On 6 Nov 2003 23:51:26 GMT, Stagger Lee <SLee@houston-hunks.com>
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 18:17:28 GMT, Sowulo <bosco@UFO.com> wrote:
: *snip*
: 
: > Running two work units simultaneously will not lead
: >to the improvement you have predicted.
: 
: I don't see any prediction other than running two at once will slow
: down your times but increase your overall production and this is most

In the original post, Twisted Hardware wrote:

"You probably have hyperthreading enabled, so SETI can only use 50% of your
CPU. You should use the CLI in combination with a tool to run 2 instances of ..."

: certainly accurate information.  That 3.0c should be turning out about

Then perhaps you'd better take a remedial reading course.  The claim by Twisted
Hardware is utter rot. 

In other words, the phrase "can only use 50% of your CPU" is baloney.

I'm having a very hard time deciding whether to bother being polite or
not.  If you will read without that huge ego/chip on your shoulder you
will see that I did not respond to the "50%" comment.  I only quoted
and responded to your attack: 

" Running two work units simultaneously will not leadto the
improvement you have predicted."

Twisted Hardware did not say one word about anything that could be
construed in any way as a prediction.  He only recommended that with
Hyperthreading the orignal poster should be running 2 instances of the
CLI.  He failed to "predict" that on a 2.4c a single instance of the
CLI will average around 9 wu's per day but using HT to run two
instances of the CLI will net 13-14 wu's per day.  But I won't post
that as a prediction nor bother with explaining the mechanics--who
cares?  The bottom line is that taking full advantage of HT increased
daily output.  After 20 years of building systems I've learned that
you don't give the details unless the client (questioner) asks "why".
The vast majority of people in the world just want to use their
computers and make sure they are getting the proper performance out of
what they spent their hard earned cash on.  Most do NOT want a
detailed explanation of the engineering involved.  

Your little rants on the engineering, which as I already pointed out,
had nothing to do with answering the real question, "Is this time ok?"
It's too bad that you feel so compelled to show off your intellect
that you can't even see you are arguing points others did not make.

Yes, "can only use 50% of your CPU" is not a completely accurate
statement. But the others you're jumping all over did not make or
support this claim.  What they DID say is that Windows will only
report 50% CPU usage and that is completely accurate--run one instance
of the CLI  and check the performance tab of the task manager--it
shows CPU Usage at 50%. Then look at the CPU Usage History--it shows
one CPU inactive and the second at 100%. Hmmm....go figure.  Yes,
something much more technical than "only us[ing] 50% of your CPU" is
certainly happening here but for all practical purposes, and CERTAINLY
as it pertains to the original question "Is this time ok?" I would say
that the only one posting inaccurate, irrelevant information is
Stagger Lee.