Os-X Time comparisons PPC vs. Intel
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Os-X Time comparisons PPC vs. Intel
Message board moderation
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
 Paul D. BuckSend message Joined: 12 Apr 08 Posts: 621 Credit: 161,934,067 RAC: 0  
|
Ok, my G5 and Mac Pro are both running Leopard. the G5 does 12:04 Mac Pro does 8:21 G5 is 2.0 GHz, Mac Pro is 3.2 GHz ... Though the clock speeds are not true indications of processing power. My recollection is that the Xeon running XP gets comparable times with the Mac Pro with its Xeon cores ... but memory is fuzzy and I have not been running MaH there for sometime so I have none stacked up |
|
Send message Joined: 22 Nov 07 Posts: 36 Credit: 1,224,316 RAC: 0 
|
Paul: My g5 (2.0 GHz, I think) dual does 12.4, and my Intel MacBookPro 2.16GHz does 12.7, and my iBook G4 1.67 GHz does 45.6 The G5 and Intel are on Tiger, and the iBook is on Leopard... C Team MacNN |
|
Paul D. Buck Send message Joined: 12 Apr 08 Posts: 621 Credit: 161,934,067 RAC: 0
|
Well, the fact that there are applications for all platforms is one of the attractive features here I have to say ... and the short processing times is oddly satisfying as you have this odd feeling of "doing more" just due to the fact that you went through 20 tasks where the other project you only did one ... anyway, it sure looks like this will be one of my main projects, though my PCs are only using it as a back-up project on a couple machines because I am running PC only projects on those machines to get my numbers up (PrimeGrid for example) ... And I do want to get a couple more real SCIENCE projects ahead of SaH ... Were I able to get the work LHC would have been my choice but it looks like this project and WCG and RaH will be the ones I will be "pushing" to get them over the hump ... It looks like that I will be running as many as 20 projects on the Mac Pro with resource shares from 100 down to 12 (4 at 100, 4 at 50, 4 at 25, and 8 at 12 or 14) thusly dedicating one processor each to 4 projects, one processor for two more projects and so on with one processor supporting 8 projects (in effect) ... I am starting to "slot" them in with the right shares as I get the initial CS number where I want it to be ... at the moment I have too many at share 100 to get them ... I need to work on the allocations for my dual (HT capable) Xeon and the other two, two processor systems (though they will likely just get the allocations from the 4 and 8 processor systems) ... Ah, decisions, decisions ... |
 Send message Joined: 11 Apr 08 Posts: 9 Credit: 400,309 RAC: 0 
|
Paul, Click on my username, then computers, then view. My Q6600 does them in 4:10(OCed to 2.9), my AMD 9600 black (OCed to 2.6) 3:50, my AMD 64 2800 clawhammer 6:10, my AMD64 X2 4800 in 4:27, my AMD64 5200 3:59, and my AMD64 X2 6000 in 3:37. all using 64b Mandriva linux. Basically, It looks like the mac app is grossly under optimized. Sorry. tony {edit} my AMD64 3700 (single core) using 32b windows is doing them in 8 min. I just checked the wife's MOBILE AMD64 3700 and it's doing them in 6:29 with 32b win.  |
|
Paul D. Buck Send message Joined: 12 Apr 08 Posts: 621 Credit: 161,934,067 RAC: 0
|
Paul, Click on my username, then computers, then view. My Q6600 does them in 4:10(OCed to 2.9), my AMD 9600 black (OCed to 2.6) 3:50, my AMD 64 2800 clawhammer 6:10, my AMD64 X2 4800 in 4:27, my AMD64 5200 3:59, and my AMD64 X2 6000 in 3:37. all using 64b Mandriva linux. Tony, yah ... My AMD 4400 does them in 7 min ... so, at the moment, that is who is doing them the most ... though I have some LHC running there ... and PrimeGrid ... My Poor old G5, used to be the fastest with the optimized application for EaH and that does not seem to be true either ... oh well ... for the moment ... I will work with what I have ... I have been using M-Way as a "filler" project on several of my computers to give them something else to do to make sure they do not run out of work ... the best news is that I got one more project at its initial target and so I am moving on to two others while I drain off the excess work I D/L from that project. ONWARDS! |
|
Send message Joined: 21 Nov 07 Posts: 52 Credit: 1,756,052 RAC: 0
|
Paul, Click on my username, then computers, then view. My Q6600 does them in 4:10(OCed to 2.9), my AMD 9600 black (OCed to 2.6) 3:50, my AMD 64 2800 clawhammer 6:10, my AMD64 X2 4800 in 4:27, my AMD64 5200 3:59, and my AMD64 X2 6000 in 3:37. all using 64b Mandriva linux. Astro, unfortunately you are completely right: My 8-core MacPro 3.0 GHz takes more than twice as much time (535 sec/WU) for a work-unit than the 2.4 GHz Linux machines (190-210 sec./WU) and almost exactly the same time as my 3-year-old G5 Dual 2.7 GHz machine. Any chance we will see optimized Mac-apps soon? 
|
|
Send message Joined: 31 Mar 08 Posts: 23 Credit: 721,836 RAC: 0 
|
More info in this thread. http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/forum_thread.php?id=279 FYI, my Mac Pro 2.66 Quad takes 4:33 / WU under Ubuntu 64 vs 11:29 in OS 10.5. Clear that when the AF race is over (today 20:00 CEST), MW will get a low priority in my settings when I return to Leopard (as long as the optimization has not occurred). I'm currently crunching with Ubuntu Livecd's. |
|
Paul D. Buck Send message Joined: 12 Apr 08 Posts: 621 Credit: 161,934,067 RAC: 0
|
I just installed Ubuntu on a really old system with an AMD XP 2400 processor and it runs the M-Way app faster than the G5, 8 min to 12 ... and I don't think that the processor is that good. It could be as simple as not setting the compiler options correctly, or not selecting the right "switches" for optimizations ... since I am not a coder any more and have not worked with a compiler in years ... well, I am certainly not the one to go off and explore ... Sure wish we had a some about that did use the Apple compiler ... sigh ... Heck, I can't even remember what they call the darn thing ... |
Crunch3r Send message Joined: 17 Feb 08 Posts: 363 Credit: 258,227,990 RAC: 0  |
I just installed Ubuntu on a really old system with an AMD XP 2400 processor and it runs the M-Way app faster than the G5, 8 min to 12 ... and I don't think that the processor is that good. That's true... however the cpu is not the limiting factor...
Well you're wrong here... it's an OS issue...
Well you're at least not going of about that app... however... you start that boinc wiki thing again all over the boards... same practise as you did before you "left"... Does that now include hiding behind your "Mental" state if the majority does not agree with you as an excuse ? Like it happen when you decided to depart ?
I've compiled the app using the "apple" compiler which is actulally a modified gcc... still it's an OS issue...
You're probably refering to the old os9 ... or whatever... any OSX uses gcc 3.3 or 4.x ...  Join Support science! Joinc Team BOINC United now! |
Dave Przybylo Send message Joined: 5 Feb 08 Posts: 236 Credit: 49,648 RAC: 0 
|
good to see you on here cruncher. it's true that os x uses the gcc versions that cruncher stated. and i've maximized the compiler settings for optimization. if any of you have any specific flags that are not well known, please tell me. Dave Przybylo MilkyWay@home Developer Department of Computer Science Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute |
|
Paul D. Buck Send message Joined: 12 Apr 08 Posts: 621 Credit: 161,934,067 RAC: 0
|
good to see you on here cruncher. it's true that os x uses the gcc versions that cruncher stated. and i've maximized the compiler settings for optimization. if any of you have any specific flags that are not well known, please tell me. xcode ... that is the name ... The only reason I bring this up is that the Mac Pro I am using does M-Way tasks in 8:20; my old HT Xeon under Win Xp does one in about 11:30 (there are variations in both, but I am looking at the averages) ... That is not quite twice as fast. Yet, the same two computers with similar full loading, actually the Mac Pro is used for other tasks too, is running a CPDN model as is the Xeon and the Mac Pro is running that model roughly 3 times as fast ... Both are "slab" models and the Win Xeon is 485 hours runtime (323 done, 162 remaining) and the Mac is 163 (104 and 60 roughly) ... And on a really old Athlon XP 2400 they are running about 8 minutes on Ubuntu Linux ... I don't think the OS accounts for it because if so, then the WIndows machine should be blowing the socks off the Intel based Mac Pro also on other projects not ice versa as is the case ... At any rate, it does strike me as odd ... When a machine that is so old I cannot remember buying it, and I gave it to one of my daughters years ago can out perform a very modern machine on this one project when that is not true for other projects ... I don't have too many projects in common between the various machines, but, 3x+1 looks to be about twice as slow on the Linux box as the Mac Pro ... (~6 hours vs. ~3) ... Which to my mind means that M-Way should be taking about 3 min or so on the Mac Pro ... Is M-Way integer or FP heavy? Any chance you will show the compile options you use(d)? |
|
Paul D. Buck Send message Joined: 12 Apr 08 Posts: 621 Credit: 161,934,067 RAC: 0
|
Well you're at least not going of about that app... however... you start that boinc wiki thing again all over the boards... same practise as you did before you "left"... Does that now include hiding behind your "Mental" state if the majority does not agree with you as an excuse ? Like it happen when you decided to depart ? If memory serves you took a dislike to me well before I did much of anything that you raise here. Since you have apparently nursed that antipathy over the years might I suggest you exercise the option to place me on your ignore lists on all projects, that way you will not have to read things you do not seem to care for. As far as bringing up the Wiki "thing" again, my opinion was solicited and I gave it. In that I am the person that spent the most time writing the Wiki information it seems quite natural to me that this should be so. Just as in matters of hand optimization of applications your opinion would carry more weight in that, if memory serves, this is the area where you have expertise. Dismissing an observation because you have a dislike for the observer serves no one well ... As far as "hiding", well, you are entitled to you opinion on that as well ... all I can say is that it is the mark of a truly callous person to mock another's disability for reasons of personal dislike. I have made no secret of my disabilities because of this imperfect medium we use to communicate and I know that being autistic makes some of my writing less palatable for others and more easily misunderstood. So, I cannot see how the claim that I hide behind my "mental state" as you put it ... has any validity to the discussion at hand. But to clarify, I was born with Asperger's Syndrome and have been diagnosed with Depression, anxiety disorder, panic disorder, agoraphobia, rapid cycle bipolar disorder ... the falling down, walking like a drunk, and inability to talk causes the shrinks to send me to the neurologists and them to pronounce me fit and send me right back. In that I have never hid any of this in the past, or present, how am I hiding? I have never used my condition to excuse my behavior, only to explain it ... a fine distinction I grant ... but where I offend, and cannot clarify, I have never hesitated to apologize. If you wish to discuss this issue, or any other in a rational manner and leave the personal biases out of it, well, I am up for any debate. Should you wish to be rude and unpleasant I will be more than happy to place you on my ignore list. But would it not be better for the projects were you to forget your dislike? |
|
Paul D. Buck Send message Joined: 12 Apr 08 Posts: 621 Credit: 161,934,067 RAC: 0
|
Just a side note, I am not the only one that has reported that there seems to be some abnormality with the speed of the version compiled for the Mac Pro. See also this report. |
|
Crunch3r Send message Joined: 17 Feb 08 Posts: 363 Credit: 258,227,990 RAC: 0 |
340 sec ... http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/workunit.php?wuid=19101113 mac pro @ 3 ghz ... is that better now ? Join Support science! Joinc Team BOINC United now! |
|
Paul D. Buck Send message Joined: 12 Apr 08 Posts: 621 Credit: 161,934,067 RAC: 0
|
340 sec ... http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/workunit.php?wuid=19101113 3.2 GHz Mac Pro with 501 seconds ... So, no, my original question still stands. his: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5365 @ 3.00GHz [x86 Family 6 Model 15 Stepping 8] Mine: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5482 @ 3.20GHz [x86 Family 6 Model 23 Stepping 6] Though he is running Tiger it looks like while I have Leopard installed (if I am reading the OS version numbers right). Which supports your contention that it is the OS, but is still bad because it affects M-Way but no other BOINC project (that I can tell so far) and in that Leopard is going to be the standard OS for all new computers and it is likely that people will be upgrading, this will stay an issue ... And so, my original question/observation still stands ... and judging from the times that he is now apparently getting I should be doing tasks in 320 seconds or so (5 min and change vice 8 min and change) ... For such a short run time that is a 30-40% efficiency loss ... |
|
Send message Joined: 31 Mar 08 Posts: 23 Credit: 721,836 RAC: 0
|
Fully agree with you Paul. Besides, we have been several members of the Alliance Francophone who noticed this during our race. The "geekiest" of us have crunched under Ubuntu 64, more than doubling the crunching speed vs OS 10.5 (provided you do not forget to adapt the cpu throttling if you have a mobile CPU, like iMacs do). Thus, there "must be something' with the compilation or libraries used, since such problems have not been mentionned with other Boinc project clients. Unfortunately, I'm only able to notice the fact, not to propose any practical solution. |
|
Paul D. Buck Send message Joined: 12 Apr 08 Posts: 621 Credit: 161,934,067 RAC: 0
|
Unfortunately, I'm only able to notice the fact, not to propose any practical solution. Well, I did some research and am also trying to see if I can get some advice from other sources ... Anyway, I forwarded my research to Dave and now we have to wait ... :) But, at the least I am hopeful I may (and I stress may) have put our finger on a couple issues that may be relevant ... Of course, I HATE to WAIT! :) Worse than a three year old Christmas eve ... :) Though I kinda hate to do it I may throttle back a bit on the Mac Pro for a bit while he works on this, along with all else he has to do ... |
|
Crunch3r Send message Joined: 17 Feb 08 Posts: 363 Credit: 258,227,990 RAC: 0 |
Unfortunately, I'm only able to notice the fact, not to propose any practical solution. the practical solution is already there... and seems to be working well Join Support science! Joinc Team BOINC United now! |
|
Paul D. Buck Send message Joined: 12 Apr 08 Posts: 621 Credit: 161,934,067 RAC: 0
|
Unfortunately, I'm only able to notice the fact, not to propose any practical solution. I don't understand your point. If it is to step the OS down to Tiger that is not practical when the system was delivered with Leopard. |
|
Crunch3r Send message Joined: 17 Feb 08 Posts: 363 Credit: 258,227,990 RAC: 0 |
That's because you didn't even checked the link and had look at those crunching times...
Again.. the same as above... check the link and look at the OS (Leopard)... Join Support science! Joinc Team BOINC United now! |
©2024 Astroinformatics Group