[Skimmertalk] Improvement of CPU consumption by RTTY Skimserv

[N4ZR]

Jeff, I assume the "normal conditions" you're speaking of are during 
contests?  Are you excluding the FT4 and FT8 frequencies from your 
coverage? On a typical non-contest day I only see a few decoders and 
maybe 1 RTTY spot per hour.  Seeing all the people on this weekend is 
downright startling!

73, Pete N4ZR
Check out the Reverse Beacon Network
at <http://reversebeacon.net>, now
spotting RTTY activity worldwide.
For spots, please use your favorite
"retail" DX cluster.

On 1/5/2020 10:40 AM, Jeff Blaine wrote:
>
> Pete there are.  Not sure how they correlate.  Much better than a 
> general CPU benchmark though.
>
> The AMD 2700X at stock frequency, as a benchmark, runs about 1100-1200 
> decoders before RTTY SS starts to throttle.  That should work for the 
> normal conditions.  I seem to need about 400 decoders per open & 
> active band and another 50-150 for each of the other bands with some 
> activity.  In peak solar condx, even this horsepower is going to be 
> marginal if leaving SS set on 5 bands x 192.  Trimming back on the 
> number of bands of course mitigates any shortcomings though.
>
> 73/jeff/ac0c
> alpha-charlie-zero-charlie
> www.ac0c.com
>
>
> On 1/5/20 8:58 AM, N4ZR wrote:
>>
>> Jeff, what I was trying to point out is simply that judgments made 
>> several years ago, that RTTY Skimserv would stop even the strongest 
>> i7, perhaps need to be rethunk.
>>
>> Is there an available benchmark for FPU capability?
>>
>> 73, Pete N4ZR
>> Check out the Reverse Beacon Network
>> at<http://reversebeacon.net>, now
>> spotting RTTY activity worldwide.
>> For spots, please use your favorite
>> "retail" DX cluster.
>> On 1/5/2020 12:09 AM, Jeff Blaine wrote:
>>>
>>> The normal cpu benchmarks are worthless as predictors. Look for 
>>> something that is a reflection of the FPU capability.
>>>
>>> That also explains why the Fx series were so poor.  They have 2 ALU 
>>> for 1 shared FPU.  All of the Intels (and the newer Amd) are 1:1 
>>> ALU:FPU.
>>>
>>> 73/jeff/ac0c
>>> alpha-charlie-zero-charlie
>>> www.ac0c.com
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/4/20 8:49 PM, N4ZR wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Before the RU started, I had CW Skimserv running on one receiver of 
>>>> the RP-16, and RTTY Skimserv running on the other, both with 8 
>>>> bands x 192 KHz  I forgot to rearrange the RTTY bands when the 
>>>> contest started, although I did select the right Contest.ini 
>>>> contest.  What I wanted to comment on is the much improved CPU 
>>>> performance I'm seeing, compared with the last time I ran RTTY 
>>>> Skimserv in a contest.  Currently I have 339 decoders open on RTTY, 
>>>> and 444 spots in the last half hour. It's running 63-67% CPU, with 
>>>> occasional excursions into the 70s. Meanwhile, CW is showing 410 
>>>> decoders, with 340 spots in 30 minutes, and 6-8 percent CPU.
>>>>
>>>> I don't know how to account for this improvement.  It is a new 
>>>> computer, running Windows 10 pro.  The processor is an Intel Core 
>>>> i5-8400 CPU @ 2.80GHz, 2808 Mhz, 6 Core(s), 6 Logical 
>>>> Processor(s).  The machine has 16 GB of RAM and a 512 GB solid 
>>>> state drive, and the CPU has a passmark of almost 12,000.  My old 
>>>> Skimmer machine has an AMD FX-8350 with a passmark of almost 9,000, 
>>>> but there really is no comparison so far as RTTY performance.
>>>>
>>>> I'm wondering if others have had similar experience with the i5 or 
>>>> similar, newer CPUs.  Perhaps they are better adapted to running 
>>>> the RTTY Skimserv code for some reason.
>>>>
>>>> A postscript - I just cut the RTTY Skimserv back to 6 bands x 
>>>> 192KHz, and it is now drawing 55-61 percent CPU with 401 decoders 
>>>> and 425 spots in the last 30 minutes.
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>>
>>>> 73, Pete N4ZR
>>>> Check out the Reverse Beacon Network
>>>> at<http://reversebeacon.net>, now
>>>> spotting RTTY activity worldwide.
>>>> For spots, please use your favorite
>>>> "retail" DX cluster.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Skimmertalk mailing list
>>>> Skimmertalk at contesting.com
>>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/skimmertalk
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Skimmertalk mailing list
>>> Skimmertalk at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/skimmertalk
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Skimmertalk mailing list
>> Skimmertalk at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/skimmertalk
>
> _______________________________________________
> Skimmertalk mailing list
> Skimmertalk at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/skimmertalk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/skimmertalk/attachments/20200105/055222a2/attachment.html>