[QUOTE=Primeinator;280710]Is possible to run both the GPU and my Quad at the same time? Will this overheat or shorten the life of my computer in any way?[/QUOTE]

Honestly, I think taking part in any distributed project probably shortens the life of your PC at least a tiny bit (but maybe not).

But as long as everything is adequately cooled, it probably doesn't shorten it all that much. I would try it out and take a look at your temps. Anything over 80 is probably alarming (though I prefer all mine under 70).

[QUOTE=delta_t;280709]At first I had no idea what you were talking about, my first reaction was that I've done thousands of P-1 over the years, but then I realized I hit 100 P-1 turn-ins on the GPU-to-72 site.

So yes, I'll see you there at 500.[/QUOTE]

I'm aiming for year end....

[QUOTE=Primeinator;280710]Is possible to run both the GPU and my Quad at the same time? Will this overheat or shorten the life of my computer in any way?[/QUOTE]

yes, of course...that's what most of us do....

And, as long as the heat is managed, your computer's life won't change much...it will probably be replaced by upgrade before it dies....

CPU-Z and GPU-Z are your friends on Windows, sensors on Linux....

[QUOTE=KyleAskine;280712] Anything over 80 is probably alarming (though I prefer all mine under 70).[/QUOTE]
Hehe. My 2600k stock heatsink running at 3.5 GHz (3.4 stock) is running about 80C. That's why I've been asking so much about the Hyper 212+ :P

[QUOTE=Christenson;280717]

CPU-Z and GPU-Z are your friends on Windows, sensors on Linux....[/QUOTE]
The only thing I've found that works was something like GKrellM, and that didn't pick up my 2600k when I installed it... (although my Linux has been down for a few months.)

[QUOTE=Dubslow;280731]Hehe. My 2600k stock heatsink running at 3.5 GHz (3.4 stock) is running about 80C. That's why I've been asking so much about the Hyper 212+ :P[/QUOTE]

Wow, you only have a slight overclock over stock and you're at 80C? Yeah perhaps an upgrade to your heatsink would be wise. Seems anything better than the stock heatsink would provide much better cooling. As a comparison, I have a 2500K at 4.5 GHz at 60C using an H80 at lowest fan speeds.

[QUOTE=delta_t;280735]Wow, you only have a slight overclock over stock and you're at 80C? Yeah perhaps an upgrade to your heatsink would be wise. Seems anything better than the stock heatsink would provide much better cooling. As a comparison, I have a 2500K at 4.5 GHz at 60C using an H80 at lowest fan speeds.[/QUOTE]

And I have my 2500k at 4.3 GHz at around 60C using a hyper 212.

The stock intel heat sinks are a joke. They finally removed them completely from the 3930 and 3960.

[QUOTE=Christenson;280717]yes, of course...that's what most of us do....

And, as long as the heat is managed, your computer's life won't change much...it will probably be replaced by upgrade before it dies....

CPU-Z and GPU-Z are your friends on Windows, sensors on Linux....[/QUOTE]

Okay. Well I will definitely consider adding my GPU to the effort. Will this also slow down the LL testing?

[QUOTE=Primeinator;280792]Okay. Well I will definitely consider adding my GPU to the effort. Will this also slow down the LL testing?[/QUOTE]

Not sure how your quad compares to mine (Intel Core2 Quad Q8200 @ 2.33GHz), but mine runs 'faster' with the GPU running. To explain a bit, the Core 2 Quad seems to share something between core 'pairs' that slows them down depending on the work being done. I started off using P95 with 4 LL's running, and all 4 had around 90ms per iteration. I found out if I switched core 2 and 4 to TF that the LL's now were at around 60ms per. So, using batch files and the start command to run mfaktc on cores 2 and 4 while setting P95 to 1 and 3 keeps the LL's around 60ms. My other GPU machines are i5's and I see a slight change with mfaktc running (2-4ms slower).

[QUOTE=bcp19;280797]Not sure how your quad compares to mine (Intel Core2 Quad Q8200 @ 2.33GHz), but mine runs 'faster' with the GPU running. To explain a bit, the Core 2 Quad seems to share something between core 'pairs' that slows them down depending on the work being done. I started off using P95 with 4 LL's running, and all 4 had around 90ms per iteration. I found out if I switched core 2 and 4 to TF that the LL's now were at around 60ms per. So, using batch files and the start command to run mfaktc on cores 2 and 4 while setting P95 to 1 and 3 keeps the LL's around 60ms. My other GPU machines are i5's and I see a slight change with mfaktc running (2-4ms slower).[/QUOTE]

Mine is an i7 Q720 1.6 Ghz.

[QUOTE=lycorn;280801]Back to the thread subject...
[/QUOTE]

Should we move my question(s) on this thread to another? I am sorry for moving the thread off topic; I merely had a couple of questions regarding the GPU project and potentially adding my efforts to it.

[QUOTE=Primeinator;280806]Mine is an i7 Q720 1.6 Ghz.
[/QUOTE]

I'd reccommend doing like I did then, set P95 to use core 1 and 3 and set up mfaktc/o to run on core 2 and 4. Doing this you will see a significant speed up in your LL processing per core if you currently have all 4 cores doing LL. 2 core = 6 exp in the same time 4 core = 8 exp with this setup.

[QUOTE=Primeinator;280806]
Should we move my question(s) on this thread to another? I am sorry for moving the thread off topic; I merely had a couple of questions regarding the GPU project and potentially adding my efforts to it.[/QUOTE]

No worries. Thread hijacking is part of the thrill. It happens all the time.