Overclocking that linux box....

[HighYield]

I just set up a new linux folding/work station with Ubuntu 7.10 and it needs a good OC but what tools are available in linux for the job? In the past I did this with a dual win XP boot so I just used the standard CPU-Z/core temp combo. I know there are a lot of diskless folders out there....what monitoring tools do you folks use to tweak your system/ test for overheating?

 

[jws2346]

I just set up a new linux folding/work station with Ubuntu 7.10 and it needs a good OC but what tools are available in linux for the job? In the past I did this with a dual win XP boot so I just used the standard CPU-Z/core temp combo. I know there are a lot of diskless folders out there....what monitoring tools do you folks use to tweak your system/ test for overheating?

Welp, not even being on the list of the top 5,000 overclockers I do OC' my cpus a bit (my sig) I keep my OC's small, just nervous I guess

I do like to see what my procs are doing and I'm "temp anal"

temperature: I use the cortemp module in lm_sensors (I think it's in the kernel 2.6.20-6 and up, I believe Ubuntu v7.10 is 2.6.22, so no sweat for you) to give me an idea of how evenly or remotely even the cpu temps are between idle and load, plus my boxen are 24/7 folding so (not extremely accurate, I don't think any software monitoring software is) I can get an idea if one of my cooling apparatus quits (ie water pumps, cooling fans, etc) It's also a good indicator of when it's time for cleaning some "dust bunnies" out.

To have an ever present GUI for temp, vcore and most other voltages, I use Gkrellm (you have to have lm_sensors first, at least in any flavor of Ubuntu). I simply configure it by going into configuration mode and adding 5c to the coretemp section. It has a cpu graph that shows cpu usage also, plus other things I don't use.

Now on the MHz readings, the only way I know how to check that is at the command line
cat [space] /procs/cpuinfo I think there are GUI's that are more modern, the process I just mentioned is "old hat"

Most of what little bit I do know about Linux has been learned on this and other forums. It seems Linux (any 64 bit flavor, with ia32-bit libs for SMP) has less overhead than windoze and it folds faster. I will say, I saw a better frame time in windoze with the Affinity program so it seems things are getting even (plus Linux is free and they upgrade more often than every 5 or so years)

You can also compile FAHmon and keep track of your folding progress

Oh yeah, lm-sensors and Gkrellm should be in your synaptic package manager. Go to this URL for a zillion different Gkrellm skins. http://www.muhri.net/gkrellm/

Edit: I blew it, no "s" in the command cat [space] /proc/cpuinfo

 

[jws2346]

Oops sorry, double post

 

[alan2308]

as jws said, lm_sensors is what you're looking for. After its installed, run sensors-detect to initially configure it, then you can run sensors from the command line or there are many GUI interfaces, such as gkrellm which was mentioned.

 

[RavenD]

lm-sensors and sensors-applet. Lets you put your temps on your panel right next to your system tray.

 

[Kendrak]

for the diskless I OC, and if it's stable and does not fry my hand to the touch it's gtg.

 

[alan2308]

for the diskless I OC, and if it's stable and does not fry my hand to the touch it's gtg.

And obviously some of us prefer to just live on the edge.

 

[digital_exhaust]

for the diskless I OC, and if it's stable and does not fry my hand to the touch it's gtg.

Yes... the tactile temperature sensors are by far the most reliable... I personally stick my tongue on the base of my HSF, keep it there for thirty seconds, and if I can still taste Jolly Roger's Pirate Hot Sauce, temps are fine and things are good.

 

[HighYield]

OK, lm-sensors....but is this reading the cpu core temp or is it just the motherboard cpu sensor under the cpu? I decided to go Kendrak's route and feel the heat sink. It was cool....so I am gtg I had this E6700 at 3.0GHz in another boxen so I just set it the same way in this new boxen and gave it a 2619 SMP WU to crunch on. It is about 5 hrs in and no problems. LM-sensor indicates 31C (ambient is 19C - cpu has an AC freezer pro 7) this seems too low for core temp what do you think?

FAH Mon indicates 10.1k ppd with my small farm.


[H]ard|Folding F@H Badge

 

[Kendrak]

OK, lm-sensors....but is this reading the cpu core temp or is it just the motherboard cpu sensor under the cpu? I decided to go Kendrak's route and feel the heat sink. It was cool....so I am gtg I had this E6700 at 3.0GHz in another boxen so I just set it the same way in this new boxen and gave it a 2619 SMP WU to crunch on. It is about 5 hrs in and no problems. LM-sensor indicates 31C (ambient is 19C - cpu has an AC freezer pro 7) this seems too low for core temp what do you think?

FAH Mon indicates 10.1k ppd with my small farm.


[H]ard|Folding F@H Badge

See.... I may sound funny, but it works

 

[HighYield]

See.... I may sound funny, but it works

I remember reading somebody else's post that went something like ...just overclock it and if it doesn't blue screen you are fine....can't remember who said that but maybe they have a good way of thinking

 

[jws2346]

Yeah man, I hope someone can answer the question about lm_sensors seeming to read low.

I have two (2) "dual" booters folding 24/7 ATM and what I do is record Coretemp, Realtemp, SpeedFan, etc in windose while folding a 1760 pernter and then kind of add any difference I have in Gkrellm when folding a 1760 pernter (or whatever).

The third box I have 24/7 folding is just straight Xubuntu v8.04 and I just call the temps "close enough for government work". (really, I kind of estimate about 5c or more )

As I said in a previous post I don't think any software program to read cpu temps is overly accurate. I just use the software temps as a reference point (especially with the new 45nm chips). If I was going to do any radical OC'ing I would have physical known calibrated temperature sensors. (I'm kind of temp anal anywhoo )

 

[alan2308]

Yeah man, I hope someone can answer the question about lm_sensors seeming to read low.

I have two (2) "dual" booters folding 24/7 ATM and what I do is record Coretemp, Realtemp, SpeedFan, etc in windose while folding a 1760 pernter and then kind of add any difference I have in Gkrellm when folding a 1760 pernter (or whatever).

The third box I have 24/7 folding is just straight Xubuntu v8.04 and I just call the temps "close enough for government work". (really, I kind of estimate about 5c or more )

As I said in a previous post I don't think any software program to read cpu temps is overly accurate. I just use the software temps as a reference point (especially with the new 45nm chips). If I was going to do any radical OC'ing I would have physical known calibrated temperature sensors. (I'm kind of temp anal anywhoo )

Theres a number of different reasons that could be.
1. From the lm_sensors FAQ: "We display the actual temperature of the sensor. This may not be the temperature you are interested in, though. If a sensor should measure the CPU temperature, it must be in thermal contact with it. In practice, it is just somewhere near it. Your BIOS may correct for this (by adding, for example, thirty degrees to the measured temperature). The correction factor is regrettably different for each mainboard, so we can not do this in the module itself."
2. A number of sensor manufacturers do not release complete specs for their sensor or no specs at all. The lm_sensors developers have to do their best to "guess" the interface in this case.
3. Sometimes a sensor is misidentified or is a newer revision thats slightly different and the developers haven't added support yet.

Theres a lot more reading you can do here:

http://www.math.ias.edu/doc/lm_sensors-2.8.7/doc/lm_sensors-FAQ.html#Section-4_002e4

In the end, "close enough for government work" has been a good motto for me in most areas of life since I first heard it.

 

[SmokeRngs]

The lm_sensors route with gkrellm is what I use to monitor temps. It seems to be pretty accurate in the case of my Intel quads but it's way off with my Athlon X2. Just something to keep in mind.

As far as overclocking, there isn't nearly as many programs out there for testing the stability of an overclock in Linux. I haven't done much searching to tell you the truth so I normally just install a copy of XP when I first put the system together and use the normal tools for testing the stability of overclocks there. Once I have determined I have the highest stable overclock, I wipe the XP install and put Linux in its place.

It's not the most efficient use of time and resources but it works for me as I won't run an unstable overclock.

 

[jws2346]

The lm_sensors route with gkrellm is what I use to monitor temps. It seems to be pretty accurate in the case of my Intel quads but it's way off with my Athlon X2. Just something to keep in mind.

Thanks for the info SmokeRngs about the Intel quads, ATM I'm not lucky enough to have a quad

I've also noticed different temperature readings (usually lower) on Athlon X2's, plus usually lower temperatures on the E6xxx C2D's (E6600, E6420, E6400, E6300)

How I came to that conclusion was that every boxen I've had for a while has been a "dual boot", WinXP w/SP2 and some flavor of Linux (Ubuntu, Kubuntu, SUSE. Mandriva, Fedora and a bunch of others) I've checked my temps both idle (BIOS) and load with Coretemp, SpeedFan, Hardware Monitor, Everest, some other mobo specific programs and lately with the RealTemp program all in winders. I just kind of compensated for any temp differences in the Gkrellm Linux GUI. (lm_sensors, coretemp module)

Like I said before, if I was doing some serious OC'ing and I was concerned about temps I would have calibrated hardware temperature sensors. I just use the software programs for reference. There's no way I would rely on some software program or motherboard sensors to keep from frying some expensive hardware.(at least it's expensive to me)

Please correct if I'm wrong, but isn't the folding program one of the best ways to stress an OC' for stability in Linux?

Believe me I'm not knocking the lm_sensors program one bit. I think it's one hell of a good program.

 

[HighYield]

.... I haven't done much searching to tell you the truth so I normally just install a copy of XP when I first put the system together and use the normal tools for testing the stability of overclocks there. Once I have determined I have the highest stable overclock, I wipe the XP install and put Linux in its place.

It's not the most efficient use of time and resources but it works for me as I won't run an unstable overclock.

This sounds like good advice!! There are more tools for XP/vista. Once I get some more time together I'll image my Ubuntu install and put XP on to find a better OC then jump back to Linux.

The new 8.04 ubuntu is going to have the "Completely Fair Scheduler", a new process scheduler introduced in Linux 2.6.23 that provides improved interactive performance."....do you think this will improve the efficiency of folding for SMP WUs?

 

[alan2308]

This sounds like good advice!! There are more tools for XP/vista. Once I get some more time together I'll image my Ubuntu install and put XP on to find a better OC then jump back to Linux.

The new 8.04 ubuntu is going to have the "Completely Fair Scheduler", a new process scheduler introduced in Linux 2.6.23 that provides improved interactive performance."....do you think this will improve the efficiency of folding for SMP WUs?

Shouldn't have much impact on a dedicated folder, but if its a daily driver, it might hurt performance. But if it does, you should still be able to use one of the older schedulers via a boot parameter.

 

[jws2346]

I've been running Ubuntu v8.04 on 1x of my 24/7 folders (E6600, OC'ed 2.8 GHz) since I could DL it from Distrowatch. I started with alpha 4, went to alpha 6 and finally to beta.

To be completely honest I haven't noticed any speed increase, in fact for a while you couldn't even use your own custom wallpaper without hacking.

From my understanding it comes out as a final release at the end of this
month.

So far, I can honestly say nothing beats the LinuxSMP for speed, dependancy, points, cost, etc. I just wish it had some more bench marking and stress programs (probably will in the future, FWIW they'll probably give M$ a run for their money )

I'm talking using a 64 bit flavor on a Intel C2D (dual) I have no idea about a Intel C2D quad

 

[alan2308]

I've been running Ubuntu v8.04 on 1x of my 24/7 folders (E6600, OC'ed 2.8 GHz) since I could DL it from Distrowatch. I started with alpha 4, went to alpha 6 and finally to beta.

To be completely honest I haven't noticed any speed increase, in fact for a while you couldn't even use your own custom wallpaper without hacking.

From my understanding it comes out as a final release at the end of this
month.

So far, I can honestly say nothing beats the LinuxSMP for speed, dependancy, points, cost, etc. I just wish it had some more bench marking and stress programs (probably will in the future, FWIW they'll probably give M$ a run for their money )

I'm talking using a 64 bit flavor on a Intel C2D (dual) I have no idea about a Intel C2D quad

Good to see there's no performance hit with with the new scheduler. I'm an Ubuntu user and would hate to have to hold off on the latest release.

 

[HighYield]

I've been running Ubuntu v8.04 on 1x of my 24/7 folders (E6600, OC'ed 2.8 GHz) since I could DL it from Distrowatch. I started with alpha 4, went to alpha 6 and finally to beta.

To be completely honest I haven't noticed any speed increase, in fact for a while you couldn't even use your own custom wallpaper without hacking.

That is hard core using and alpha OS. You are dedicated!

 

[Nephelim]

There's a version of prime95 for linux. I don't know if it has a torture-test mode.