mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > Software

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2010-06-23, 15:14   #12
Rhyled
 
Rhyled's Avatar
 
May 2010

1111112 Posts
Smile Benchmark on i7 looks very similar to ver 25

Running the 64-bit benchmark on ver 26 only took a couple of minutes (not hours). The numbers look very similar to what I've seen from version 25. There are lots more "helper thread" messages in the new version:
x64 results.txt

Now, returning to my regular prime search
Rhyled is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-23, 15:23   #13
Rhyled
 
Rhyled's Avatar
 
May 2010

32×7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prime95 View Post
I'm working on the code that selects which FFT implementation to run for a given FFT size. Kinda stuck.

V25 uses a hardwired selection process based on the L2+L3 cache size.

Preliminary benchmarks on my Core 2 and Core i7 boxes indicate that this isn't optimal.
Does looking at L1/L2 cache only give you a better estimate? The problem with L3 cache is that it's shared between all cores, so you can't really predict how much of it will be useful/available for a single core.
Rhyled is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-23, 15:59   #14
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

5,437 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyled View Post
Running the 64-bit benchmark on ver 26 only took a couple of minutes (not hours). The numbers look very similar to what I've seen from version 25. There are lots more "helper thread" messages in the new version:
Attachment 5381

Now, returning to my regular prime search
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prime95 View Post
Add this to prime.txt:

StressTester=1
MinBenchFFT=4
MaxBenchFFT=32768
OnlyBench5678=0
BenchAllComplex=1
AllBench=1

Then run Options/Benchmark. Post your results.txt file in this thread.
Ahem.
axn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-23, 16:24   #15
NBtarheel_33
 
NBtarheel_33's Avatar
 
"Nathan"
Jul 2008
Maryland, USA

45B16 Posts
Talking Well, you knew someone would test the waters...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prime95 View Post
P.S. I really wouldn't recommend using this version for production work, though it will probably work.
I couldn't help it. I'm trying about 10 TF-LMHs in the 151M range. Would it be worth double-checking the results with v25?

Trying an LL with v26 is probably a no-no, right? Would a doublecheck be worthwhile, to make sure everything is running OK?
NBtarheel_33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-23, 16:32   #16
Prime95
P90 years forever!
 
Prime95's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL

816310 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NBtarheel_33 View Post
I couldn't help it. I'm trying about 10 TF-LMHs in the 151M range. Would it be worth double-checking the results with v25?

Trying an LL with v26 is probably a no-no, right? Would a doublecheck be worthwhile, to make sure everything is running OK?
The TF code is unchanged. Feel free to run a double-check if you like. The code is not optimized for a P4. It is optimized for Core 2.
Prime95 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-23, 18:17   #17
NBtarheel_33
 
NBtarheel_33's Avatar
 
"Nathan"
Jul 2008
Maryland, USA

111510 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prime95 View Post
The TF code is unchanged. Feel free to run a double-check if you like. The code is not optimized for a P4. It is optimized for Core 2.
OK, I have 39 cores running, including three flavors of Core 2 - 1.86 GHz, 2 GHz, and 2.66 GHz. Also have a Q6600 @ 2.4 GHz. And of course, a whole bunch of P4s and Pentium Ds, some of which are dual core. So I should be able to get you some useful data.
NBtarheel_33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-23, 20:22   #18
starrynte
 
starrynte's Avatar
 
Oct 2008
California

22·59 Posts
Default

I still went ahead and benchmarked my i5, is attached
Attached Files
File Type: zip benchmark.zip (87.7 KB, 109 views)

Last fiddled with by starrynte on 2010-06-23 at 20:24
starrynte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-23, 23:27   #19
Rhyled
 
Rhyled's Avatar
 
May 2010

6310 Posts
Default Suggestion: Add prime95.txt to the .zip download

Quote:
Originally Posted by axn View Post
Ahem.
Ah. I see the problem. I did indeed add the specified lines, AFTER prime95 created a default .txt file with contradictory benchmark options. Just drop the correct version of prime.txt (also with qa) into that zipped file and you'll make it easier on the testers.

Here's the correct 64-bit benchmark results - took about 6 hours to run on my Core i7. Note that the last 3 cores on my i7 only averaged about 20% loading each while in use by prime95. For the last series, with all 4 cores, my total cpu load was around 50%, not the 100% I'm used to seeing with prime95.

x64 results.zip
Rhyled is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-25, 13:32   #20
ATH
Einyen
 
ATH's Avatar
 
Dec 2003
Denmark

2·32·191 Posts
Default

Core2Quad (Yorksfield) Q9450 2.66Ghz: Benchmark QA (no mismatch, MaxErr=0.3125 (only 1 above 0.3))

Core2Duo (Conroe) E6750 2.66Ghz: Benchmark QA (no mismatch, MaxErr=0.29296875)

Laptop: Mobile Core2Duo T7300 (Merom) 2.00Ghz: Benchmark QA (no mismatch, MaxErr=0.34375 (10 above 0.3))
ATH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-25, 23:35   #21
Prime95
P90 years forever!
 
Prime95's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL

177438 Posts
Default

Thanks for all the benchmarks. No more please. Y'all have uncovered an optimization problem with the length 2304 pass 2. Once I get it fixed, we'll need to rerun the benchmarks. I've started working on some Pentium-4 optimizations and one of them might apply to Core 2 and Core i5/7/9 as well.
Prime95 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Some ideas regarding NFS... paul0 Factoring 3 2015-03-14 19:55
two ideas for NPLB TimSorbet No Prime Left Behind 16 2008-03-01 23:32
GROUP IDEAS TTn 15k Search 15 2003-09-23 16:28
Domain name ideas... Xyzzy Lounge 17 2003-03-24 16:20
Couple of ideas/things to do Stormblade Lounge 12 2002-08-20 02:21

All times are UTC. The time now is 10:14.


Sat Feb 4 10:14:16 UTC 2023 up 170 days, 7:42, 1 user, load averages: 1.01, 1.21, 1.20

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.

≠ ± ∓ ÷ × · − √ ‰ ⊗ ⊕ ⊖ ⊘ ⊙ ≤ ≥ ≦ ≧ ≨ ≩ ≺ ≻ ≼ ≽ ⊏ ⊐ ⊑ ⊒ ² ³ °
∠ ∟ ° ≅ ~ ‖ ⟂ ⫛
≡ ≜ ≈ ∝ ∞ ≪ ≫ ⌊⌋ ⌈⌉ ∘ ∏ ∐ ∑ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⨀ ⊕ ⊗ 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 ⊲ ⊳
∅ ∖ ∁ ↦ ↣ ∩ ∪ ⊆ ⊂ ⊄ ⊊ ⊇ ⊃ ⊅ ⊋ ⊖ ∈ ∉ ∋ ∌ ℕ ℤ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℵ ℶ ℷ ℸ 𝓟
¬ ∨ ∧ ⊕ → ← ⇒ ⇐ ⇔ ∀ ∃ ∄ ∴ ∵ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊨ ⫤ ⊣ … ⋯ ⋮ ⋰ ⋱
∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∯ ∰ ∇ ∆ δ ∂ ℱ ℒ ℓ
𝛢𝛼 𝛣𝛽 𝛤𝛾 𝛥𝛿 𝛦𝜀𝜖 𝛧𝜁 𝛨𝜂 𝛩𝜃𝜗 𝛪𝜄 𝛫𝜅 𝛬𝜆 𝛭𝜇 𝛮𝜈 𝛯𝜉 𝛰𝜊 𝛱𝜋 𝛲𝜌 𝛴𝜎𝜍 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔