowed all current WUs to finish with no new work) and those giant files disappeared.

Problem solved!
9) Forums : Technical Support : Files camb_scalarcls.chk and camb_tensorcls.chk (Message 4491)
Posted 17 Jan 2008 by Sysadmin_Ed
Post:
Hey, Déjà Vu. ;-)

Didn\'t I see this before? :-)


Yes - since I was told that this is a Cosmology@Home issue, I thought that I\'d re-post on this forum to get advice.



I will tell you this Ed....sometimes my hosts virtual/swap memory overloads with C@H files and creates errors in the results if not caught....this typically happens on hosts with lesser ram but not always....this phenomena doesn\'t happen often (less than once a month on 5 hosts). A simple reboot clears it all out.


Thanks. I checked my results all the way back to Jan 7 and the outcomes all show \"success\". All of my BOINC projects running have never even come close to maxing out my real or virtual memory (2 GB / 4 GB).
10) Forums : Technical Support : Files camb_scalarcls.chk and camb_tensorcls.chk (Message 4488)
Posted 17 Jan 2008 by Sysadmin_Ed
Post:
Hey, Déjà Vu. ;-)

Didn\'t I see this before? :-)


Yes - since I was told that this is a Cosmology@Home issue, I thought that I\'d re-post on this forum to get advice.
11) Forums : Technical Support : Files camb_scalarcls.chk and camb_tensorcls.chk (Message 4486)
Posted 17 Jan 2008 by Sysadmin_Ed
Post:
These files are in c:program files/boinc/BOINC/slots/2 and take up 54 and 11 mb, respectively. The file type is labeled as \"Recovered File Fragments\"

Someone in the BOINC forum said that these files are associated with Cosmology@Home WUs. Is this correct?

If so, they are quickly growing larger and are frequently badly fragmented. What are these, and is something going wrong that I need to know about? Should I do something to manage these files?

I don\'t see any evidence that anything is failing with my work units.

BTW, I defrag my hard drive every other day - that\'s where I noticed them, from the defragmenter\'s report.

Thanks,
Ed
12) Forums : General Topics : Why do you participate in Cosmology@Home? Who is the \"most surprising\" participant? (Message 4302)
Posted 18 Dec 2007 by Sysadmin_Ed
Post:
I\'m just an astronomy fan ever since I first saw Lost in Space back in the 60s (I know, I know - bad, laughable science there) and moved onto the Star Treks and Sci Fi in general. I wanted to be an astronaut but my eyesight wasn\'t good enough :^)

But seriously, ever since I was a kid, I have just been astounded by all of the illogic and irrational behaviors of our societies (hmmm... sound familiar?).

My feeling is that the more we learn about the cosmos, the more we understand the realities of existence and ourselves, and hopefully we\'ll lose some of the frightening, self-absorbed fantasies that we maintain that cause so much hardship in our world.

I started crunching SETI years ago, and find that cosmology@home\'s mission and golas are just as exciting.