Improving Seti@Home Processor Times
Created | Updated Jan 28, 2002
Improving Seti@Home performance.
Yes, I know there quite a few Seti conversations in the guide already, but I haven't seen one dedicated to improving the crunching time.
Anyroad, here we go;
The Screensaver.
----------------
Any screensaver uses processor and memory resources, so disabling it will improve your Seti time. And when I say disable it, I mean have no screensaver at all. Now I hear you say "but what aboot my monitor, won't it get burnt?". The answer is no, as long as you turn the monitor off when you are not using the PC. I have noticed a 10 - 20% improvement in crunch times using no screensaver.
The Seti Client.
----------------
Again, having this maximised or as a window is using system resources. Have it minimised to the system tray and only open it when you need to pick up a new file. If you want to monitor the progress, there's a neat little program called Seti Monitor, which allows you to see how much data has been found. It can be downloaded at;
http://users.surfree.net.il/l.fainshil/
Background Tasks.
-----------------
MS Windows always has tasks and services running in the background and these too are using system resources. Now, I can't advise anyone who has Seti running at work to start fiddling(!) with their PC, but for home users, it's a straightforward process to figure out which tasks are running and which you actually need. Personally, I switch off all non-essential tasks, but you may find that a bit extreme.
Processing Times.
-----------------
We are into "High Fidelity" territory here, lists of stats that are meaningful to only a few.
Over the last two years, I have built several PC's from scratch and then sold them on once the price of hardware comes down and I can afford to build a new one. Thus, I have some pretty good performance indicators of processing Seti files using the above method.
Processor Chipset Memory Time
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pentium 166 IBM 300 32mb (66mhz) 30 - 36 hrs
AMD K6 - 2 333 SIS 600 64mb (100mhz) 24 - 30 hrs
Pentium 2 - 266 * Compaq 64mb (100mhz) 16 - 18 hrs
Pentium 2 - 350 SIS 620 64mb (100mhz) 16 - 18 hrs
Pentium 2 - 350 SIS 620 128mb (100mhz) 14 - 16 hrs
Pentium 2 - 350 Intel BX 196mb (100mhz) 10 - 12 hrs
Pentium 3 - 800 Intel BX 196mb (100mhz) 5 - 7 hrs
*All the above machines are or were mine, with the exception of the Compaq, which is one of my work PC's. I only crunch at night and at weekends because otherwise it runs like a dog.
So as you can see, there really is no substitute for a red hot machine. The time fluctuations are the result of the PC being used for something other than Seti crunching, then Seti has to share resources. I have one machine dedicated to Seti alone, which runs pretty much all the time. As an added bonus, Seti does seem to be quite a good performance indicator for different chipsets and processors - compare the 266 with a Compaq chipset to a 350 with an SIS chipset - no contest. Likewise the SIS vs. the Intel BX chipset.
To sum up, if you want to do something noble with your PC, you could do a lot worse than running Seti!
Andy Cockerill.
Yes, I know there quite a few Seti conversations in the guide already, but I haven't seen one dedicated to improving the crunching time.
Anyroad, here we go;
The Screensaver.
----------------
Any screensaver uses processor and memory resources, so disabling it will improve your Seti time. And when I say disable it, I mean have no screensaver at all. Now I hear you say "but what aboot my monitor, won't it get burnt?". The answer is no, as long as you turn the monitor off when you are not using the PC. I have noticed a 10 - 20% improvement in crunch times using no screensaver.
The Seti Client.
----------------
Again, having this maximised or as a window is using system resources. Have it minimised to the system tray and only open it when you need to pick up a new file. If you want to monitor the progress, there's a neat little program called Seti Monitor, which allows you to see how much data has been found. It can be downloaded at;
http://users.surfree.net.il/l.fainshil/
Background Tasks.
-----------------
MS Windows always has tasks and services running in the background and these too are using system resources. Now, I can't advise anyone who has Seti running at work to start fiddling(!) with their PC, but for home users, it's a straightforward process to figure out which tasks are running and which you actually need. Personally, I switch off all non-essential tasks, but you may find that a bit extreme.
Processing Times.
-----------------
We are into "High Fidelity" territory here, lists of stats that are meaningful to only a few.
Over the last two years, I have built several PC's from scratch and then sold them on once the price of hardware comes down and I can afford to build a new one. Thus, I have some pretty good performance indicators of processing Seti files using the above method.
Processor Chipset Memory Time
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pentium 166 IBM 300 32mb (66mhz) 30 - 36 hrs
AMD K6 - 2 333 SIS 600 64mb (100mhz) 24 - 30 hrs
Pentium 2 - 266 * Compaq 64mb (100mhz) 16 - 18 hrs
Pentium 2 - 350 SIS 620 64mb (100mhz) 16 - 18 hrs
Pentium 2 - 350 SIS 620 128mb (100mhz) 14 - 16 hrs
Pentium 2 - 350 Intel BX 196mb (100mhz) 10 - 12 hrs
Pentium 3 - 800 Intel BX 196mb (100mhz) 5 - 7 hrs
*All the above machines are or were mine, with the exception of the Compaq, which is one of my work PC's. I only crunch at night and at weekends because otherwise it runs like a dog.
So as you can see, there really is no substitute for a red hot machine. The time fluctuations are the result of the PC being used for something other than Seti crunching, then Seti has to share resources. I have one machine dedicated to Seti alone, which runs pretty much all the time. As an added bonus, Seti does seem to be quite a good performance indicator for different chipsets and processors - compare the 266 with a Compaq chipset to a 350 with an SIS chipset - no contest. Likewise the SIS vs. the Intel BX chipset.
To sum up, if you want to do something noble with your PC, you could do a lot worse than running Seti!
Andy Cockerill.
