John Rehill wrote:
[...]

What OS seems to give the best performance for s@h CLI with seti driver?  I

[...]

I got the following OS's:

Win 95
Win 98 SE
Win NT 4.0 workstation
Win NT 4.0 server
Win 2000 Professional
Win 2000 server
Win XP Professional

If you go to the trouble to turn off all the unnecessary services, then WinXP should give the best results out of that lot.

See:
http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/servicecfg.htm
for what to do with what services.


The fastest combination that I've found is:

Win-NT-CLI-v3.03, SetiSpy, SetiQueue, all running in the same Wine shell in Linux.

(Wine often gives better performance than the original MS Win95/98!)

Linux also offers greater robustness and reliability. The latest task scheduler is far more efficient than the Windows 'equivalents'. You don't need fancy anti-virus, anti-ad-malware or active firewall programs running that waste CPU cycles.

Just wondering in what enviroment was seti developed and under what OS would
i expect to see the best performance if hardware was not an issue between
them.

Most of the Berkeley machines run various flavours of unix and linux.

The compiler and compiler settings used for the client are the dominant factor for code efficiency. Next is whatever hardware you're running - CPU cache size and memory bandwidth, FPU ops.


Hopefully, boinc will settle out soon.


See the sig for Mandrake.

Good luck,
Martin