|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
unusual result processing
I own two pc's that I've installed Seti on. One is a Gateway running
win98se with a 1ghz Pentium III and 512mb or ram, and the other is an HPrunning Win XP Home with an Athlon 3000 2.167ghz and 1gb ram. It takes the Gateway about 10 hours to complete a work unit, while the much faster HP takes 24 to 30 hours. I've got both set to work at all times. Why is this, and how can I improve the HP's processing of units? TIA |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
unusual result processing
First, dump the GUI version of the client. Using the CLI version will
improve both machine times dramatically. Your results indicate that the HP either has a hidious video subsystem that isn't taking any of the video processing off the CPU or that something else is running in background. Make sure you have the latest drivers for your video on that machine and use the Task Manager's (Ctrl-Shift-Esc) processes tab to see what's consuming your CPU cycles. Mike Ober. "Jason Symes" wrote in message om... I own two pc's that I've installed Seti on. One is a Gateway running win98se with a 1ghz Pentium III and 512mb or ram, and the other is an HPrunning Win XP Home with an Athlon 3000 2.167ghz and 1gb ram. It takes the Gateway about 10 hours to complete a work unit, while the much faster HP takes 24 to 30 hours. I've got both set to work at all times. Why is this, and how can I improve the HP's processing of units? TIA |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
unusual result processing
First, dump the GUI version of the client. Using the CLI version will
improve both machine times dramatically. Your results indicate that the HP either has a hidious video subsystem that isn't taking any of the video processing off the CPU or that something else is running in background. Make sure you have the latest drivers for your video on that machine and use the Task Manager's (Ctrl-Shift-Esc) processes tab to see what's consuming your CPU cycles. Mike Ober. "Jason Symes" wrote in message om... I own two pc's that I've installed Seti on. One is a Gateway running win98se with a 1ghz Pentium III and 512mb or ram, and the other is an HPrunning Win XP Home with an Athlon 3000 2.167ghz and 1gb ram. It takes the Gateway about 10 hours to complete a work unit, while the much faster HP takes 24 to 30 hours. I've got both set to work at all times. Why is this, and how can I improve the HP's processing of units? TIA |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
unusual result processing
Ok, I'm guessing I got the right cmd client for both pc's, though I'm not
rel sure since there was a few different i386-winnt version 3.08 available. I checked the HP's resources, and I'm only using between 5% and 7% at any given time, and I've done my best to pair down all the junk that loads on system startup, though I do have a screen reader that I need that might be affecting things I'd imagine. My video drivers are up to date, but my graphics card is an integrated card, if that matters. "Michael D. Ober" [email protected] wrote in message ... First, dump the GUI version of the client. Using the CLI version will improve both machine times dramatically. Your results indicate that the HP either has a hidious video subsystem that isn't taking any of the video processing off the CPU or that something else is running in background. Make sure you have the latest drivers for your video on that machine and use the Task Manager's (Ctrl-Shift-Esc) processes tab to see what's consuming your CPU cycles. Mike Ober. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
unusual result processing
Ok, I'm guessing I got the right cmd client for both pc's, though I'm not
rel sure since there was a few different i386-winnt version 3.08 available. I checked the HP's resources, and I'm only using between 5% and 7% at any given time, and I've done my best to pair down all the junk that loads on system startup, though I do have a screen reader that I need that might be affecting things I'd imagine. My video drivers are up to date, but my graphics card is an integrated card, if that matters. "Michael D. Ober" [email protected] wrote in message ... First, dump the GUI version of the client. Using the CLI version will improve both machine times dramatically. Your results indicate that the HP either has a hidious video subsystem that isn't taking any of the video processing off the CPU or that something else is running in background. Make sure you have the latest drivers for your video on that machine and use the Task Manager's (Ctrl-Shift-Esc) processes tab to see what's consuming your CPU cycles. Mike Ober. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
unusual result processing
What's using the 93-95% of your CPU? The client should be getting 98-99%
when nothing else is running. Mike. "jason symes" wrote in message ... Ok, I'm guessing I got the right cmd client for both pc's, though I'm not rel sure since there was a few different i386-winnt version 3.08 available. I checked the HP's resources, and I'm only using between 5% and 7% at any given time, and I've done my best to pair down all the junk that loads on system startup, though I do have a screen reader that I need that might be affecting things I'd imagine. My video drivers are up to date, but my graphics card is an integrated card, if that matters. "Michael D. Ober" [email protected] wrote in message ... First, dump the GUI version of the client. Using the CLI version will improve both machine times dramatically. Your results indicate that the HP either has a hidious video subsystem that isn't taking any of the video processing off the CPU or that something else is running in background. Make sure you have the latest drivers for your video on that machine and use the Task Manager's (Ctrl-Shift-Esc) processes tab to see what's consuming your CPU cycles. Mike Ober. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
unusual result processing
What's using the 93-95% of your CPU? The client should be getting 98-99%
when nothing else is running. Mike. "jason symes" wrote in message ... Ok, I'm guessing I got the right cmd client for both pc's, though I'm not rel sure since there was a few different i386-winnt version 3.08 available. I checked the HP's resources, and I'm only using between 5% and 7% at any given time, and I've done my best to pair down all the junk that loads on system startup, though I do have a screen reader that I need that might be affecting things I'd imagine. My video drivers are up to date, but my graphics card is an integrated card, if that matters. "Michael D. Ober" [email protected] wrote in message ... First, dump the GUI version of the client. Using the CLI version will improve both machine times dramatically. Your results indicate that the HP either has a hidious video subsystem that isn't taking any of the video processing off the CPU or that something else is running in background. Make sure you have the latest drivers for your video on that machine and use the Task Manager's (Ctrl-Shift-Esc) processes tab to see what's consuming your CPU cycles. Mike Ober. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
unusual result processing
At the time I checked the usage stats the client was disabled, so nothing
was using 93% or 95% of my resources. When I run it, then all 100% of my resources are used, as I would imagine is normal. "Michael D. Ober" [email protected] wrote in message ... What's using the 93-95% of your CPU? The client should be getting 98-99% when nothing else is running. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
unusual result processing
At the time I checked the usage stats the client was disabled, so nothing
was using 93% or 95% of my resources. When I run it, then all 100% of my resources are used, as I would imagine is normal. "Michael D. Ober" [email protected] wrote in message ... What's using the 93-95% of your CPU? The client should be getting 98-99% when nothing else is running. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
unusual result processing
In that case I go back to my original thought - you're running the GUI
client. Switching to the CLI client will dramatically improve your throughput. Mike. "jason symes" wrote in message ... At the time I checked the usage stats the client was disabled, so nothing was using 93% or 95% of my resources. When I run it, then all 100% of my resources are used, as I would imagine is normal. "Michael D. Ober" [email protected] wrote in message ... What's using the 93-95% of your CPU? The client should be getting 98-99% when nothing else is running. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Summery Study and colony location | Sander Vesik | Policy | 12 | August 10th 04 07:00 PM |
KSC Space Shuttle Processing Status Report, 16-04-2004 | Jacques van Oene | Space Shuttle | 0 | July 18th 04 08:09 PM |
KSC Space Shuttle Processing Status Report, 25-06-2004 | Jacques van Oene | Space Shuttle | 0 | June 27th 04 01:58 PM |
Space Shuttle Processing Status, 30-04-2004 | Jacques van Oene | Space Shuttle | 7 | May 4th 04 04:19 PM |
Space Shuttle Processing Status Report, 27-02-2004 | Jacques van Oene | Space Shuttle | 0 | February 28th 04 11:43 AM |