I wish you all the best. I couldn't get any of the linux cuda code to compile for me so when the cuda windows binaries came out - the choice was a no brainer for me.

-- Craig

Hopefully it won't be too bad. I probably won't be attempting anything cuda until I've found my way around and llrCuda has matured. Then I'll need a cuda capable gpu.

There is still the possibility that I'll go running back to Windows. :redface:

[QUOTE=Flatlander;249379]There is still the possibility that I'll go running back to Windows. :redface:[/QUOTE]
You can have anything you want with a dual(multi)boot :)

Installed new video card and CPU cooler (the cheap CoolerMaster).

With stock cooler at 3.8 GHz temps reached as high as 87C. Now running at 4.1 GHz with temps reaching only 67C.

I haven't even tried to see how high this thing will overclock. It is stable at 4.1 GHz.

[QUOTE=Prime95;250499]Installed new video card and CPU cooler (the cheap CoolerMaster).

With stock cooler at 3.8 GHz temps reached as high as 87C. Now running at 4.1 GHz with temps reaching only 67C.

I haven't even tried to see how high this thing will overclock. It is stable at 4.1 GHz.[/QUOTE]

Is this a Windows build? I can't get a reading with lm-sensors in ubuntu. Same mobo.
I'm at 4hr-stable, 4.3GHz (i7 2600k) with a Noctua cooler. Just fits in the case!

[QUOTE=Flatlander;250507]Is this a Windows build?[/QUOTE]

I've loaded 64-bit Windows 7. I left 150GB available for Ubuntu, but I haven't loaded it yet.

[QUOTE=Flatlander;250507]I can't get a reading with lm-sensors in ubuntu.[/QUOTE]
What does it say as an error message ? Can you paste an output from dmesg as well ?

[QUOTE]
No sensors found!
Make sure you loaded all the kernel drivers you need.
Try sensors-detect to find out which these are.
[/QUOTE]

Outputs from sensor-detect and dmesg attached.:smile:
I think the mobo isn't supported yet.

[QUOTE=Flatlander;250517]Outputs from sensor-detect and dmesg attached.:smile:
I think the mobo isn't supported yet.[/QUOTE]
Thanks, can you check this thread:
[url]http://www.spinics.net/lists/lm-sensors/msg30887.html[/url]

That worked. Thank you!
Cores are around 71 degrees @4.4Ghz. Stable for 2hrs :smile:

Looking at Chris's [URL="http://www.noprimeleftbehind.net/stats/index.php?content=port&server=GB&port=9000"]output[/URL] on NPLB's port 9000 server, I see he's cranking out 40 tests/hour, which is just about exactly twice what my Q6600 can do (16 tests/hour at stock and 20 tests/hour at 2.8GHz)! :shock:

Gary a.k.a. gd_barnes, also from NPLB, mentioned to me that his i7 (pre-Sandy Bridge, not sure of the exact model) running at stock speeds is worth about 5 cores of a stock Q6600 doing LLR on typical NPLB work (k*2^n-1 with n<1M). Since the pre-SB i7 can do about 20 tests/hour on similarly sized numbers, and Chris's SB can do 40 pairs/hour, that makes for a 100% speed gain! Granted, the SB is overclocked a fair amount while the pre-SB is not (and had a lower stock speed to boot IIRC), but this is still quite a significant boost.

What's interesting is that, based on George's finding that his SB gets about a 25% boost over a similarly-clocked pre-SB i7, small FFTs (64K in this case) seem to benefit the most.

Now I'm definitely reconsidering some earlier statements I made elsewhere on the forum that a Sandy Bridge i5 < an AMD Phenom II X6 in terms of total throughput. That may be the case for GIMPS (and other large-FFT work) but not so for NPLB and the like.