Just for comparation, here are the results of my Athlon XP (Barton) BOX,

[code:1]
gbv@gauss:~/glucas/glucas-2.9.1> less selftest.out
You have new mail in /var/spool/mail/gbv
gbv@gauss:~/glucas/glucas-2.9.1> cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor : 0
vendor_id : AuthenticAMD
cpu family : 6
model : 10
model name : AMD Athlon(tm) XP 2500+
stepping : 0
cpu MHz : 1830.138
cache size : 512 KB
fdiv_bug : no
hlt_bug : no
f00f_bug : no
coma_bug : no
fpu : yes
fpu_exception : yes
cpuid level : 1
wp : yes
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 mmx fxsr sse syscall mmxext 3dnowext 3dnow
bogomips : 3643.80
[/code:1]

And the timings:
[code:1] milsec/iter (user time)
FFT(k) round check
on / off
--- ---------
512 53/ 50
576 63/ 60
640 74/ 70
768 88/ 84
896 107/100
1024 115/116
1152 138/130
1280 149/142
1536 181/172
1792 217/213
2048 238/228
[/code:1]

Guillermo

Ok, ran that Glucas test (your link needs /pub/ btw)

I guess you cleaned up the results so I'll try and do the same, I think I'm interpreting it correctly.

milsec/iter (user time)
FFT(k) round check
on / off
--- ---------
512 43/40
576 52/48
640 56/51
768 66/62
896 80/76
1024 88/84
1152 107/100
1280 115/107
1536 137/130
1792 166/158
2048 183/175

I'll try making with -m64 -m128bit-long-double as well

Bok

Bok, try this:

Run "mprime -m"
Choose 18
exit mprime
vi local.ini
add line "CpuSupportsSSE2=0"
repeat choice 18

Bok, also please try this in a fresh directory

Get ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/mprtst.tar.gz

Run mprime -m
Choose 5
exit
delete worktodo.ini
Run mprime -m
Choose 8, exponent = 20000000, iterations = 10
exit

Post the results.txt file - full of weird timer numbers

[quote="Prime95"]Bok, try this:

Run "mprime -m"
Choose 18
exit mprime
vi local.ini
add line "CpuSupportsSSE2=0"
repeat choice 18[/quote]

This is the results.txt for this one

AMD Engineering Sample
CPU speed: 1799.79 MHz
CPU features: RDTSC, CMOV, PREFETCH, MMX, SSE, SSE2
L1 cache size: 64 KB
L2 cache size: 1024 KB
L1 cache line size: 64 bytes
L2 cache line size: 64 bytes
L1 TLBS: 32
L2 TLBS: 512
Prime95 version 22.12, RdtscTiming=1
Best time for 256K FFT length: 16.347 ms.
Best time for 320K FFT length: 21.512 ms.
Best time for 384K FFT length: 25.947 ms.
Best time for 448K FFT length: 31.366 ms.
Best time for 512K FFT length: 34.787 ms.
Best time for 640K FFT length: 46.058 ms.
Best time for 768K FFT length: 56.882 ms.
Best time for 896K FFT length: 69.160 ms.
Best time for 1024K FFT length: 76.882 ms.
Best time for 1280K FFT length: 98.280 ms.
Best time for 1536K FFT length: 118.428 ms.
Best time for 1792K FFT length: 145.785 ms.

AMD Engineering Sample
CPU speed: 1800.20 MHz
CPU features: RDTSC, CMOV, PREFETCH, MMX, SSE
L1 cache size: 64 KB
L2 cache size: 1024 KB
L1 cache line size: 64 bytes
L2 cache line size: 64 bytes
L1 TLBS: 32
L2 TLBS: 512
Prime95 version 22.12, RdtscTiming=1
Best time for 256K FFT length: 17.196 ms.
Best time for 320K FFT length: 22.334 ms.
Best time for 384K FFT length: 29.183 ms.
Best time for 448K FFT length: 32.451 ms.
Best time for 512K FFT length: 35.374 ms.
Best time for 640K FFT length: 46.979 ms.
Best time for 768K FFT length: 56.599 ms.
Best time for 896K FFT length: 68.014 ms.
Best time for 1024K FFT length: 75.773 ms.
Best time for 1280K FFT length: 100.296 ms.
Best time for 1536K FFT length: 120.103 ms.
Best time for 1792K FFT length: 145.532 ms.

[quote="Prime95"]Bok, also please try this in a fresh directory

Get ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/mprtst.tar.gz

Run mprime -m
Choose 5
exit
delete worktodo.ini
Run mprime -m
Choose 8, exponent = 20000000, iterations = 10
exit

Post the results.txt file - full of weird timer numbers[/quote]

And here is the results of this one....

Test 0: 0.000 sec. (121 clocks), avg: 0.000 sec. (127 clocks)
Test 1: 0.000 sec. (2131 clocks), avg: 0.000 sec. (2140 clocks)
Test 2: 0.000 sec. (654142 clocks), avg: 0.000 sec. (660652 clocks)
Test 3: 0.001 sec. (2623567 clocks), avg: 0.001 sec. (2685738 clocks)
Test 4: 0.002 sec. (2840212 clocks), avg: 0.002 sec. (2854997 clocks)
Test 1000: 0.000 sec. (528147 clocks), avg: 0.000 sec. (537882 clocks)
Test 1001: 0.001 sec. (1547728 clocks), avg: 0.001 sec. (1581690 clocks)
Test 1002: 0.001 sec. (2323676 clocks), avg: 0.001 sec. (2347559 clocks)
Test 1003: 0.000 sec. (525146 clocks), avg: 0.000 sec. (525155 clocks)
Test 1004: 0.001 sec. (2460613 clocks), avg: 0.001 sec. (2470975 clocks)
Test 1005: 0.002 sec. (4224755 clocks), avg: 0.002 sec. (4397632 clocks)
Test 1006: 0.000 sec. (528147 clocks), avg: 0.000 sec. (529015 clocks)
Test 1007: 0.001 sec. (2485652 clocks), avg: 0.001 sec. (2512956 clocks)
Test 1008: 0.002 sec. (3813135 clocks), avg: 0.002 sec. (4017296 clocks)
Test 1009: 0.001 sec. (1040145 clocks), avg: 0.001 sec. (1042419 clocks)
Test 1010: 0.003 sec. (4907879 clocks), avg: 0.003 sec. (4914776 clocks)
Test 1011: 0.003 sec. (4732079 clocks), avg: 0.003 sec. (4976143 clocks)
Test 1012: 0.000 sec. (504955 clocks), avg: 0.000 sec. (505812 clocks)
Test 1013: 0.000 sec. (831666 clocks), avg: 0.000 sec. (834674 clocks)
Test 1014: 0.001 sec. (1120767 clocks), avg: 0.001 sec. (1142366 clocks)
Test 1015: 0.001 sec. (1581311 clocks), avg: 0.001 sec. (1590955 clocks)
Test 1016: 0.001 sec. (1290771 clocks), avg: 0.001 sec. (1312691 clocks)
Test 1017: 0.001 sec. (1901221 clocks), avg: 0.001 sec. (1910335 clocks)
Test 1018: 0.001 sec. (1152645 clocks), avg: 0.001 sec. (1154434 clocks)
Test 1019: 0.001 sec. (2025428 clocks), avg: 0.001 sec. (2029746 clocks)
[Fri Sep 5 16:23:34 2003]
timer 0: 72921256
timer 1: 57044016
timer 2: 579204
timer 3: 72340708
timer 4: 10620074
timer 5: 6002809
timer 6: 13630747
timer 9: 12004685
timer 10: 13410368
timer 13: 7685964
timer 14: 7410400
timer 16: 9099429
timer 17: 5984708
timer 18: 8094904
timer 20: 12457308
timer 21: 13360638
timer 24: 7918447
timer 26: 18079
timer 27: 36327



Bok

Bok, perhaps you ought to try mprime version 23.5 instead of 22.12?

ok, ran it again with version 23.5

AMD Engineering Sample
CPU speed: 1799.80 MHz
CPU features: RDTSC, CMOV, PREFETCH, MMX, SSE, SSE2
L1 cache size: 64 KB
L2 cache size: 1024 KB
L1 cache line size: 64 bytes
L2 cache line size: 64 bytes
L1 TLBS: 32
L2 TLBS: 512
Prime95 version 23.5, RdtscTiming=1
Best time for 384K FFT length: 25.615 ms.
Best time for 448K FFT length: 30.690 ms.
Best time for 512K FFT length: 34.733 ms.
Best time for 640K FFT length: 43.128 ms.
Best time for 768K FFT length: 52.786 ms.
Best time for 896K FFT length: 63.544 ms.
Best time for 1024K FFT length: 71.629 ms.
Best time for 1280K FFT length: 95.534 ms.
Best time for 1536K FFT length: 116.598 ms.
Best time for 1792K FFT length: 140.507 ms.
Best time for 2048K FFT length: 158.316 ms.
[Fri Sep 5 20:38:36 2003]
Compare your results to other computers at http://www.mersenne.org/bench.htm
That web page also contains instructions on how your results can be included.

AMD Engineering Sample
CPU speed: 1799.76 MHz
CPU features: RDTSC, CMOV, PREFETCH, MMX, SSE
L1 cache size: 64 KB
L2 cache size: 1024 KB
L1 cache line size: 64 bytes
L2 cache line size: 64 bytes
L1 TLBS: 32
L2 TLBS: 512
Prime95 version 23.5, RdtscTiming=1
Best time for 384K FFT length: 28.408 ms.
Best time for 448K FFT length: 32.031 ms.
Best time for 512K FFT length: 34.807 ms.
Best time for 640K FFT length: 47.125 ms.
Best time for 768K FFT length: 55.922 ms.
Best time for 896K FFT length: 67.866 ms.
Best time for 1024K FFT length: 74.954 ms.
Best time for 1280K FFT length: 96.482 ms.
Best time for 1536K FFT length: 117.145 ms.
Best time for 1792K FFT length: 139.925 ms.
Best time for 2048K FFT length: 156.999 ms.


Should it have been slower ???

Bok

[quote="Bok"]ok, ran it again with version 23.5



Should it have been slower ???

Bok[/quote]

When comparing results, note that version 22 output starts at 256K FFT and ends at 1792K, while version 23 output starts at 384K and ends at 2048K.

So your results show that version 23.5 is actually a bit faster than 22.12 for your Opteron.

It seems there is no significative advantage using Revision C for Glucas. Actually, the timings are near the same. The version Bok tested is a bit slower because I supressed an optimization causing problems in other targets.

Other interesting thing is that Glucas and mprime are closest than ever :shock: . Well, when magic George's hands touch again the code this will disapear :) .

And I also have work to do with Glucas ...

[quote]I'll try making with -m64 -m128bit-long-double as well
[/quote]

Bok, I don't think it will run, at least it will not give any advantage.

Guillermo

[quote="gbvalor"]It seems there is no significative advantage using Revision C for Glucas. [/quote]

From the timer values I see no significant advantage for rev C for prime95 either.