![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Apr 2003
California
22×23 Posts |
![]()
What is the most energy-efficient PC for LL?
I.e. what system will use the least energy to LL-test an exponent? We have touched on related topics in the past, and I guess that farm builders have a good handle on this. I'll use kWh because that is how electricity is billed. E.g. my PIII 866 MHz takes 0.156 s per iteration when the FFT size is 640K. Let's say it takes 50 W, so it'll take 20 hours to consume 1 kWh. In those 20 h it'll do 20 * 3600 / 0.156 = 462000 iterations. That is a figure of merit: 462000 iterations / kWh. Beat that :-) 1: Choose the OS: Windows runs fast Prime95, Linux may allow more efficiency but runs slower compiled C code. 2: What CPU is best? Prime95 is well-optimized for P4, but the P4 uses a lot more energy. 3: Save energy on drives by going from hard disk to USB drive or CD or RAM drive? 4: Save on cooling, fans, etc. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Mar 2003
New Zealand
13·89 Posts |
![]() Quote:
mprime on x86-based Linux uses the same assembly code that Prime95 on x86-based Windows uses. Non-x86 Linux has to use one of the other programs instead of mprime, as would Windows running on non-x86 hardware. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Aug 2002
1101102 Posts |
![]() Quote:
Consider the 3.1 GHz P4 from the Benchmark thread: ntel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.60GHz CPU speed: 3133.24 MHz CPU features: RDTSC, CMOV, PREFETCH, MMX, SSE, SSE2 L1 cache size: 8 KB L2 cache size: 512 KB L1 cache line size: 64 bytes L2 cache line size: 128 bytes TLBS: 64 Prime95 version 23.4, RdtscTiming=1 Best time for 384K FFT length: 11.437 ms. Best time for 448K FFT length: 13.554 ms. Best time for 512K FFT length: 15.425 ms. Best time for 640K FFT length: 18.535 ms. Best time for 768K FFT length: 22.552 ms. Best time for 896K FFT length: 26.662 ms. Best time for 1024K FFT length: 29.951 ms. Best time for 1280K FFT length: 39.310 ms. Best time for 1536K FFT length: 48.347 ms. Best time for 1792K FFT length: 57.434 ms. Best time for 2048K FFT length: 64.950 ms. System draws 70W idle and about 140W with prime95 torture-test - that is about 9.1Ws/2048FFT. http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthr...9&page=2&pp=25 It does 640K FFTs in 19 ms and consumes 140 W/hr => 7.14 hrs / kWh. 7.14 hrs * 3600 / 0.019 ~=> 1.36 million iterations / kWh The 140 Watts seams a bit low, but even with a 50% increase it still wins against that P3. I wonder if the athlon is competative. It looks like even the hot P4 is worth the money in work/$. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Apr 2003
California
1348 Posts |
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Aug 2002
2·33 Posts |
![]() Quote:
Since the Kill a Watt meters are only around $30, I may order one to check my P4 and Athlon systems. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Mar 2003
Braunschweig, Germany
2·113 Posts |
![]() Quote:
If i had used a non-PFC PSU i may have even gotten lower into the 130W range. More on PFC in my infamous PFC rant and here ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Efficiency in % of your computers | 3mg4 | PrimeNet | 8 | 2016-03-23 13:12 |
Per-Watt Efficiency | pinhodecarlos | Riesel Prime Search | 8 | 2012-08-21 09:14 |
How much do you pay for your electric energy? | em99010pepe | Lounge | 31 | 2011-02-14 01:57 |
kinetic energy | science_man_88 | Miscellaneous Math | 8 | 2010-05-29 04:14 |
VIA C3 efficiency | ET_ | Hardware | 4 | 2007-03-27 21:29 |