Best builds for BOINC machines? How did mine turn out?

Message boards : Questions and problems : Best builds for BOINC machines? How did mine turn out?
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
stvv

Send message
Joined: 23 Jul 14
Posts: 8
Message 55015 - Posted: 23 Jul 2014, 21:43:55 UTC

What would a dedicated BOINC machine look like? I recently built one for $475, using an AMD FX-8320 and 4GB RAM (planning to upgrade later), and it is blowing away all my older computers. I am thinking that more CPU cores would be better? What other considerations should go into it?
ID: 55015 · Report as offensive
noderaser
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 2 Jan 14
Posts: 276
United States
Message 55017 - Posted: 24 Jul 2014, 1:58:02 UTC

More cores and more memory equals more simultaneous workunits. You can also pack GPUs in there, which ones will partially depend on which projects you're interested in as not all are supported and some run better than others.
My Detailed BOINC Stats
ID: 55017 · Report as offensive
stvv

Send message
Joined: 23 Jul 14
Posts: 8
Message 55113 - Posted: 29 Jul 2014, 1:52:02 UTC

Oh yeah that was my thought process, I got the most cores I could for the least amount of $$. I am currently RAM restricted but that should be fixed soon. I run Rosetta, World Community Grid, and POEM, so I dont think a GPU will help me. But are there any recommendations for a cheap one that will run well?

And I am wondering if more cores is the best option for BOINC, vs. having fewer faster cores. The 8320 seems to be quite slow compared to some i3/i5's, but I am not sure there is a better option at the <$150 price point right now, since they all have fewer cores.
ID: 55113 · Report as offensive
Coleslaw
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Feb 12
Posts: 198
United States
Message 55119 - Posted: 29 Jul 2014, 17:01:34 UTC - in response to Message 55113.  
Last modified: 29 Jul 2014, 17:02:26 UTC

The last question depends on the project. The ones you mention don't require speedy returns, so if you can get more done with a larger number of cores running at a slower speed, then that will be fine. You just have to do the math on whether slower but more units at a time is more production or if faster return time on fewer cores is. Check out WUProp to get some comparisons.

As far as GPU, POEM uses them and yes they are faster than CPU's. They just don't have a continuous supply so there will be dry spells. As far as which ones to look at, it would be best to go to the project and ask everyone there because you would get a lot more expertise in regards to that specific project needs.

Another thing to consider is your RAM situation. If you are going to be RAM light, then you are better off getting less cores that are faster because then you won't be starving the work units that are waiting on memory. Your hard drive will also thank you. When looking at things, consider the work unit requirements as if you were running the heaviest ones on all cores. If you have enough memory for that and the OS, then you should be fine.

The last thing I recommend is choosing the OS carefully. Linux 64 bit tends to out perform Windows machines at most projects. So, if this is a dedicated cruncher, Linux is the smarter choice.
ID: 55119 · Report as offensive
Profile Richie

Send message
Joined: 2 Jul 14
Posts: 186
Finland
Message 55213 - Posted: 1 Aug 2014, 22:50:00 UTC

If used parts could come into consideration, I believe one of the best "bang for the bug" PC at the moment could be built using these parts:

* old LGA775 motherboard
* Xeon E5450 processor (revision E0)
* 4-8 GB DDR2 ram


Choosing the right motherboard, I would take a look at this site:
http://www.delidded.com/lga-771-to-775-adapter/

Personally, I would search for any Asus P5Q model. They just tend to work and are capable of giving a rock steady overclocking situation. Here you can find a custom bios, which makes them even better:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?200109-Modded-ASUS-P5Q-Pro-Deluxe-Premium-BIOS


P5Q Pro with that bios, Q9550 processor, 8 GB ram and Win 7 64bit, running at 3.8GHz, gives this result in BOINC speed test:

Measured floating point speed: 4611.38 million ops/sec
Measured integer speed: 10314.58 million ops/sec


Then... Xeon E5450 is a cheap CPU, but it's pretty much the same CPU as a more expensive Q9650 (or Q9550, in that example above) is. It has 12MB of cache which still makes it a somewhat powerful quad core CPU. Then... if you choose a decent cooler for the CPU, E5450 (Q9650) can easily run at 3.5GHz speed or faster, 24/7.

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Xeon/Intel-Xeon%20E5450%20-%20EU80574KJ080N%20-%20AT80574KJ080N%20(BX80574E5450A).html

* Important notice: CPU should be "E0" revision. C-revisions do not have the same potential (they can not give you those speeds).


The whole point in this old LGA775 scenario: A low budget is still capable of giving some nice crunching power.

A usable motherboard, Xeon quad core "E0" CPU and 4-8 GB's of DDR2 memory are relatively cheap these days. Then you would just need to add a decent CPU cooler, a basic power supply and a basic GPU.


If also GPU crunching is on the wish list, I would search for a used GTX660 card. I believe they might have one of the best power/price values at the moment. I don't know about the situation with Radeon GPU's.


OS: Coleslaw suggested Linux 64 bit. I would try that OS too. I'm sure it could give some extra speed for the system.
ID: 55213 · Report as offensive
stvv

Send message
Joined: 23 Jul 14
Posts: 8
Message 55276 - Posted: 8 Aug 2014, 19:11:46 UTC

Hey thanks for the suggestions. I was thinking of building one more computer at my local MicroCenter. They have AMD FX 6300 for $100, 6200 for $70, and I think they both come with $40 off a motherboard. Would these be better for a sub-$300 machine? The Xeon is a good idea too.

I got 8gb more RAM for 8-core machine, 12GB total & it's running well. However I have nothing to compare it's performance to except my other Q6600 and old Core 2 Duo machines.
ID: 55276 · Report as offensive
stvv

Send message
Joined: 23 Jul 14
Posts: 8
Message 55285 - Posted: 9 Aug 2014, 10:00:41 UTC

Hey Richie now that I saw the prices on the old Xeon CPUs (~$40 each), I really like the idea of running some. I've never been big on overclocking, but I am really interested in running them in a dual-CPU SMP configuration. Any tips on finding boards that can handle that or setting it up?
ID: 55285 · Report as offensive
Profile Richie

Send message
Joined: 2 Jul 14
Posts: 186
Finland
Message 55287 - Posted: 9 Aug 2014, 11:47:51 UTC

Hi!

I'm sorry, I don't really have any kind of knowledge about those dual-CPU systems and SMP. Actually a few days ago I noticed HP XW-series Workstations have those dual-Xeon boards inside. Now, after you mentioned that term SMP, I used Google and it told me at least some of those HP's seem to be shipped with Linux and they run in SMP configuration. So I learned something new :D
But I don't know which dual-"Xeon ready" motherboards might offer nice overclocking features. Hopefully somebody else can share that information here.
ID: 55287 · Report as offensive
Richard Haselgrove
Volunteer tester
Help desk expert

Send message
Joined: 5 Oct 06
Posts: 5077
United Kingdom
Message 55290 - Posted: 9 Aug 2014, 13:02:10 UTC - in response to Message 55287.  

In general, dual-cpu motherboards will only be found in servers, and in high-spec business workstations designed for CAD and similar applications. I have an elderly Dell Precision 490 with dual quad-core Xeon E5320 CPUs, and at the time I bought it, Mac Pro computers with similar specifications were available.

Given the intended applications, and the cost, these machines are designed primarily for rock-solid business reliability. Overclocking would be a considered a serious drawback in such an environment.

I am only aware of one counter-example: the IBM Skulltrail. This was designed as a fearsome gaming machine with massive overclocking capability (Google suggests somebody got one up to 6 GHz), but unfortunately it was released just as GPUs took over the gaming and distributed computing communities, and it sank without trace.
ID: 55290 · Report as offensive
stvv

Send message
Joined: 23 Jul 14
Posts: 8
Message 55301 - Posted: 9 Aug 2014, 15:29:45 UTC
Last modified: 9 Aug 2014, 15:32:30 UTC

Very interesting. I think a local pawn shop had some 2006 Mac Pro's, I almost bought one but backed off and built the machine in the OP instead. One was priced at $250, and had a dual Xeon setup, but the included Xeons were only dual-core models. It doesn't seem worth it to have two CPUs but only 4 cores total, I'd really only be interested if I could get two quad cores. I am not sure if its worth dropping $250 to get that machine, and then another ~$80 to get two quad-core Xeons for it. I think I might instead try to get a single quad-core Xeon to upgrade one of my existing machines.


These are the two pre-built models that I have:
ZT: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883241008

Acer Aspire: http://www.cnet.com/products/acer-aspire-m3641-be4700a-core-2-duo-e4700-2-6-ghz-3-gb-320-gb-lcd-22/specs/
^This run is running with this replacement board:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813135248

I think the Acer might be a good candidate for a Xeon upgrade, since its G41 chipset seems to be compatible with the Xeon processors, and it is also the slower of the two. Not sure if its worth replacing the quad-core ZT's CPU, since that would probably require a new motherboard for marginal (?) performance increase.
ID: 55301 · Report as offensive

Message boards : Questions and problems : Best builds for BOINC machines? How did mine turn out?

Copyright © 2024 University of California.
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.