Rhapsody setiathome

E

ericmurphy

Registered
Is anyone running the PPC/Rhapsody text version of setiathome under OS X? I've been running it on my G4/500 SP with 256 Meg, and it seems like it's taking about ten-twelve hours to do a work unit. Running the Mac OS version under 9.0.4 on the same machine, I was churning work units in about 6 1/2 hours. I thought the native text version would run faster.... Now, granted, under OS 9 it was running as a screensaver (and presumably as a foreground task) whereas under X it's running in the background and constantly getting pre-empted, but it' slurping up every available CPU cycle it can get its hands on--anywhere from 30% to 75%, and the CPU's maxed out all the time it's running, so I would have thought it would be at least running in the 7-9 hour range...
 
Have you tried the carbonized Seti 3.0? GUI and everything, and it seems pretty spritely.

Versiontracker has a link to it.
 
I couldn't find any setiathome clients at Versiontracker, so I went to the Setiathome site. The only Mac version I could find there (v. 3.0) said it would run under OS 7.5.5, which leads me to believe it's not Carbonzied. Are you maybe talking about a version that runs under OS X server?
 
The results for 3.0 will be slower because they've changed the algorithm and added more diagnosis- I believe that the guys in Berkeley said that it should take around 30-40% longer time per unit than 2.0.4.
As an example, my Wallstreet PB/300 with 9.0.4 was churning 2.0.4 units at under 10 hours a pop, and when I installed 3.0, they now take over 12 hours.
3.0 is carbonized for OS X Beta.
I've been running 2.x with OS X DP4 and it seems quite fast, though with OS X Server it seems the most efficient, however, it does crash OS X Server 1.2 after a few days probably due to a problem with the Terminal applicaion- I hadn't run into any problems with OS X Server prior to 1.2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top