Actually, I would contend it IS a FSB problem. Seti is VERY memory
intensive, typically running with a working set size of 14MB. Beyond
the 103Mhz FSB of your wifes machine vs. your 66Mhz, you have two
processors contending across that 66Mhz BX chipset interface chip.
If you are up to playing, disable one of your CPUs. I'd suspect you
will only see about a 30% decrease in SETI throughput on the BP6. I
replaced my 500's with 366's OCed to 550 JUST to get the FSB speed up
for seti. I reused the 500's in some older single-chip 300 systems via
slocket cards.
Kevin C.
>
> I had a change of heart though and decided to keep it to replace my
> firewall/workstation (which was a celeron 400), and make it a firewall/work
> station/overclocking toy/seti cruncher and to see if kernel 2.4 adds better
> SMP support.
>
>
> I still to this date do not understand why my wife's 300a overclocked to
> 464mhz (slot 1) w/128mb ram does a seti packet in 8 hours 20 mins
> (this is avg time with over 5000 packet hours), while it takes my BP6 with
> dual 500's/66mhz w/ same memory 10 hours 45 mins.. (and I know seti
> only supports single proc's, but you can run two seti's).
>
> I know it can not be the FSB issue, so I was thinking it has to do with
> slot 1 versus socket 370, but that still doesn't sound right.. at anyrate
> I am sure I will still enjoy the BP6 for sometime now.
>
>
>
> --
> =- To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the -=
> =- body of "unsubscribe linux-abit". -=
>
--
Kevin Carpenter: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kevin's Home Page: http://www.seaplace.org/kevinc
(Expressing his comments from home in St. Louis, where this message originated)
--
=- To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the -=
=- body of "unsubscribe linux-abit". -=
