Hello everyone,

I'm Leaps-from-Shadows, but you can call me Leaps.  It was inferred over at the SETI@home forums that y'all need some testers equipped with AMD-based systems.

I've got me a Gateway GT5692, bought in August.  It originally came with a Phenom 8450 (triple core, 2.1GHz), but I upgraded it to a Phenom 9650 (quad core, 2.3GHz) just for running SETI@home.  The 4GB of 667MHz DDR2 RAM and 500GB SATA hard drive have remained the same.  Clock speeds and voltages remain at default because of Gateway's crappy BIOS.  Oh yeah ... it has Vista Home Premium x64 with SP1 for the OS.  I've been using the AK_v8 SSE3 app for a while, and I have been running the SSE3 optimized Astropulse app from the day it was released.  I'm a huge fan of both, and SETI@home is the only project I run.

Anyway ... if it turns out that you do indeed need a tester with my hardware/software configuration, I'd jump at the chance to be involved in development/testing of super-speedy optimized apps to erase the AMD inferiority in SETI@home.

Let me know...

To clarify (since it was my remark about the limited number of AMD testers that prompted Leaps to volunteer in the first place):

There is an AP app which has the basic upgrades for v5.00 compatibility already in testing. That seems to be stable and reliable so far, and it's probably "good enough" to match the stock v5 release if they spring it on us suddenly.

Raistmer and Jason G are busily working through further optimisations as we speak (I've been watching their conversations this morning from the sidelines - way above my pay-grade to actually join in ): it's those further optimisations which aren't yet ready for live testing.

When testing does begin, it's usually better to test at SETI Beta: not only is it good form to test at a test site, but the tasks you've crunched remain visible on the website indefinitely (no 24-hour purge), which is helpful if you report problems and somebody else needs to look at your output. Oh, and you also get that dinky little 'Volunteer tester' tag on the main site when you register.

Upgrading to pre-release tester status here also requires tweaking by a site administrator, and they are few on the ground. Probably best to start by registering at Beta first, and reading up on some of the history on the Beta message boards, while we're waiting.

Short answer is "It depends".
Testing is done both at Beta & here.  Richard's point re: ability to monitor output is spot-on.  It's a better "control" environment to test functionality in a live mode.  Some of the current work being done also has relevance to stock Berkeley development as well.  Optimized development aps are tested here @ Lunatics in the MANY development builds that eventually coalesce into an agreed release candidate build.  A release candidate may need multiple compiles/flavors to suit different archs, i.e.  ssse3 & sse4.1 for Intel, sse2, sse3 for AMD etc.  as well as 32bit & 64 bit .  At this point, more people and platforms are needed to test all these alphas sufficiently.  Much of this goes on here.  Once the gremlins are sorted & confidence is high in accuracy and stability, some limited testing may be done @ Beta prior to "public release". 

The one common element is that testing groups here are tight control groups & developers COUNT on their active participation & quick response.  Each person generally is contributing a certain combination of CPU + OS flavor that helps complete a whole picture.  If called-upon, it's not casual testing & can in fact involve a considerable amount of work & time.
The developers pretty much determine the scope of testing and what specific resources are needed & when.
Thanks for your interest.