Advanced search

Message boards : News : New CUDA4.2 applications are out for Kepler GPUs

Author Message
Profile GDF
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 14 Mar 07
Posts: 1863
Credit: 629,356
RAC: 0
Level
Gly
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwat
Message 25848 - Posted: 25 Jun 2012 | 9:23:16 UTC

We have finally uploaded the new applications for Kepler supporting cuda4.2.

You should be receiving them if you have a recent driver. The new applications are substantially faster.

gdf

Profile robertmiles
Send message
Joined: 16 Apr 09
Posts: 314
Credit: 53,094,112
RAC: 264
Level
Thr
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25854 - Posted: 25 Jun 2012 | 13:00:32 UTC - in response to Message 25848.

Substantially faster for what GPUs? Only those with the Kepler chips, or the older ones with Fermi chips also?

5pot
Send message
Joined: 8 Mar 12
Posts: 397
Credit: 1,491,122,793
RAC: 2,431,192
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25855 - Posted: 25 Jun 2012 | 13:19:51 UTC

Fermi as well.

Profile Retvari Zoltan*
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Jan 09
Posts: 1030
Credit: 4,045,768,687
RAC: 5,536,234
Level
Arg
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25856 - Posted: 25 Jun 2012 | 13:26:10 UTC
Last modified: 25 Jun 2012 | 13:46:20 UTC

I'm still receiving CUDA 4.2 and CUDA 3.1 by turns on the same host.
I never thought that I'll become one of those who have to abort tasks selectively one by one....

For Windows users it's a good time to upgrade their drivers to 301.42, otherwise they won't receive CUDA 4.2 tasks (if they use the last recommended driver v285.58, or earlier)

klepel
Send message
Joined: 23 Dec 09
Posts: 68
Credit: 509,252,618
RAC: 865,178
Level
Lys
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25859 - Posted: 25 Jun 2012 | 14:27:28 UTC - in response to Message 25856.

I'm still receiving CUDA 4.2 and CUDA 3.1 by turns on the same host.
I never thought that I'll become one of those who have to abort tasks selectively one by one....

I suggest that the project duplicats under "Preference of GPUGRID/Run only the selected applications" the possibilities:
ACEMD standard: Cuda 3.1
ACEMD standard: Cuda 4.2
ACEMD beta
ACEMD for long runs (8-12 hours on fastest GPU): Cuda 3.1
ACEMD for long runs (8-12 hours on fastest GPU): Cuda 4.2

It is not so much that I care about speed, but in my special case, I suspect, that the Cuda 3.1 apps causes problems on my GTX570 with driver: 301.42, as I have posted before on other threads.

Profile K1atOdessa
Send message
Joined: 25 Feb 08
Posts: 249
Credit: 308,427,702
RAC: 254,026
Level
Asp
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25863 - Posted: 25 Jun 2012 | 16:12:45 UTC

Interesting... Only one of my two rigs has completed a cuda3.1 WU since this announcement and thus become eligible for the long cuda4.2 app. However, the newly downloaded WU is labeled as using cuda3.1 still.

For kicks yesterday I disabled long WU's and selected only short WU's to test the system with the cuda4.2 app. It completed one WU without issue. So, I re-enabled only Long WU's yesterday afternoon.

Any reason why it would use a cuda3.1 app when the cuda4.2 app is available, for a GTX570 running 301.42 drivers? Should I try a detach/reattach after this WU's ends?

klepel
Send message
Joined: 23 Dec 09
Posts: 68
Credit: 509,252,618
RAC: 865,178
Level
Lys
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25864 - Posted: 25 Jun 2012 | 16:36:17 UTC

I let receive the GTX570 only short apps until yesterday evening. However this card got a mix of work of Cuda 3.1 and Cuda 4.2. It seems to me that the Cuda 4.2 is slightly more stable than the Cuda 3.1 on my configuration. I am actually crunching two long tasks Cuda 3.1, the first crashed after a few seconds (NAN). The second caused a crash of the computer, luckily after reboot, the computer continuous the same work unit.

I think detach and attach is no solution, as it will continue to get a mix. And for me is not practical, as this computer is used by a co-worker and should crunch silently in the back, without have to pause Boinc, when the computer is in use.

Profile GDF
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 14 Mar 07
Posts: 1863
Credit: 629,356
RAC: 0
Level
Gly
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwat
Message 25866 - Posted: 25 Jun 2012 | 17:20:39 UTC - in response to Message 25864.
Last modified: 25 Jun 2012 | 17:34:52 UTC

This problem of receiving multiple applications is probably a bug of the server.
I am going to investigate it with Boinc people or maybe do a server upgrade.

For now, you have to live with it. Sorry.

gdf

Tom Philippart
Send message
Joined: 12 Feb 09
Posts: 57
Credit: 23,376,686
RAC: 0
Level
Pro
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25867 - Posted: 25 Jun 2012 | 18:44:42 UTC

i got a unit on a gtx260 (win7 x64 latest boinc and drivers), but i had to abort it as it was making my computer completely unusable with 99% usage.

Is there any way to make it less aggressive? like 90-95% usage or am I doing something wrong?

Profile K1atOdessa
Send message
Joined: 25 Feb 08
Posts: 249
Credit: 308,427,702
RAC: 254,026
Level
Asp
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25868 - Posted: 25 Jun 2012 | 19:54:31 UTC - in response to Message 25866.

On my 2nd rig, I saw the current cuda3.1 WU getting close to finishing. After it completed and uploaded, I clicked the "reset project" button in BOINC. Now, it could be a complete coincidence, but I did get a WU using cuda4.2 afterward.

I will let that run and see if I get any more cuda3.1 WU's.

kibidk
Send message
Joined: 21 Sep 11
Posts: 3
Credit: 33,943,597
RAC: 28
Level
Val
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25870 - Posted: 25 Jun 2012 | 20:10:59 UTC

Hmmm, the first 4.2 I recived crashed after about 12 min. The workunit seems to have crashed on another host as well.

Workunit is: http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=3510440

Are you sure they are as stable for Fermi cards as Kepler cards? So far my GTX570 has been pretty rock-solid despite the fact my my computer is turned on/off almost every day (only running 24/7 in weekends)

Profile Retvari Zoltan*
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Jan 09
Posts: 1030
Credit: 4,045,768,687
RAC: 5,536,234
Level
Arg
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25871 - Posted: 25 Jun 2012 | 20:58:28 UTC - in response to Message 25870.
Last modified: 25 Jun 2012 | 21:09:52 UTC

Hmmm, the first 4.2 I recived crashed after about 12 min. The workunit seems to have crashed on another host as well.

Workunit is: http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=3510440

Are you sure they are as stable for Fermi cards as Kepler cards? So far my GTX570 has been pretty rock-solid despite the fact my my computer is turned on/off almost every day (only running 24/7 in weekends)

I'm sure they are rock solid on Fermi. I have a couple of them running for more than 4 hours now, they will finish soon. However, your GTX 570 is overclocked to 830MHz, and as I've wrote about this problem in another thread earlier:
The CUDA4.2 failures could be caused by overclocking adjusted for CUDA3.1 tasks.
It's possible that many of us have to adjust GPU (and CPU) overclocking (and voltages and cooling) for CUDA4.2 tasks.
For example my GTX 480s need 25mV more for crunching CUDA4.2 tasks without failures, also my GTX 590s had to be set to 625MHz instead of 725MHz (I don't want to raise their voltage).
The CUDA4.2 tasks are less tolerant of overclocking than CUDA3.1 tasks, partly because they are running much faster on the same hardware and on the same clocks.

kibidk
Send message
Joined: 21 Sep 11
Posts: 3
Credit: 33,943,597
RAC: 28
Level
Val
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25872 - Posted: 25 Jun 2012 | 21:07:23 UTC - in response to Message 25871.

Yes, I have seen that other thread and have set the card to default speed now, so now I'm just waiting for the next 4.2 task to arrive :-)

5pot
Send message
Joined: 8 Mar 12
Posts: 397
Credit: 1,491,122,793
RAC: 2,431,192
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25873 - Posted: 25 Jun 2012 | 21:20:32 UTC
Last modified: 25 Jun 2012 | 21:22:50 UTC

Wow, almost forgot to bring my clocks back down. My 570 has a 4.2 up next.

Oh and, MJH long on my 680 took 4hrs with W7

Great work GPUgrid researchers. Fantastic improvement.

Edit. This about 53% faster than my 570 under 3.1

Profile Carlesa25
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 13 Nov 10
Posts: 315
Credit: 68,815,234
RAC: 24,766
Level
Thr
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25874 - Posted: 25 Jun 2012 | 21:28:11 UTC - in response to Message 25873.

Hello: In my GTX295 with WIN-7 tasks CUDA 4.2 are working fine and faster, with OC (666Mhz)

The same GTX295 (no OC) on Linux does not work with CUDA 4.2...???

Profile K1atOdessa
Send message
Joined: 25 Feb 08
Posts: 249
Credit: 308,427,702
RAC: 254,026
Level
Asp
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25878 - Posted: 26 Jun 2012 | 2:45:21 UTC - in response to Message 25868.

I will let that run and see if I get any more cuda3.1 WU's.


Well, 1st long cuda4.2 finished (and quite faster than cuda3.1, as promised). It immediately downloaded another cuda4.2. All seems well, though 2 WU's hardly indicates a pattern. Will keep an eye on it.


On my 2nd rig, I did the same thing after the cuda3.1 WU finished. "Project reset" in BOINC, and got a cuda4.2. There may be something to that, or again maybe just 3 for 3 luck.

If anyone isn't getting any cuda4.2's (or a mix), could be worth a shot to try it and see.

Profile K1atOdessa
Send message
Joined: 25 Feb 08
Posts: 249
Credit: 308,427,702
RAC: 254,026
Level
Asp
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25879 - Posted: 26 Jun 2012 | 2:50:59 UTC

My two 570's (in separate machines) are factory OC'd to 797 Mhz and 780 Mhz. The 780 Mhz card finished a long WU about 30% faster with cuda4.2 than cuda3.1, and I didn't have any issues with errors. Also, given it is summer that card is running warmer than normal.

My 797 Mhz card is working on it's first long WU (did a short cuda4.2 WU yesterday w/ no issues), so we'll see how that goes. Maybe I am just lucky on the OC front.


I am liking the 90%+ utilization in Win7.

BDDave
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jul 10
Posts: 6
Credit: 48,075,385
RAC: 58,206
Level
Val
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25880 - Posted: 26 Jun 2012 | 3:13:25 UTC - in response to Message 25848.

Hi All,


If you are interested in the increase in computational times, I've pasted my Nvidia 470 results below.

http://www.gpugrid.net/host_app_versions.php?hostid=82476

Simba123
Send message
Joined: 5 Dec 11
Posts: 141
Credit: 44,426,084
RAC: 580,732
Level
Val
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwat
Message 25881 - Posted: 26 Jun 2012 | 6:03:19 UTC

Looks like I just loaded up my first 4.2 app.
it's a Paola, which normally take around 12-15 hours on my 560ti @920.

I've dropped it to 880 for this one, and it's indicating a 5:45:00 min runtime.
If that proves correct, that's an amazing result!

whoa, using 96% GPU and 597 Mb of Ram. Best utilization I have seen!

WTG!!!!

Profile [PUGLIA] kidkidkid3
Send message
Joined: 23 Feb 11
Posts: 35
Credit: 130,878,867
RAC: 197,045
Level
Cys
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25882 - Posted: 26 Jun 2012 | 6:28:18 UTC - in response to Message 25881.
Last modified: 26 Jun 2012 | 6:30:55 UTC

Best work on Cuda 4.2 !
Same pc, same operating system, similar long time Wu .....
performance increased by 100% !
Now we can elaborate at double speed !
Warning for administrator ...
Thanks all !
k.
____________
Dreams do not always come true. But not because they are too big or impossible. Why did we stop believing.
(Martin Luther King)

Simba123
Send message
Joined: 5 Dec 11
Posts: 141
Credit: 44,426,084
RAC: 580,732
Level
Val
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwat
Message 25884 - Posted: 26 Jun 2012 | 7:16:27 UTC - in response to Message 25881.

Looks like I just loaded up my first 4.2 app.
it's a Paola, which normally take around 12-15 hours on my 560ti @920.

I've dropped it to 880 for this one, and it's indicating a 5:45:00 min runtime.
If that proves correct, that's an amazing result!

whoa, using 96% GPU and 597 Mb of Ram. Best utilization I have seen!

WTG!!!!



hmmmm, maybe got ahead of myself.
after 1:15:00, the countdown to completion is still virtually the same at 15:42:32.

I'll be watching closely to see how long this actually takes.

Profile skgiven
Volunteer moderator
Project tester
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 3528
Credit: 976,099,157
RAC: 1,296,952
Level
Glu
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25887 - Posted: 26 Jun 2012 | 10:34:47 UTC - in response to Message 25880.
Last modified: 26 Jun 2012 | 12:25:01 UTC

Hi All,

If you are interested in the increase in computational times, I've pasted my Nvidia 470 results below.

http://www.gpugrid.net/host_app_versions.php?hostid=82476

The recursive acronym at it's best.

http://www.gpugrid.net/host_app_versions.php?hostid=122075
http://www.gpugrid.net/host_app_versions.php?hostid=125945 :)

However you also need to look at each task type individually to see the variation in improvement:
I4R101-NATHAN_RPS1120528-13-166-RND7789_0 3518586 24 Jun 2012 | 5:58:48 UTC 24 Jun 2012 | 18:53:21 UTC Completed and validated 38,683.76 1,187.91 60,900.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v6.16 (cuda31)

I5R92-NATHAN_RPS1120528-11-166-RND0162_2 3507092 25 Jun 2012 | 21:44:05 UTC 26 Jun 2012 | 6:38:11 UTC Completed and validated 24,334.46 517.02 60,900.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v6.16 (cuda42)

GTX470 on Ubuntu 12.04 (195.40), Nathan tasks - 4.2 is 58% faster than 3.1.

Anyone wishing to exclusively run CUDA 4.2 tasks (ie not 3.1 and 4.2)?
I suggest people select no new tasks, finish any tasks in progress and then reset the project. This will delete the 3.1 App. If you reset while you have a task, and are running it on 3.1, it's probably going to start running it again and fail.
____________
FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

Profile K1atOdessa
Send message
Joined: 25 Feb 08
Posts: 249
Credit: 308,427,702
RAC: 254,026
Level
Asp
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25892 - Posted: 26 Jun 2012 | 15:08:19 UTC - in response to Message 25868.

I will let that run and see if I get any more cuda3.1 WU's.

Well, crap. After the "reset project" in BOINC, I did get through several long cuda4.2 WU's before getting another cuda3.1 WU. So, seems like it is luck of the draw right now.



This problem of receiving multiple applications is probably a bug of the server.
I am going to investigate it with Boinc people or maybe do a server upgrade.

For now, you have to live with it. Sorry.

gdf

Well, sporadic cuda4.2 is better than no cuda4.2 at all. :-) Please do look into the potential server issues sending out both types of WU's to a cuda4.2-eligible machine.

Profile K1atOdessa
Send message
Joined: 25 Feb 08
Posts: 249
Credit: 308,427,702
RAC: 254,026
Level
Asp
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25894 - Posted: 26 Jun 2012 | 15:12:36 UTC - in response to Message 25887.


Anyone wishing to exclusively run CUDA 4.2 tasks (ie not 3.1 and 4.2)?
I suggest people select no new tasks, finish any tasks in progress and then reset the project. This will delete the 3.1 App. If you reset while you have a task, and are running it on 3.1, it's probably going to start running it again and fail.


Doesn't seem like that is a permanent solution. I did that and after receiving 2-3 cuda4.2 WU's, it went back to grabbing a cuda3.1 without intervention.

6/26/2012 9:00:34 AM | GPUGRID | Sending scheduler request: To fetch work.
6/26/2012 9:00:34 AM | GPUGRID | Requesting new tasks for NVIDIA
6/26/2012 9:00:37 AM | GPUGRID | Scheduler request completed: got 1 new tasks
6/26/2012 9:00:39 AM | GPUGRID | Started download of acemd.win.2352
6/26/2012 9:00:39 AM | GPUGRID | Started download of cudart32_31_9.dll
6/26/2012 9:00:42 AM | GPUGRID | Finished download of cudart32_31_9.dll
6/26/2012 9:00:42 AM | GPUGRID | Started download of cufft32_31_9.dll
6/26/2012 9:00:49 AM | GPUGRID | Finished download of acemd.win.2352
6/26/2012 9:00:49 AM | GPUGRID | Started download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-LICENSE
6/26/2012 9:00:50 AM | GPUGRID | Finished download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-LICENSE
6/26/2012 9:00:50 AM | GPUGRID | Started download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-COPYRIGHT
6/26/2012 9:00:51 AM | GPUGRID | Finished download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-COPYRIGHT
6/26/2012 9:00:51 AM | GPUGRID | Started download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-11-166-RND7611_1
6/26/2012 9:00:59 AM | GPUGRID | Finished download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-11-166-RND7611_1
6/26/2012 9:00:59 AM | GPUGRID | Started download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-11-166-RND7611_2
6/26/2012 9:01:06 AM | GPUGRID | Finished download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-11-166-RND7611_2
6/26/2012 9:01:06 AM | GPUGRID | Started download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-11-166-RND7611_3
6/26/2012 9:01:11 AM | GPUGRID | Finished download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-11-166-RND7611_3
6/26/2012 9:01:11 AM | GPUGRID | Started download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-pdb_file
6/26/2012 9:01:33 AM | GPUGRID | Finished download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-pdb_file
6/26/2012 9:01:33 AM | GPUGRID | Started download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-psf_file
6/26/2012 9:01:54 AM | GPUGRID | Finished download of cufft32_31_9.dll
6/26/2012 9:01:54 AM | GPUGRID | Started download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-par_file
6/26/2012 9:01:58 AM | GPUGRID | Finished download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-par_file
6/26/2012 9:01:58 AM | GPUGRID | Started download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-conf_file_enc
6/26/2012 9:01:59 AM | GPUGRID | Finished download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-conf_file_enc
6/26/2012 9:01:59 AM | GPUGRID | Started download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-metainp_file
6/26/2012 9:02:00 AM | GPUGRID | Finished download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-metainp_file
6/26/2012 9:02:00 AM | GPUGRID | Started download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-11-166-RND7611_7
6/26/2012 9:02:01 AM | GPUGRID | Finished download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-11-166-RND7611_7
6/26/2012 9:02:20 AM | GPUGRID | Finished download of I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-psf_file
6/26/2012 9:02:21 AM | GPUGRID | Starting task I2R137-NATHAN_RPS1120528-12-166-RND7611_0 using acemdlong version 616 (cuda31) in slot 3

Profile skgiven
Volunteer moderator
Project tester
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 3528
Credit: 976,099,157
RAC: 1,296,952
Level
Glu
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25895 - Posted: 26 Jun 2012 | 16:04:33 UTC - in response to Message 25894.
Last modified: 26 Jun 2012 | 17:07:01 UTC



Looks like I was wrong/it doesn't work that way/the way it's supposed to. So server bug it is.

You have 301.42, and did get a 4.2 task after resetting, so why the 3.1?
I see you have a GT240 (CC 1.2) in one system, but that would not explain the other getting 3.1 tasks (unless a GT440 is deemed as being too slow)?

Which card is the 3.1 task running on?

cufft32_42_9.dll looks like it's been written for both 3.1 and 4.2, actually 3.2 and 4.2.

Anyway, if it's not working maybe Paul Raney was right in asking for separate queues for 4.2 and 3.1, though that might not work in a mixed GPU generation environment (if that matters).
____________
FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

Profile dskagcommunity
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 28 Apr 11
Posts: 440
Credit: 594,328,558
RAC: 1,019,402
Level
Lys
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25897 - Posted: 26 Jun 2012 | 16:49:29 UTC
Last modified: 26 Jun 2012 | 16:50:35 UTC

ok i have the same problem now, i got a cuda 42 app and as next i got a cuda 32 app. intersting enough, i got no speedup on the cuda 42 WU with the 285gtx :( Seems to be a only speedup on fermi (where i got a real speedup) & kepler.
____________
DSKAG Austria Research Team: http://www.research.dskag.at



Crunching for my deceased Dog who had "good" Braincancer..

Profile K1atOdessa
Send message
Joined: 25 Feb 08
Posts: 249
Credit: 308,427,702
RAC: 254,026
Level
Asp
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25898 - Posted: 26 Jun 2012 | 17:22:41 UTC - in response to Message 25895.

You have 301.42, and did get a 4.2 task after resetting, so why the 3.1?
I see you have a GT240 (CC 1.2) in one system, but that would not explain the other getting 3.1 tasks (unless a GT440 is deemed as being too slow)?

Which card is the 3.1 task running on?


I have two systems:

A: 1x GTX570 (GPUGrid only) and 1x GT440 (non-GPUGrid, only PrimeGrid, etc.)
B: 1x GTX570 (GPUGrid only) and 3x GT240 (non-GPUGrid, only PrimeGrid, etc.)


I use the cc_config.xml options to specify which projects get which cards. I devote the 570's to GPUGrid (since I started with you guys), and have merely demoted old GPUGrid cards to other projects that accept them.


I am OK getting a mix of cuda4.2 and cuda3.1 tasks, though I hope I don't get ONLY cuda3.1 tasks now, unless I do a reset project. I'd love the 30%+ credit bonus, and I'm sure GPUGrid would love the 30%+ throughput increase from Fermi/Kepler cards. If you guys can identify the server issue (or whatever it is), I think it'll be a win/win.

But, for now, I'm happy to continue with the cuda3.2's with the hopes a nice cuda4.2 strolls down my street. :-)

Profile skgiven
Volunteer moderator
Project tester
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 3528
Credit: 976,099,157
RAC: 1,296,952
Level
Glu
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25903 - Posted: 26 Jun 2012 | 20:05:23 UTC - in response to Message 25898.

I would suggest making the long queue CUDA 4.2 only, but I'm not sure how many people have a suitable driver, how many don't, and of those that don't have compatible drivers for CUDA4.2 how many run normal length tasks or both normal and long?
____________
FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

Profile K1atOdessa
Send message
Joined: 25 Feb 08
Posts: 249
Credit: 308,427,702
RAC: 254,026
Level
Asp
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25905 - Posted: 26 Jun 2012 | 20:50:53 UTC - in response to Message 25903.

I would suggest making the long queue CUDA 4.2 only, but I'm not sure how many people have a suitable driver, how many don't, and of those that don't have compatible drivers for CUDA4.2 how many run normal length tasks or both normal and long?


As was suggested before, maybe a solution is to have 2 long queues selectable in the preferences: 1 for cuda3.1 long and 1 for cuda4.2 long? Not sure if that is easy/possible, but I know if I could deselect the cuda3.1 long and only select the cuda4.2 long, that'd be great for me. For those that want both or only cuda3.1 long, it still allows full flexibility.

5pot
Send message
Joined: 8 Mar 12
Posts: 397
Credit: 1,491,122,793
RAC: 2,431,192
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25906 - Posted: 26 Jun 2012 | 21:13:20 UTC

Wonder how long they will even keep 3.1 with these kinds of results though?

Profile skgiven
Volunteer moderator
Project tester
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 3528
Credit: 976,099,157
RAC: 1,296,952
Level
Glu
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25907 - Posted: 26 Jun 2012 | 21:24:26 UTC - in response to Message 25906.

It's just needed because some people use older drivers, and don't read the forums.
____________
FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

Bedrich Hajek
Send message
Joined: 28 Mar 09
Posts: 177
Credit: 1,643,507,829
RAC: 2,298,539
Level
His
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25911 - Posted: 26 Jun 2012 | 21:56:48 UTC

Why not just post that as of such and such date, you will no longer be issuing cuda3.1 work units, that anybody who hasn't already done so, to updated your driver to 301.xx, and then do it. This will save a lot of aggravation, and will increase overall number crunching totals, even while losing a few crunchers.

Profile skgiven
Volunteer moderator
Project tester
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 3528
Credit: 976,099,157
RAC: 1,296,952
Level
Glu
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25912 - Posted: 26 Jun 2012 | 22:06:14 UTC - in response to Message 25911.
Last modified: 26 Jun 2012 | 22:21:23 UTC

I see that resetting the project when only Long runs are selected just means that 'acemdlong' is used. It does not specify that it's CUDA4.2 or CUDA3.1.

So basically there is just one 'acemdlong' app and two CUDA variants within & we can't exclude a CUDA3.1 app.
____________
FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

Simba123
Send message
Joined: 5 Dec 11
Posts: 141
Credit: 44,426,084
RAC: 580,732
Level
Val
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwat
Message 25914 - Posted: 27 Jun 2012 | 1:02:51 UTC

Given that everyone needs to supply an e-mail address to sign-up,
why just do a mass e-mail advised users to upgrade their drivers?

You might even get some people who have long stopped crunching come back
after getting the e-mail.

Having the choice of either 3.1 or 4.2 would be good for those people who
for whatever reason, cannot upgrade their drivers. Program incompatability or such.

Simba123
Send message
Joined: 5 Dec 11
Posts: 141
Credit: 44,426,084
RAC: 580,732
Level
Val
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwat
Message 25915 - Posted: 27 Jun 2012 | 1:12:59 UTC

Also, just completed


I3R197-NATHAN_RPS1120528-16-166-RND3620_0http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=5538958

25669.37 675.84 60,900 points - compared to

I2R58-NATHAN_RPS1120528-6-166-RND3113_0http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=5525951

46355.21 1526.58 60.900 points

very nice improvement. This is on a 560ti @880. Now running a Paola @900. See how stable it is. I was able to run the 3.1 units @920


Wiyosaya
Send message
Joined: 22 Nov 09
Posts: 82
Credit: 73,232,103
RAC: 99,820
Level
Thr
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25918 - Posted: 27 Jun 2012 | 4:11:03 UTC - in response to Message 25856.

I'm still receiving CUDA 4.2 and CUDA 3.1 by turns on the same host.
I never thought that I'll become one of those who have to abort tasks selectively one by one....

For Windows users it's a good time to upgrade their drivers to 301.42, otherwise they won't receive CUDA 4.2 tasks (if they use the last recommended driver v285.58, or earlier)

Just poking around as a comparison for tasks, and the last MJHarvy I did was around 11.9 hours on my GTX 580. I'm set to finish one in about 5.1 hours on the same card. That is quite an improvement. Kudos, GPU Grid researchers.

However, as an FYI, in my poking around I note that this WU http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=3514448 which is a CUDA 4.2 app WU, was sent to a PC with 296.10 drivers - http://www.gpugrid.net/show_host_detail.php?hostid=89848
____________

Profile skgiven
Volunteer moderator
Project tester
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 3528
Credit: 976,099,157
RAC: 1,296,952
Level
Glu
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25920 - Posted: 27 Jun 2012 | 7:52:08 UTC - in response to Message 25918.
Last modified: 27 Jun 2012 | 8:33:32 UTC

That card's not doing too well, http://www.gpugrid.net/results.php?hostid=89848
But it is using one of the known bad drivers. There might be more wrong drivers in use than than right!
____________
FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

Wiyosaya
Send message
Joined: 22 Nov 09
Posts: 82
Credit: 73,232,103
RAC: 99,820
Level
Thr
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25932 - Posted: 27 Jun 2012 | 14:01:19 UTC
Last modified: 27 Jun 2012 | 14:03:25 UTC

I certainly agree that the card is not doing well. Every once in a while, it does do a WU right - the corollary to Murphy's Law in action. LOL

Retvari posted that the GPU Grid server would not distribute CUDA 4.2 tasks to PCs running drivers less than 301.42. Seems this exclusion is not functioning properly.

I don't know what is going on with that, however, I know that Milkyway or Einstein (I am not sure which) was successful at implementing a general exclusion on the distribution of WUs to PCs with improper drivers because for a while, I was at one of the 295 or 296 drivers and stopped getting WUs from one of those projects. I noted on that particular project's site that they were requiring 301.XX drivers (due to the known issues with 295 and 296), and when I updated to 301.28 (beta at the time, but I've been at 301.42 for a few weeks now) I started getting WUs from that project again.

I'm not complaining, but trying to be helpful.

If anyone is interested, here's a 3.1 MJHarvey task completed on my GTX 580 and the 4.2 MJHarvey task my 580 just completed.The 4.2 task completed in slightly less than half the time, according to the WU status, than the 3.1 task did. IMHO, fantastic results.

I wonder how much of an improvement, if any, my GTX 460 will exhibit. It would be great if it started doing Paolas, which now take about 23 - 25 hours, in 20 or 22 hours as right now, they sometimes finish and report just outside of the 24 hour 1.5X bonus window.

I'll be experimenting with tasks on the 460 this weekend. :)
____________

Profile GDF
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 14 Mar 07
Posts: 1863
Credit: 629,356
RAC: 0
Level
Gly
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwat
Message 25937 - Posted: 27 Jun 2012 | 18:31:50 UTC - in response to Message 25932.

it distributes cuda4.2 to drivers higher than 295.43 which is the linux version for cuda4.2.

gdf

Profile Retvari Zoltan*
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Jan 09
Posts: 1030
Credit: 4,045,768,687
RAC: 5,536,234
Level
Arg
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25939 - Posted: 27 Jun 2012 | 18:48:08 UTC - in response to Message 25932.

Retvari posted that the GPU Grid server would not distribute CUDA 4.2 tasks to PCs running drivers less than 301.42.

What I was actually saying is users with the last recommended driver (v285.58 or earlier) won't receive CUDA4.2 tasks. The v295 and v296 drivers are CUDA4.2 capable but not recommended, because the monitor sleep bug. Because this bug, many users rolled back to the v285 drivers, that's why it is a good idea to update the drivers to the v301.42.

Seems this exclusion is not functioning properly.

This part is true....

Profile ritterm
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 31 Jul 09
Posts: 85
Credit: 189,540,697
RAC: 198,659
Level
Ile
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25941 - Posted: 27 Jun 2012 | 20:07:32 UTC

Do the 4.2 tasks need/make use of as much of a CPU as the 3.1 tasks? I've been watching a 4.2 task run on my GTX 570 and noticed that the CPU utilization by the core I've set aside for GPU tasks is much lower than before. It looks like it uses significantly less RAM, too.
____________

Simba123
Send message
Joined: 5 Dec 11
Posts: 141
Credit: 44,426,084
RAC: 580,732
Level
Val
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwat
Message 25946 - Posted: 27 Jun 2012 | 23:10:56 UTC

@ Wiyosaya: my 460 which is clocked at 880 normally gets poala tasks in around 20 hours. It's a bit of a golden card though, they normally don't clock that high.

if the current trend of around a 50% reduction in runtime holds true, It should have no problem getting Poala tasks in on time.

@ ritterm: funny, I've noticed that while, according to my Boinc manager it requires around the same amount of CPU time (.42 cores) when I run, I actually have to free up 2 cores to get the time-to-completion counter to move. If I don't it just sits at the same time until about 50% is completed and then starts counting down > increases the runtime by about 25% over only having 1 core free.

I have 8 cores/threads and used to run 7 WCG threads and 1 GPUGrid, now have to run 6 WCG threads and 2 GpuGrid. The load on the CPU drops accordingly, so it seems it might be a scheduling issue with the faster GPU app fighting for CPU cycles and needs the lower load to run at optimum speed.


My question: What is driving this HUGE increase in speed [decrease in runtime]. Is it solely due to CUDA 4.2, or have the programmers achieved an amazing increase in the efficiency of the 4.2 app?

Betting Slip
Send message
Joined: 5 Jan 09
Posts: 289
Credit: 478,552,776
RAC: 1,255,116
Level
Gln
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25960 - Posted: 28 Jun 2012 | 11:23:41 UTC

Nathans jobs run well as long as I don't use PC for anything else. They are crippling. Remote computer not so good but have no access to it as yet to make adjustments.

NATHAN get your jobs sorted out nobody else's cause the computer to become useless.
____________

Simba123
Send message
Joined: 5 Dec 11
Posts: 141
Credit: 44,426,084
RAC: 580,732
Level
Val
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwat
Message 25963 - Posted: 28 Jun 2012 | 12:01:09 UTC - in response to Message 25960.

Nathans jobs run well as long as I don't use PC for anything else. They are crippling. Remote computer not so good but have no access to it as yet to make adjustments.

NATHAN get your jobs sorted out nobody else's cause the computer to become useless.



Strange, Nathan tasks don't have that effect on my PC. Even the new 4.2 tasks that run 95-99% GPU utilization.

even when I'm running 7 threads of WCG and 1 thread for GPUGrid with a Nathan task I have no problems.
A slight lag when changing programs/screens etc, but nothing else. I can sort that slight issue out by freeing up another CPU core.

What's your CPU load like?
maybe you need to look at that....

5pot
Send message
Joined: 8 Mar 12
Posts: 397
Credit: 1,491,122,793
RAC: 2,431,192
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25964 - Posted: 28 Jun 2012 | 13:31:50 UTC

I have no slowdown with mine either. All 4.2 tasks on W7 are using a minimum of 95 GPU Aw well.

Betting Slip
Send message
Joined: 5 Jan 09
Posts: 289
Credit: 478,552,776
RAC: 1,255,116
Level
Gln
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 25970 - Posted: 28 Jun 2012 | 14:02:42 UTC - in response to Message 25963.
Last modified: 28 Jun 2012 | 14:03:58 UTC

Graphics card is only GTX460

Runs everything fine apart from Nathans so he must be doing something different.

or it could be my PCIE 1.1 slot
____________

Simba123
Send message
Joined: 5 Dec 11
Posts: 141
Credit: 44,426,084
RAC: 580,732
Level
Val
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwat
Message 26020 - Posted: 29 Jun 2012 | 22:23:12 UTC - in response to Message 25970.

Graphics card is only GTX460

Runs everything fine apart from Nathans so he must be doing something different.

or it could be my PCIE 1.1 slot



I run a 460 as well as a 560, no difference in functionality of the computer when either or both of them are running NATE tasks.

Why do you have it in a 1.1 slot??????
Is this card also your primary graphics card?
It could be that you are running out of PCIE bandwidth.

Betting Slip
Send message
Joined: 5 Jan 09
Posts: 289
Credit: 478,552,776
RAC: 1,255,116
Level
Gln
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 26027 - Posted: 30 Jun 2012 | 8:15:30 UTC - in response to Message 26020.

It's a 16 X slot just MB is a few years old now and I don't have the option of PCIE2
____________

Profile skgiven
Volunteer moderator
Project tester
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 3528
Credit: 976,099,157
RAC: 1,296,952
Level
Glu
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 26029 - Posted: 30 Jun 2012 | 9:53:14 UTC - in response to Message 26027.
Last modified: 30 Jun 2012 | 10:00:19 UTC

Might be due to the high amount of memory required to run these tasks and W7; I'm seeing ~990MB in use. I have a GTX 470 (1279MB), so I have some headroom. However W7 eats some GPU memory leaving you short of 1024MB. Possibly too short. That said Boinc reports 1023MB (maybe another rounding error in the driver), and might not be true anyway (W7 is probably using more, ~60 to 90MB I think).
____________
FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

Paul Raney
Send message
Joined: 26 Dec 10
Posts: 115
Credit: 345,237,796
RAC: 0
Level
Asp
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 26031 - Posted: 30 Jun 2012 | 10:47:17 UTC - in response to Message 26029.

I just check the GPUGrid computing preferences and noticed we still only have 3 queues, long, short and beta. It would be good to find a way to get 4.2 tasks exclusively to machines with the correct mix of hardware and drivers.

All of my cards are now optimized for 4.2 work units so when 3.1 work units hit my systems, they run a bit slower than in the past.

If the problem is a bug on the server, do we have an estimated time to repair?

So far it looks like we don't have a solution to the mixed work unit issue. Aborting 3.1 work units usually works but recently I aborted 2 of the 3.1 work units and received 2 more 3.1 work units.
____________
Thx - Paul

Note: Please don't use driver version 295 or 296! Recommended versions are 266 - 285.

Simba123
Send message
Joined: 5 Dec 11
Posts: 141
Credit: 44,426,084
RAC: 580,732
Level
Val
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwat
Message 26043 - Posted: 30 Jun 2012 | 14:20:17 UTC - in response to Message 26031.

I just check the GPUGrid computing preferences and noticed we still only have 3 queues, long, short and beta. It would be good to find a way to get 4.2 tasks exclusively to machines with the correct mix of hardware and drivers.

All of my cards are now optimized for 4.2 work units so when 3.1 work units hit my systems, they run a bit slower than in the past.

If the problem is a bug on the server, do we have an estimated time to repair?

So far it looks like we don't have a solution to the mixed work unit issue. Aborting 3.1 work units usually works but recently I aborted 2 of the 3.1 work units and received 2 more 3.1 work units.



I imagine that most/all new tasks will be coded in 4.2.

Just have to run the 3.1 hoppers dry. (I hope this is the case anyway. Seems fairly pointless to code in 3.1 now that 4.2 is here and ~40% more efficient)

Profile skgiven
Volunteer moderator
Project tester
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 3528
Credit: 976,099,157
RAC: 1,296,952
Level
Glu
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 26050 - Posted: 30 Jun 2012 | 20:55:24 UTC - in response to Message 26043.
Last modified: 30 Jun 2012 | 20:56:04 UTC

There might be a lot of non-4.2 capable drivers in use.

While I doubt there would be any issues, I suppose it's good science to compare cuda3.1 with cuda4.2 runs.

If a solution has to come in the form of a bespoke server patch, who knows how long it will take?

For now we could use the 3.1 to 4.2 workaround
____________
FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

Profile robertmiles
Send message
Joined: 16 Apr 09
Posts: 314
Credit: 53,094,112
RAC: 264
Level
Thr
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 26053 - Posted: 30 Jun 2012 | 23:33:36 UTC - in response to Message 25867.

i got a unit on a gtx260 (win7 x64 latest boinc and drivers), but i had to abort it as it was making my computer completely unusable with 99% usage.

Is there any way to make it less aggressive? like 90-95% usage or am I doing something wrong?


99% usage of what? If it's a CPU core, try telling BOINC to leave one CPU core free for programs other than BOINC workunits.

If it's the GPU, I haven't found a usable method yet.

Tom Philippart
Send message
Joined: 12 Feb 09
Posts: 57
Credit: 23,376,686
RAC: 0
Level
Pro
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 26079 - Posted: 1 Jul 2012 | 18:59:25 UTC - in response to Message 26053.

i got a unit on a gtx260 (win7 x64 latest boinc and drivers), but i had to abort it as it was making my computer completely unusable with 99% usage.

Is there any way to make it less aggressive? like 90-95% usage or am I doing something wrong?


99% usage of what? If it's a CPU core, try telling BOINC to leave one CPU core free for programs other than BOINC workunits.

If it's the GPU, I haven't found a usable method yet.


it's the gpu usage

Profile SMTB1963
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 27 Jun 10
Posts: 35
Credit: 142,831,243
RAC: 0
Level
Cys
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 26080 - Posted: 1 Jul 2012 | 20:37:55 UTC - in response to Message 25867.

i got a unit on a gtx260 (win7 x64 latest boinc and drivers), but i had to abort it as it was making my computer completely unusable with 99% usage.

Is there any way to make it less aggressive? like 90-95% usage or am I doing something wrong?


Same thing's happening on the GTX275 in my wife's machine. I've simply unchecked "Use GPU while computer is in use" until I get around to upgrading the card.

oscark
Send message
Joined: 3 Nov 11
Posts: 2
Credit: 87,884,990
RAC: 370,183
Level
Thr
Scientific publications
watwatwatwat
Message 26089 - Posted: 2 Jul 2012 | 11:27:35 UTC

Can I receive only cuda 4.2 ?

Profile skgiven
Volunteer moderator
Project tester
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 3528
Credit: 976,099,157
RAC: 1,296,952
Level
Glu
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 26095 - Posted: 2 Jul 2012 | 11:58:42 UTC - in response to Message 26089.
Last modified: 2 Jul 2012 | 22:31:19 UTC

Not unless you use the 3.1 to 4.2 workaround
- Actually you will still get 3.1 tasks but they will run just as fast as 4.2, so it's a fix.
____________
FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

oscark
Send message
Joined: 3 Nov 11
Posts: 2
Credit: 87,884,990
RAC: 370,183
Level
Thr
Scientific publications
watwatwatwat
Message 26108 - Posted: 2 Jul 2012 | 20:46:06 UTC - in response to Message 26095.

thanks

JLConawayII
Send message
Joined: 31 May 10
Posts: 48
Credit: 24,603,604
RAC: 0
Level
Pro
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 26118 - Posted: 3 Jul 2012 | 4:35:57 UTC

The 4.2 units actually run slower on my old GTX 260, and additionally the newer drivers are still causing threadsafe exit downclocks with other projects. I guess it may finally be time to get some new hardware and relegate the old card to running einstein full time.

Profile skgiven
Volunteer moderator
Project tester
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 3528
Credit: 976,099,157
RAC: 1,296,952
Level
Glu
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 26128 - Posted: 3 Jul 2012 | 10:33:35 UTC - in response to Message 26118.

For now, go back to an older driver (285).
____________
FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

Profile ritterm
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 31 Jul 09
Posts: 85
Credit: 189,540,697
RAC: 198,659
Level
Ile
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 26223 - Posted: 8 Jul 2012 | 15:59:32 UTC - in response to Message 25941.

Do the 4.2 tasks need/make use of as much of a CPU as the 3.1 tasks? I've been watching a 4.2 task run on my GTX 570 and noticed that the CPU utilization by the core I've set aside for GPU tasks is much lower than before...

Still looking for feedback on this. :-)
____________

Profile skgiven
Volunteer moderator
Project tester
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 3528
Credit: 976,099,157
RAC: 1,296,952
Level
Glu
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 26227 - Posted: 8 Jul 2012 | 18:14:06 UTC - in response to Message 26223.

As you observed, the new app appears to use less CPU. Remember that different tasks use different amounts of the CPU, so things could change as and when new task come and go.

____________
FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

Profile ritterm
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 31 Jul 09
Posts: 85
Credit: 189,540,697
RAC: 198,659
Level
Ile
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 26252 - Posted: 9 Jul 2012 | 18:52:25 UTC - in response to Message 26227.

As you observed, the new app appears to use less CPU. Remember that different tasks use different amounts of the CPU, so things could change as and when new task come and go.

Okay, thanks for the feedback. So, perhaps it's still best to reserve a CPU for GPUGrid tasks?

____________

Profile skgiven
Volunteer moderator
Project tester
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 3528
Credit: 976,099,157
RAC: 1,296,952
Level
Glu
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 26253 - Posted: 9 Jul 2012 | 20:09:31 UTC - in response to Message 26252.

Yes, if you have plenty of cores/threads (4/8 for example), and for stability reasons as well as performance.


____________
FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

werdwerdus
Send message
Joined: 15 Apr 10
Posts: 123
Credit: 1,004,468,395
RAC: 4
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 26311 - Posted: 13 Jul 2012 | 15:45:50 UTC

I am still receiving an occasional 3.1 long run task on my main PC, have selected only to receive long runs. I did the workaround but somehow it reverted to the original 3.1 executable.

Post to thread

Message boards : News : New CUDA4.2 applications are out for Kepler GPUs