Motherboard Forums


Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes

Any Overclockers running on Linux 64

 
 
Pete
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-19-2006, 02:52 AM
Hi All:

Now that I have my system stable. I am thinking of making the transition
from Windoze to Linux SuSE 10.1. I was curious to hear opinions or horror
stories from anybody else that has tried swapping systems. I also was
hoping that there will be as many unix overclocking tools as there are for
windoze. The reason for the switch is that Linux appears to bench mark at
twice the speed for floating point calculations as Windoze. Basically, I
need this box as a number cruncher.

TIA,

Pete


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Conor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-19-2006, 09:34 AM
In article <Kpabg.40945$(E-Mail Removed)>, Pete says...
> Hi All:
>
> Now that I have my system stable. I am thinking of making the transition
> from Windoze to Linux SuSE 10.1. I was curious to hear opinions or horror
> stories from anybody else that has tried swapping systems.


1) It's not Windows...don't use it trying to think stuff works along
the same lines because it has a taskbar and a "start" button.
2) Repeat 1).

Follow the above and all will be OK.


--
Conor,

Same ****, different day.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bill
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-19-2006, 06:31 PM
In article <Kpabg.40945$(E-Mail Removed)>,
(E-Mail Removed) says...
> Hi All:
>
> Now that I have my system stable. I am thinking of making the transition
> from Windoze to Linux SuSE 10.1. I was curious to hear opinions or horror
> stories from anybody else that has tried swapping systems.


I'm triple booting between Windoze XP SP2, SUSE 10.0, SUSE 10.1.
No horror stories from the installation. I used the expert mode to install
and told it exactly what I wanted as opposed to letting the install program
sort it out. So far everything is working well.

> I also was
> hoping that there will be as many unix overclocking tools as there are for
> windoze.


I don't know, I'm not much of a Linux geek. My overclocking is done in the
bios.

AMD 64 3500+ Winchester OC from 2.2 GHz to 2.4 GHz.
Abit AV8 Deluxe MB.

> The reason for the switch is that Linux appears to bench mark at
> twice the speed for floating point calculations as Windoze. Basically, I
> need this box as a number cruncher.
>
> TIA,
>
> Pete
>


You will probably get better answers over in alt.os.linux.suse .

Just don't top post there. They're touchy about that. That, and proper
quoting.

See you there.

Bill
--
Gmail and Google Groups. This century's answer to AOL and WebTV.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Eric Parker
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-19-2006, 07:49 PM

"Pete" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Kpabg.40945$(E-Mail Removed).. .
> Hi All:
>
> Now that I have my system stable. I am thinking of making the

transition
> from Windoze to Linux SuSE 10.1. I was curious to hear opinions or

horror
> stories from anybody else that has tried swapping systems. I also

was
> hoping that there will be as many unix overclocking tools as there

are for
> windoze. The reason for the switch is that Linux appears to bench

mark at
> twice the speed for floating point calculations as Windoze.

Basically, I
> need this box as a number cruncher.
>
> TIA,
>
> Pete
>
>


I'm surprised that Linux is giving twice the flops that windoze is.
Is it the same benchmark ?
Can you give links to the origin of this info.
What application are you using to crunch numbers (if you don't mind me
asking) ?

Eric

--
Remove the dross to contact me directly


 
Reply With Quote
 
Pete
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-21-2006, 08:28 PM

"Eric Parker" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:446e2138$0$10744$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Pete" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:Kpabg.40945$(E-Mail Removed).. .
>> Hi All:
>>
>> Now that I have my system stable. I am thinking of making the

> transition
>> from Windoze to Linux SuSE 10.1. I was curious to hear opinions or

> horror
>> stories from anybody else that has tried swapping systems. I also

> was
>> hoping that there will be as many unix overclocking tools as there

> are for
>> windoze. The reason for the switch is that Linux appears to bench

> mark at
>> twice the speed for floating point calculations as Windoze.

> Basically, I
>> need this box as a number cruncher.
>>
>> TIA,
>>
>> Pete
>>
>>

>
> I'm surprised that Linux is giving twice the flops that windoze is.
> Is it the same benchmark ?
> Can you give links to the origin of this info.
> What application are you using to crunch numbers (if you don't mind me
> asking) ?
>
> Eric
>
> --
> Remove the dross to contact me directly
>
>


I am using MATLAB 2006A. Using the MATLAB Bench command. These are the
reference specs.

AMD Opteron 248, 2.1 GHz Dual (MATLAB only runs on one processor) on SuSE
Linux 9.0 has a 0.26 on the FFT benchmark and 0.17 on the ODE benchmark.

An AMD Opteron 250, 2.4 GHz Dual running Window XP64, SP-1 has an FFT
benchmark of 0.49 and an ODE benchmark of 0.43.

My system running XP64 SP-1 at 286x10 and the RAM with a 9/10 divider hits
0.42 for the FFT and 0.39 for the ODE. The FFT bemchmark seems to be
sensitive to the RAM speed and timings.

The FFT is a good model for most of the calculations that I perform which is
why I was considering jumping to Linux. Although I am still feeling a bit
reluctant, because the last time I used a Unix system was 15 years ago and
found it a bit more complicated than windows to administer.

Best wishes,

Pete


 
Reply With Quote
 
Eric Parker
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-22-2006, 07:06 PM

"Pete" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news34cg.30114$(E-Mail Removed). ..
>
>
> I am using MATLAB 2006A. Using the MATLAB Bench command. These are

the
> reference specs.
>
> AMD Opteron 248, 2.1 GHz Dual (MATLAB only runs on one processor) on

SuSE
> Linux 9.0 has a 0.26 on the FFT benchmark and 0.17 on the ODE

benchmark.
>
> An AMD Opteron 250, 2.4 GHz Dual running Window XP64, SP-1 has an

FFT
> benchmark of 0.49 and an ODE benchmark of 0.43.
>
> My system running XP64 SP-1 at 286x10 and the RAM with a 9/10

divider hits
> 0.42 for the FFT and 0.39 for the ODE. The FFT bemchmark seems to

be
> sensitive to the RAM speed and timings.
>
> The FFT is a good model for most of the calculations that I perform

which is
> why I was considering jumping to Linux. Although I am still feeling

a bit
> reluctant, because the last time I used a Unix system was 15 years

ago and
> found it a bit more complicated than windows to administer.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Pete
>
>


Interesting figures.
I can only assume MATLAB have yet to get the best out of 64bit
Windoze.
Perhaps Linux is their main market and they give it priority in
development.

Thanks for the info.

Eric

--
Remove the dross to contact me directly


 
Reply With Quote
 
Pete
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-23-2006, 12:05 AM
"Eric Parker" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:44720bb0$0$10790$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Pete" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news34cg.30114$(E-Mail Removed). ..
>>
>>
>> I am using MATLAB 2006A. Using the MATLAB Bench command. These are

> the
>> reference specs.
>>
>> AMD Opteron 248, 2.1 GHz Dual (MATLAB only runs on one processor) on

> SuSE
>> Linux 9.0 has a 0.26 on the FFT benchmark and 0.17 on the ODE

> benchmark.
>>
>> An AMD Opteron 250, 2.4 GHz Dual running Window XP64, SP-1 has an

> FFT
>> benchmark of 0.49 and an ODE benchmark of 0.43.
>>
>> My system running XP64 SP-1 at 286x10 and the RAM with a 9/10

> divider hits
>> 0.42 for the FFT and 0.39 for the ODE. The FFT bemchmark seems to

> be
>> sensitive to the RAM speed and timings.
>>
>> The FFT is a good model for most of the calculations that I perform

> which is
>> why I was considering jumping to Linux. Although I am still feeling

> a bit
>> reluctant, because the last time I used a Unix system was 15 years

> ago and
>> found it a bit more complicated than windows to administer.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Pete
>>
>>

>
> Interesting figures.
> I can only assume MATLAB have yet to get the best out of 64bit
> Windoze.
> Perhaps Linux is their main market and they give it priority in
> development.
>
> Thanks for the info.
>
> Eric
>
> --
> Remove the dross to contact me directly
>

I don't think your proposition is true. I think the windows market is the
largest for MATLAB although MATLAB was first developed for Unix.

I think that SuSE Linux may have better coded math and memory routines than
windows. MS has always been interested in the bizness community, and their
lack of attention to numerical computations is best exemplified by the
sloppiness in Excel.

Best wishes,

Pete


 
Reply With Quote
 
john_doe@invalid.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-23-2006, 02:16 AM
On Tue, 23 May 2006 00:05:32 GMT, "Pete" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>I don't think your proposition is true. I think the windows market is the
>largest for MATLAB although MATLAB was first developed for Unix.
>
>I think that SuSE Linux may have better coded math and memory routines than
>windows. MS has always been interested in the bizness community, and their
>lack of attention to numerical computations is best exemplified by the
>sloppiness in Excel.
>
>Best wishes,
>
>Pete
>


My money's on Apple or Linux long term.

Billy Gates just doesn't have the right stuff.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Small ARM board running capable of running Linux Don Gravos Embedded 27 09-29-2005 01:03 AM
Using iPod on a Linux PC (NOT running Linux on iPod) news@celticbear.com Apple 9 08-11-2005 03:17 PM
Overclockers UK are rip off merchants Dancing stag Abit 2 11-04-2004 06:35 PM
NF7-S +others from overclockers.co.uk xxxx Abit 11 01-21-2004 01:28 PM
Overclockers Fred Scharmann Abit 9 12-16-2003 06:17 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:04 AM.


Welcome!
Welcome to Motherboard Point
 

Advertisment