Huge difference of speed between windows and ubuntu!

Message boards : Number crunching : Huge difference of speed between windows and ubuntu!

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Profile [AF>Dell>LesDelliens]La frite

Send message
Joined: 1 May 09
Posts: 10
Credit: 23,452
RAC: 0
Message 1675 - Posted: 7 Nov 2009, 18:46:30 UTC

Hi!

I've noticed that there is a really important difference in crunching times whether one is on a windows or linux machine.

How come crunching speed is about 3 to 4 times better on linux than on windows?

Thanks

La frite
ID: 1675 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Tim Turner
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 1 May 09
Posts: 570
Credit: 184,322
RAC: 0
Message 1676 - Posted: 7 Nov 2009, 18:51:51 UTC - in response to Message 1675.  
Last modified: 7 Nov 2009, 18:53:32 UTC

Hi!

I've noticed that there is a really important difference in crunching times whether one is on a windows or linux machine.

How come crunching speed is about 3 to 4 times better on linux than on windows?

Thanks

La frite


what are you comparing... show me this via links please... 2 wu's of the same work...

we've had some short wu's and now what's going out are long wu's...

so please, link me to the compared wu's.
Tim Turner
Public Relations Admin
Secunia PSI: http://secunia.com/vulnerability_scanning/personal/
If you need help via voice or Convo; PM me and i will give you details on where i will be; Teamspeak, Yahoo Messenger, or Skype.
ID: 1676 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile [AF>Dell>LesDelliens]La frite

Send message
Joined: 1 May 09
Posts: 10
Credit: 23,452
RAC: 0
Message 1678 - Posted: 7 Nov 2009, 21:06:16 UTC

See for this workunit for example:
http://boinc.drugdiscoveryathome.com/workunit.php?wuid=336364

You can see the host with linux is much faster.
I tried it too on ubuntu on my computer and I noticed the same thing.

Thanks
ID: 1678 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Tim Turner
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 1 May 09
Posts: 570
Credit: 184,322
RAC: 0
Message 1681 - Posted: 7 Nov 2009, 21:28:50 UTC - in response to Message 1678.  

See for this workunit for example:
http://boinc.drugdiscoveryathome.com/workunit.php?wuid=336364

You can see the host with linux is much faster.
I tried it too on ubuntu on my computer and I noticed the same thing.

Thanks


this wu is linux 64 bit versus 32 bit windows, thats why it's faster... but jack and i are about to go nutz over the 64 bit app.


Tim Turner
Public Relations Admin
Secunia PSI: http://secunia.com/vulnerability_scanning/personal/
If you need help via voice or Convo; PM me and i will give you details on where i will be; Teamspeak, Yahoo Messenger, or Skype.
ID: 1681 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile [AF>Dell>LesDelliens]La frite

Send message
Joined: 1 May 09
Posts: 10
Credit: 23,452
RAC: 0
Message 1683 - Posted: 7 Nov 2009, 22:56:41 UTC - in response to Message 1681.  


this wu is linux 64 bit versus 32 bit windows, thats why it's faster... but jack and i are about to go nutz over the 64 bit app.



Ok I understand, such an increase in crunching speed going 32bits->64bits is impressive! (now I'll only crunch on DD on my ubuntu64 :D)

Why are you going nutz over this app??

La frite
ID: 1683 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Tim Turner
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 1 May 09
Posts: 570
Credit: 184,322
RAC: 0
Message 1685 - Posted: 7 Nov 2009, 23:04:20 UTC - in response to Message 1683.  


this wu is linux 64 bit versus 32 bit windows, thats why it's faster... but jack and i are about to go nutz over the 64 bit app.



Ok I understand, such an increase in crunching speed going 32bits->64bits is impressive! (now I'll only crunch on DD on my ubuntu64 :D)

Why are you going nutz over this app??

La frite


b/c my linux(ubuntu) vmbox and nenym systems are comping erroring.

Tim Turner
Public Relations Admin
Secunia PSI: http://secunia.com/vulnerability_scanning/personal/
If you need help via voice or Convo; PM me and i will give you details on where i will be; Teamspeak, Yahoo Messenger, or Skype.
ID: 1685 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile nenym

Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 99
Credit: 530,784
RAC: 534
Message 1705 - Posted: 10 Nov 2009, 14:10:56 UTC

My observations: @ Linux (both 32/64 bit) wall-clock time and CPU time is nearly the same.
See my supercomputer ATOM N 280 1.66 GHz - Ubuntu 32bit ID 1066, wall time = 1.11 CPU time, or AMD RM-70 2.0 GHz - Ubuntu 64bit ID 1029 wall time = 1.02 CPU time.
On the other side Windows apps has wall time = 1.6 CPU time, e.g. C2D 3.0 GHz Win XP x68 ID 211.
I have nocited it 6 month before when DD started. Moreover Linux tasks claim less credit than Windows task (that is about only CPU time, I am not sure if it is problem of false benchmark on Linux or result of faster crunching). Linux tasks recieve more granted credit then claimed credit, Windows tasks recieve less. If bad wall-clock time added for Windows tasks, it is much effective to crunch @ Linux.
What result could be? Zipping/unzipping is much more faster on Linux? Any idea?
ID: 1705 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile [AF>Libristes] Dudumomo

Send message
Joined: 1 May 09
Posts: 63
Credit: 39,940
RAC: 0
Message 1708 - Posted: 10 Nov 2009, 15:39:08 UTC - in response to Message 1705.  

Yeah definitively, Linux is much faster to do a WU than Windows. (But I don't know the reason)
I remember trying to put my P4 Linux 32b in the top host page xD

Haaaa ! I love Linux !
ID: 1708 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Van Fanel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Sep 09
Posts: 17
Credit: 103,550
RAC: 0
Message 1709 - Posted: 10 Nov 2009, 15:44:38 UTC

Just to add my two cents on this subject:

On my Ubuntu 64bit quad-core 2.3GHz, I crunch a WU in roughly 10 minutes (and yes, I'm talking about this last batch). It asks for something like 2.5-4 credits/result.

However, on my Windows XP 32bit dual-core 1.8GHz, it takes about 40-50 minutes to go through a WU. It roughly asks 7.5-10 credits/result.

Normally, because there are more Windows machines out there than Linux machines, my Ubuntu box is paired with Windows machines for a given WU. Because the crediting system takes the middle value out of the three valid results, I get a lot more credits then what I asked for in my Linux box than in my Windows box.
ID: 1709 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Ageless
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Apr 09
Posts: 172
Credit: 7,631
RAC: 0
Message 1710 - Posted: 10 Nov 2009, 18:47:42 UTC - in response to Message 1709.  

Not much we can do about that, unless we turn on Homogeneous Redundancy.
Jord

'Cause you seem like an orchard of mines, Just take one step at a time.
ID: 1710 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Tim Turner
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 1 May 09
Posts: 570
Credit: 184,322
RAC: 0
Message 1711 - Posted: 10 Nov 2009, 19:54:09 UTC - in response to Message 1710.  

let me add...

we project currently doesn't have a 64-bit app for windows but i have a feeling that it would fairly close to Linux 64 bit processing.

we(or i should say jack) may, in the future build a 64 bit app but no promises...
Tim Turner
Public Relations Admin
Secunia PSI: http://secunia.com/vulnerability_scanning/personal/
If you need help via voice or Convo; PM me and i will give you details on where i will be; Teamspeak, Yahoo Messenger, or Skype.
ID: 1711 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Rabinovitch
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Apr 09
Posts: 47
Credit: 82,303
RAC: 0
Message 1729 - Posted: 15 Nov 2009, 5:08:57 UTC

Well, appearantly this project is using benefits of x64 architecture? Is the same WU, for example, on x64 Linux processing faster than on x32 Linux?
ID: 1729 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile [AF>Dell>LesDelliens]La frite

Send message
Joined: 1 May 09
Posts: 10
Credit: 23,452
RAC: 0
Message 1733 - Posted: 15 Nov 2009, 10:11:39 UTC - in response to Message 1729.  
Last modified: 15 Nov 2009, 10:13:16 UTC

Well, appearantly this project is using benefits of x64 architecture? Is the same WU, for example, on x64 Linux processing faster than on x32 Linux?


Well I think it's got nothing to do with 64 bits but rather more with linux. Sorry if I'm wrong but that's what I noticed by personal experiments:
-either on windows seven 32 bits or 64 bits workunits take ~40 minutes to complete
-on ubuntu 9.10 64 bits they only take ~10 or less minutes.
Now testing on ubuntu 32 bits will say a lot.

La frite
ID: 1733 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profile Tim Turner
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 1 May 09
Posts: 570
Credit: 184,322
RAC: 0
Message 1737 - Posted: 15 Nov 2009, 14:51:43 UTC - in response to Message 1733.  

Well, appearantly this project is using benefits of x64 architecture? Is the same WU, for example, on x64 Linux processing faster than on x32 Linux?


Well I think it's got nothing to do with 64 bits but rather more with linux. Sorry if I'm wrong but that's what I noticed by personal experiments:
-either on windows seven 32 bits or 64 bits workunits take ~40 minutes to complete
-on ubuntu 9.10 64 bits they only take ~10 or less minutes.
Now testing on ubuntu 32 bits will say a lot.

La frite


there won't be any noticeable difference in windows 32 and 64 bit as we only have one windows app which is 32 bit and 64 bit just runs the 32bit app in 32-bit mode.

Tim Turner
Public Relations Admin
Secunia PSI: http://secunia.com/vulnerability_scanning/personal/
If you need help via voice or Convo; PM me and i will give you details on where i will be; Teamspeak, Yahoo Messenger, or Skype.
ID: 1737 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive

Message boards : Number crunching : Huge difference of speed between windows and ubuntu!


©2017 All rights reserved | Design by Digital BioPharm Ltd