Advanced search

Message boards : Number crunching : Really long runs

Author Message
TJ
Send message
Joined: 26 Jun 09
Posts: 815
Credit: 1,470,385,294
RAC: 0
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 27918 - Posted: 2 Jan 2013 | 18:08:57 UTC

Nathan's took a lot of time to complete on my old GTX285, but they did mostly without error or making the system in-responsive.

Now the last week I get Noelia's and that are realy long ones. Between 130000 and 156000 seconds. I just got one (my system went down when typing this) with a BOINC estimate of 46.33 hours (167400 seconds).
I hope my systems keeps running while I sleep...
____________
Greetings from TJ

TJ
Send message
Joined: 26 Jun 09
Posts: 815
Credit: 1,470,385,294
RAC: 0
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36465 - Posted: 20 Apr 2014 | 17:48:06 UTC

Today I found a new one:

e9s2_e7s22f278-GIANNI_lig3-0-1-RND8462_0 6447447 155969 19 Apr 2014 | 9:56:32 UTC 20 Apr 2014 | 7:21:34 UTC Completed and validated 73,494.64 70,408.88 217,500.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v8.15 (cuda55)

It took more then 20 hours to complete on my 660.
Now I have a second one running on the 780Ti, 49% done in 4h53m, but with steady GPU load of 87% on Win7, driver 331.82
____________
Greetings from TJ

John C MacAlister
Send message
Joined: 17 Feb 13
Posts: 181
Credit: 144,871,276
RAC: 0
Level
Cys
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36474 - Posted: 21 Apr 2014 | 10:21:45 UTC

I have two GIANNI tasks running: over 23h run time at about 80% done on my 650Ti GPUs.

Too long....


e12s130_e10s3f209-GIANNI_lig3-0-1-RND2338
application Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card)
created 20 Apr 2014 | 11:08:49 UTC

e12s12_e10s3f100-GIANNI_lig3-0-1-RND0090
application Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card)
created 20 Apr 2014 | 11:08:45 UTC
minimum quorum 1

Jeremy Zimmerman
Send message
Joined: 13 Apr 13
Posts: 61
Credit: 726,605,417
RAC: 0
Level
Lys
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36476 - Posted: 21 Apr 2014 | 11:38:28 UTC - in response to Message 36474.

Good to see some bigger WU's in calculation time.

Name e12s105_e8s78f139-GIANNI_lig3-0-1-RND4498_0
Run time 41,158.44 (11.4 hours on a GTX680)
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=9207233

Name e12s121_e8s78f200-GIANNI_lig3-0-1-RND5565_0
Run time 27,154.78 (7.5 hours on a GTX780Ti)
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=9207254


Also, the NATHAN_RPS1 and SDOERR_BARNA WU's have been nice to see.

Hope all these WU's are giving you some fun and interesting data to work with. Keep them coming. :)

Profile Retvari Zoltan
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Jan 09
Posts: 2343
Credit: 16,201,255,749
RAC: 6,169
Level
Trp
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36477 - Posted: 21 Apr 2014 | 14:20:58 UTC

These "really long runs" are the ones the long queue is made for.
They live up to the term "Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card)"
As the fastest card is the GTX 780Ti at the present time, and these workunits take ~7 hours to process on a GTX 780Ti this isn't abnormal at all.
I welcome that the project adapts the running time of the workunits to the latest GPUs. This could mean either larger molecules, longer simulation timeframe, or both at the same time.

TJ
Send message
Joined: 26 Jun 09
Posts: 815
Credit: 1,470,385,294
RAC: 0
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36479 - Posted: 21 Apr 2014 | 15:03:25 UTC - in response to Message 36476.

Good to see some bigger WU's in calculation time.

Name e12s121_e8s78f200-GIANNI_lig3-0-1-RND5565_0
Run time 27,154.78 (7.5 hours on a GTX780Ti)
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=9207254

Amazing Jeremy, we have the same OS, same GPU but yours is about 1.5 hours faster then mine. I have it now running with all settings from manufacturer, so not at piece of alternation software running (AfterBurner, GPUTweak etc). Even with 69°C it will not boost the clock, however it can if I use AfterBurner to tweak.

I don't mind these long runs, as long as the project can do its work I am happy. Just what I saw on the 660, means that card is almost to slow for these "long runs". Good on the 780Ti though.
____________
Greetings from TJ

Profile skgiven
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 3968
Credit: 1,995,359,260
RAC: 0
Level
His
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36480 - Posted: 21 Apr 2014 | 15:10:45 UTC - in response to Message 36479.
Last modified: 21 Apr 2014 | 15:11:06 UTC

At present this only applies to the GIANNI_lig3 WU's. Also discussed in the 'GIANNI ligand3-0-1 bad batch?' thread.
The other 'Long' WU's are actually much shorter, but I guess it's better to put them into the Long queue than the short queue.
____________
FAQ's

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

TJ
Send message
Joined: 26 Jun 09
Posts: 815
Credit: 1,470,385,294
RAC: 0
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36481 - Posted: 21 Apr 2014 | 15:20:35 UTC - in response to Message 36480.

At present this only applies to the GIANNI_lig3 WU's. Also discussed in the 'GIANNI ligand3-0-1 bad batch?' thread.
The other 'Long' WU's are actually much shorter, but I guess it's better to put them into the Long queue than the short queue.

Indeed I saw that thread, my fault. But as mine did not error, I considered them as a "good batch" and did not post there.
____________
Greetings from TJ

Profile Retvari Zoltan
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 20 Jan 09
Posts: 2343
Credit: 16,201,255,749
RAC: 6,169
Level
Trp
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36486 - Posted: 21 Apr 2014 | 16:27:43 UTC - in response to Message 36479.

Good to see some bigger WU's in calculation time.

Name e12s121_e8s78f200-GIANNI_lig3-0-1-RND5565_0
Run time 27,154.78 (7.5 hours on a GTX780Ti)
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=9207254

Amazing Jeremy, we have the same OS, same GPU but yours is about 1.5 hours faster then mine. I have it now running with all settings from manufacturer, so not at piece of alternation software running (AfterBurner, GPUTweak etc). Even with 69°C it will not boost the clock, however it can if I use AfterBurner to tweak.

I don't mind these long runs, as long as the project can do its work I am happy. Just what I saw on the 660, means that card is almost to slow for these "long runs". Good on the 780Ti though.

Jeremy's GTX 780Ti under Win7 is almost as fast as my slower GTX 780Ti (PCIe 2.0@4x, 2700MHz RAM clock) under WinXPx64.
I think his Core i7-4770K is overclocked to 4GHz or more, and maybe he has some faster RAM modules.
However, TJ, your Core i7-4771 is slightly slower than mine. Are you using the iGPU?

Profile skgiven
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 3968
Credit: 1,995,359,260
RAC: 0
Level
His
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36489 - Posted: 21 Apr 2014 | 16:38:04 UTC - in response to Message 36481.
Last modified: 21 Apr 2014 | 16:38:43 UTC

At present this only applies to the GIANNI_lig3 WU's. Also discussed in the 'GIANNI ligand3-0-1 bad batch?' thread.
The other 'Long' WU's are actually much shorter, but I guess it's better to put them into the Long queue than the short queue.


Indeed I saw that thread, my fault. But as mine did not error, I considered them as a "good batch" and did not post there.
____________
Greetings from TJ


That batch was withdrawn, fixed, and re-released, and it's the only truly LONG run that GPUGRID presently has, though another batch comes close-ish - probably because that research line was started when the best GPU was a lot slower. Other threads exist on this general topic but it's often the case that new threads pop-up naturally that have been previously discussed and other threads naturally overlap, topics diverge and merge, and that's fine by me; nobody wants to trawl through a 300 post thread that was first brought up 4years ago and 90% of it is irrelevant. I was just making people aware of the other thread in case they missed it and because it's related ;)
____________
FAQ's

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

TJ
Send message
Joined: 26 Jun 09
Posts: 815
Credit: 1,470,385,294
RAC: 0
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36503 - Posted: 21 Apr 2014 | 17:50:53 UTC - in response to Message 36486.

Good to see some bigger WU's in calculation time.

Name e12s121_e8s78f200-GIANNI_lig3-0-1-RND5565_0
Run time 27,154.78 (7.5 hours on a GTX780Ti)
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=9207254

Amazing Jeremy, we have the same OS, same GPU but yours is about 1.5 hours faster then mine. I have it now running with all settings from manufacturer, so not at piece of alternation software running (AfterBurner, GPUTweak etc). Even with 69°C it will not boost the clock, however it can if I use AfterBurner to tweak.

I don't mind these long runs, as long as the project can do its work I am happy. Just what I saw on the 660, means that card is almost to slow for these "long runs". Good on the 780Ti though.

Jeremy's GTX 780Ti under Win7 is almost as fast as my slower GTX 780Ti (PCIe 2.0@4x, 2700MHz RAM clock) under WinXPx64.
I think his Core i7-4770K is overclocked to 4GHz or more, and maybe he has some faster RAM modules.
However, TJ, your Core i7-4771 is slightly slower than mine. Are you using the iGPU?

Thanks for posting Zoltan. No I am not using the iGPU. I did with Einstein and saw a draw back on the 780Ti (is also discussed in Einstein that it does) and stopped using it. I will use AfterBurner again in a few days time to get the core clock a bit higher. I am happy with it results, running steady at 70-72­°C, sometimes 69°C and error free. But when I see better performance with others, then I am always thinking: "What am I doing wrong?".

____________
Greetings from TJ

Jeremy Zimmerman
Send message
Joined: 13 Apr 13
Posts: 61
Credit: 726,605,417
RAC: 0
Level
Lys
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36532 - Posted: 22 Apr 2014 | 11:01:43 UTC - in response to Message 36503.

TJ,

This post was where I had ended up with my current configuration for the 780Ti (well until last night having to change the driver to avoid the errors with 8.40).

http://www.gpugrid.net/forum_thread.php?id=3634&nowrap=true#35730

This was winter time when this post was done. Now with warmer days and the {NATHAN_RPS1, SDOERR_BARNA, GIANNI_lig3} WU's, the boost is getting throttled down (~1125) with the 72 temp limit I have on there. These WU's are now getting 87-90% utilization. Yeah!

As Zoltan noted, the CPU is running 4+ (flickers between 4.1-4.2). CPU speed dependency was a bit of a surprise to me. I seem to recall a post that some DP calculations were pushed off to the CPU so I guess that would be part of the reason.

What are your top boost speeds? There is definitely a dependency on clock speed. http://www.gpugrid.net/forum_thread.php?id=1150&nowrap=true#33133

Regards,
Jeremy

TJ
Send message
Joined: 26 Jun 09
Posts: 815
Credit: 1,470,385,294
RAC: 0
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36548 - Posted: 22 Apr 2014 | 18:13:24 UTC - in response to Message 36532.

Thanks for your answer Jeremy.
The highest I have seen was 1067MHz, but it is mainly running at 875.7MHz, even when temperature goes to 68°C it does not boost. I can use AfterBurner to let it boost, but when WU's switch from researcher, it goes to 875MHz again.

Well I am happy with the performance as it uses about 67% TDP, but I must admit I am jealous when seeing your times with the same OS. But your CPU is quite a bit faster as indeed explained by Zoltan.
____________
Greetings from TJ

Jacob Klein
Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 08
Posts: 1127
Credit: 1,901,927,545
RAC: 0
Level
His
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36568 - Posted: 23 Apr 2014 | 2:50:28 UTC - in response to Message 36548.

Thanks for your answer Jeremy.
The highest I have seen was 1067MHz, but it is mainly running at 875.7MHz, even when temperature goes to 68°C it does not boost. I can use AfterBurner to let it boost, but when WU's switch from researcher, it goes to 875MHz again.

Well I am happy with the performance as it uses about 67% TDP, but I must admit I am jealous when seeing your times with the same OS. But your CPU is quite a bit faster as indeed explained by Zoltan.


Force Max Boost, and be done with it.
http://www.gpugrid.net/forum_thread.php?id=3647&nowrap=true#36320

TJ
Send message
Joined: 26 Jun 09
Posts: 815
Credit: 1,470,385,294
RAC: 0
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36572 - Posted: 23 Apr 2014 | 5:32:34 UTC - in response to Message 36568.

Thanks for your answer Jeremy.
The highest I have seen was 1067MHz, but it is mainly running at 875.7MHz, even when temperature goes to 68°C it does not boost. I can use AfterBurner to let it boost, but when WU's switch from researcher, it goes to 875MHz again.

Well I am happy with the performance as it uses about 67% TDP, but I must admit I am jealous when seeing your times with the same OS. But your CPU is quite a bit faster as indeed explained by Zoltan.


Force Max Boost, and be done with it.
http://www.gpugrid.net/forum_thread.php?id=3647&nowrap=true#36320

I will try, but two questions. In my PC is a GTX770 and runs at max boost 1150MHz at 68-69°C. I didn't make any settings or changes with a program (AfterBurner, GPUTweak etc.). And there is a GTX780Ti in it. Also made no changes, it runs at 68-70°C and starts at 1060MHz with a new WU and after a while it runs at 875.7MHz which is its base clock. Is this because it are different types of GK's?

Secondly, running a GPU at max boost for 24/7 has that a (huge) influence of the longlivety of the card?
____________
Greetings from TJ

Profile skgiven
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 3968
Credit: 1,995,359,260
RAC: 0
Level
His
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36579 - Posted: 23 Apr 2014 | 8:25:15 UTC - in response to Message 36572.

In my PC is a GTX770 and runs at max boost 1150MHz at 68-69°C. I didn't make any settings or changes with a program (AfterBurner, GPUTweak etc.). And there is a GTX780Ti in it. Also made no changes, it runs at 68-70°C and starts at 1060MHz with a new WU and after a while it runs at 875.7MHz which is its base clock. Is this because it are different types of GK's?


The base clock rates differ for different types of GPU, and manufacturers can alter this, so there are Factory OverClocks (FOC) models and reference models.

The GPU is not boosting due to a bug in the driver. 337.50 might fix that, or at least improve things, or you could use Jacob's fix.

Secondly, running a GPU at max boost for 24/7 has that a (huge) influence of the longlivety of the card?


Larger cards go a long way towards looking after themselves, but I prefer to take measures to decrease temperature (usually increase the GPU fan speeds and add system fans/leave the case door off, use a water cooler for the CPU...). If the GPU is being throttled because of the temperature it's probably worse than boosting to a higher clock, staying below the temperature point where it gets throttled, and only being throttled due to the Voltage cap.
____________
FAQ's

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

Jacob Klein
Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 08
Posts: 1127
Credit: 1,901,927,545
RAC: 0
Level
His
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36583 - Posted: 23 Apr 2014 | 11:01:50 UTC
Last modified: 23 Apr 2014 | 11:04:09 UTC

Set a custom fan curve in Precision-X such that the fan goes to Max fan, 1 degree before thermal limiting might happen. For me, that means 80% (Max Fan for a GTX 660 Ti) at 69*C (sine 70*C is the start of thermal limiting for a 600-series GPU). The yellow dotted line shows you Min/Max fan, and for your GPU the thermal limiting might not start until 80*C.

Matt
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Jan 13
Posts: 216
Credit: 846,538,252
RAC: 0
Level
Glu
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36589 - Posted: 23 Apr 2014 | 15:21:13 UTC

Yes, the 780Ti does not seem to throttle itself until it reaches 80C. It's been warm here the last few days and even with maxed out fans my cards have been running at 75C while staying at full boost when I have the temp target set that high. I like to keep them a bit cooler, though, so I usually set the temp target for 72C with 100% fan speed at 71C.

TJ
Send message
Joined: 26 Jun 09
Posts: 815
Credit: 1,470,385,294
RAC: 0
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36609 - Posted: 24 Apr 2014 | 13:18:22 UTC

A bit off-topic, but I don't think that the 780Ti will not boast has anything to do with the driver. I have 331.82 and saw it running at more than 1000MHz a few times before.
But I was about going to try the latest beta drivers and I set BOINC to not accept new work. Eventually Rosetta on 5 CPU threads where gone and the GPUGRID WU on the 770 was ready too. So only one WU (Gianny ligand) is still running on the 780Ti and at 1102MHz at 70°C. Max boost is 1131HMz per nVidia Inspector.

When I let some Milkyway WU's run on the 770, the clock from the 780Ti went gradually down to 940MHz at the moment (927.9MHz while typing this post, oh and up to 940.9 again)). While temperature is still constantly at 70°C.
My 770 does run at Max Boast almost all the time despite temp. is going to 70-74°C.
____________
Greetings from TJ

Jacob Klein
Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 08
Posts: 1127
Credit: 1,901,927,545
RAC: 0
Level
His
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36611 - Posted: 24 Apr 2014 | 13:29:36 UTC - in response to Message 36609.
Last modified: 24 Apr 2014 | 13:30:38 UTC

The best way to determine Max Boost, in my opinion, is to run GPU-Z, click the question mark at the middle right, and start the render test, then click Sensors and look at the GPU Core Clock value.

Any "pre-reported" boost value, is just a "typical boost" value, not a "Max boost" value.

For reference, for my GTX 660 Ti, on the first tab of GPU-Z, it says my card has rated GPU Clock of 1046 Mhz, with a Default Boost clock of 1124 Mhz, yet I know from testing that my Max Boost is 1241 Mhz.

So, I set for Max Boost, and it works wonderfully, even when the drivers would otherwise stupidly downclock due to supposed low utilization. Forcing Max Boost works wonders.
http://www.gpugrid.net/forum_thread.php?id=3647&nowrap=true#36320

TJ
Send message
Joined: 26 Jun 09
Posts: 815
Credit: 1,470,385,294
RAC: 0
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36615 - Posted: 24 Apr 2014 | 15:41:58 UTC - in response to Message 36611.

yes I know Jacob and I certainly will test your work-around. But I was just sharing the information I see on my system.

The 780Ti runs at 1045.3MHz at the moment still with 70°C and no other jobs on the CPU or the 770. To me that is a bit strange, then when the second GPU starts to work and the CPU start to do 5 tasks and the temperature is not changing the core clock of the first (primary) GPU is falling. But that could be easily be lack of knowledge on my side.
____________
Greetings from TJ

Jacob Klein
Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 08
Posts: 1127
Credit: 1,901,927,545
RAC: 0
Level
His
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36616 - Posted: 24 Apr 2014 | 15:54:46 UTC - in response to Message 36615.

The behavior I have seen, even with the latest drivers, is that, without my "Force Max Boost" workaround, then even when a GPUGrid unit is being crunched at a sub-70*C temp, GPU-Z will show the clock being downclocked, for PerfCap reason "Util". Basically, the drivers don't think the GPU is being worked hard enough to warrant Max Boost. The behavior may become more prominent as more CPU tasks "eat into" the CPU time needed by the acemd process, thus lowering GPU Usage %.

skgiven believes it is a driver bug. I believe it is just silly driver design by NVIDIA. I've privately reported it to them, but my inclination is that the behavior won't be changed.

Thus, I Force Max Boost. To hell with their stupid design. :)

Profile dskagcommunity
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 28 Apr 11
Posts: 456
Credit: 817,865,789
RAC: 0
Level
Glu
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36618 - Posted: 24 Apr 2014 | 17:34:22 UTC - in response to Message 36465.

Today I found a new one:

e9s2_e7s22f278-GIANNI_lig3-0-1-RND8462_0 6447447 155969 19 Apr 2014 | 9:56:32 UTC 20 Apr 2014 | 7:21:34 UTC Completed and validated 73,494.64 70,408.88 217,500.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v8.15 (cuda55)

It took more then 20 hours to complete on my 660.
Now I have a second one running on the 780Ti, 49% done in 4h53m, but with steady GPU load of 87% on Win7, driver 331.82


Hehe yes THESE are really long ones, 67k seconds on 570gtx ^^ never saw more then 200k credits for a single workunit.
____________
DSKAG Austria Research Team: http://www.research.dskag.at



ExtraTerrestrial Apes
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 17 Aug 08
Posts: 2705
Credit: 1,311,122,549
RAC: 0
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36633 - Posted: 25 Apr 2014 | 10:35:45 UTC - in response to Message 36615.

The 780Ti runs at 1045.3MHz at the moment still with 70°C and no other jobs on the CPU or the 770. To me that is a bit strange, then when the second GPU starts to work and the CPU start to do 5 tasks and the temperature is not changing the core clock of the first (primary) GPU is falling.

TJ, this sounds like your temperature target is set to 70°C for the 780Ti and all you're seeing is just Boost working exactly as it should.

If the CPU and 770 are idle, the 780Ti boosts until it reaches 1045 MHz. At this point the GPU consumes a given amount of power, let's call it P. Let's assume an ambient temperature of 25°C in the case (the exact number doesn't matter). The power draw P warms the GPU up and the fan ramps its speed up. At 70°C an equilibrium between heating (P) and cooling via the fan is reached. Note "at 70°C an equilibrium is reached" is not a coincidence, because the GPU has adjusted P via its boost state so that this happens.

If CPU and the 770 are loaded they dump some amount of heat into your case. How much is irrelevant, but let's assume the GPU fan on the 780Ti would now suck in 30°C warm air instead of 25°C. The GPU temperature target is still 70°C, so the boost state has to be adjusted again to hit exactly that temperature. At 70°C the GPU fan will spin just as fast as it did without other loads (due to using the same fan curve). That means the "cooling power" is the same, but now the chip can only be allowed to warm up 70-30 = 40°C instead of 45°C without other loads. To achieve this either the cooling must become stronger (and we already ruled this out) or the amount of heat to be removed must be reduced. Hence the power draw has to be reduced to approximately P*40/45 = 89% P - i.e. a lower boost state must be choosen. You should be able to verify this by comparing the power consumption reported by e.g. GPU-Z for both cases. The tool should also show temperature as "PerfCap Reason".

This explanation is a bit long-winded.. but I tried to give you some more background to make it clear. Hope it doesn't distract from the main point, which isn't all that complicated :)

BTW: running Milkyway on the 770 is a bad idea, as it's really inefficient there. Leave this to the big AMDs.

MrS
____________
Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

TJ
Send message
Joined: 26 Jun 09
Posts: 815
Credit: 1,470,385,294
RAC: 0
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36638 - Posted: 25 Apr 2014 | 12:17:37 UTC - in response to Message 36633.
Last modified: 25 Apr 2014 | 12:24:59 UTC

Thank you for the extended explanation ETA.
Nice to read. I thought more or less the same, after watching all reading of GPU-Z and changing settings. I see that with the latest driver it is indeed a bit faster, thus skgiven is right about that. But I see higher temperature of the 780Ti. I have no set the target temp. at 72°C and power target to 88%. Temperature of the card is 74°C though and the clock is 875.7MHz thus its base clock. GPU load is 84% I can increase that but then the temperature goes up as well.

With the older driver 331.82 I saw also the clock at 875.7MHz and a temp. of 68-71°C and GPU load of 86-91% (depending on the WU type).

Could be a hasty conclusion but the 331.82 driver seems better for my card, with lower temp. and higher usage.

Edit: I know that AMD are better for Milkyway but I use it for testing with nVidia as there WU's run fast. All nVidia cards I have that are capable for GPUGRID do only GPUGRID.
____________
Greetings from TJ

Profile Beyond
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Nov 08
Posts: 1112
Credit: 6,162,416,256
RAC: 0
Level
Tyr
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36688 - Posted: 27 Apr 2014 | 13:07:31 UTC
Last modified: 27 Apr 2014 | 13:08:24 UTC

These are the first WUs I've seen that won't make the 24 hour bonus limit on 650 Ti cards. Is the 650 Ti reaching EOL for GPUGrid? Hope not.

Profile Mumak
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 7 Dec 12
Posts: 92
Credit: 225,897,225
RAC: 0
Level
Leu
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36691 - Posted: 27 Apr 2014 | 15:09:06 UTC - in response to Message 36688.

There's no reason for the 650 Ti EOL.
I was lucky, since the fan on my 650 Ti died, so I RMA'd it and was hoping that there won't be a replacement possible ;-) And indeed, there wasn't, so I got a new 750 Ti in exchange :-) I like that card, it's really low power, low temperature and very nice performance for such a piece.

ExtraTerrestrial Apes
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 17 Aug 08
Posts: 2705
Credit: 1,311,122,549
RAC: 0
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36710 - Posted: 28 Apr 2014 | 20:31:37 UTC - in response to Message 36688.

EOL would be too harsh.. but it's certainly not recommended to buy one now. Actually, I had been hesitant to recommend such "small" cards since some time (considering GTX660 is quite a bit faster and relatively cheap since quite some time).

MrS
____________
Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

Jacob Klein
Send message
Joined: 11 Oct 08
Posts: 1127
Credit: 1,901,927,545
RAC: 0
Level
His
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36711 - Posted: 28 Apr 2014 | 20:40:09 UTC

I still have an eVGA GTX 460 OC, happily crunching GPUGrid tasks, including "Long-run" tasks which occasionally give me a "Really long run". Despite being an older card, it is still providing useful results.

Just because a GPU now takes longer than 24 hours to return a GPUGrid result, does NOT mean it is EOL or useless...

Even my GTS 240 is working away on other projects, where it is not useless.

Profile Beyond
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Nov 08
Posts: 1112
Credit: 6,162,416,256
RAC: 0
Level
Tyr
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36742 - Posted: 30 Apr 2014 | 16:27:31 UTC
Last modified: 30 Apr 2014 | 16:30:50 UTC

Mumak, ET & Jacob: saying the 650Ti was EOL was my attempt at a bit of hyperbole. However if WUs such as these GIANNI_lig become the norm the 650Ti will be at a significant disadvantage (but as you say still quite usable). I'd certainly opt for the 750Ti at this point.

According to my Kill-a-Watt, swapping in a 750Ti for a GTX 460 or 560 resulted in a 100 watt lowering of power use. Since electricity here is $0.09/KW and the boxes run 24/7, that's ~ $79.00/year savings if my calculations are correct.

The 750 Ti (EVGA SC) yielded more or less a 35% WU speedup compared to the 650Ti (the 650Ti is a bit faster than the 560 and a lot faster than the 460). On low GPU usage WUs (only the GERARD_A2ARNUL and ISBA_MULTISCALELAB_GERARD at this point AFAIK) the speed advantage here is somewhere around 25% compared to the 650Ti. It will be interesting to see what the efficiency of the 20nm Maxwells will be.

Vagelis Giannadakis
Send message
Joined: 5 May 13
Posts: 187
Credit: 349,254,454
RAC: 0
Level
Asp
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36770 - Posted: 2 May 2014 | 8:33:56 UTC

I was "annoyed" at first to see the estimated time of the first GIANNI_lig3 I got (~29 hours) on my 650Ti, but the resultant credit of >180K wasn't bad at all! In total, I got two of these:

9758880 6976288 171276 30 Apr 2014 | 2:35:29 UTC 1 May 2014 | 9:42:45 UTC Completed and validated 105,987.00 5,605.40 181,250.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v8.21 (cuda60)
9597193 6817200 171276 28 Apr 2014 | 21:06:43 UTC 30 Apr 2014 | 3:52:02 UTC Completed and validated 105,999.30 5,594.61 181,250.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v8.21 (cuda60)


I may be missing the full credit bonus, but the half-bonus (25%?) isn't half bad either! Hey, 180K is about my average credit!

So, my feeling is, the 650Ti is not reaching EOL or becoming redundant just yet, it still has some juice! :)

That said, I am tempted to pair it in my box with a 750Ti, it's a sweet little card! I would be at ~80% of the Titan with a laughable comparable cost!
____________

ExtraTerrestrial Apes
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 17 Aug 08
Posts: 2705
Credit: 1,311,122,549
RAC: 0
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36779 - Posted: 2 May 2014 | 19:59:43 UTC - in response to Message 36770.

I would be at ~80% of the Titan with a laughable comparable cost!

While that's probably true (didn't check the numbers) keep in mind that any comparison to Titan based on anything remotely related to "value" is a default win for whoever is the contender. The only thing Titan has going for it is strong DP performance in nVidia land for cheaper than the alternatives (Tesla & Quadro). But luckily DP is completely irrelevant for GPU-Grid.

MrS
____________
Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

John C MacAlister
Send message
Joined: 17 Feb 13
Posts: 181
Credit: 144,871,276
RAC: 0
Level
Cys
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 36786 - Posted: 3 May 2014 | 13:54:10 UTC - in response to Message 36770.
Last modified: 3 May 2014 | 14:06:14 UTC

I am happy to see Vagelis' opinion of the 650Ti. I have two of them processing GPUGrid projects and cannot afford to replace them. They are a little slow compared to others but they work.

I was "annoyed" at first to see the estimated time of the first GIANNI_lig3 I got (~29 hours) on my 650Ti, but the resultant credit of >180K wasn't bad at all! In total, I got two of these:

9758880 6976288 171276 30 Apr 2014 | 2:35:29 UTC 1 May 2014 | 9:42:45 UTC Completed and validated 105,987.00 5,605.40 181,250.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v8.21 (cuda60)
9597193 6817200 171276 28 Apr 2014 | 21:06:43 UTC 30 Apr 2014 | 3:52:02 UTC Completed and validated 105,999.30 5,594.61 181,250.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v8.21 (cuda60)


I may be missing the full credit bonus, but the half-bonus (25%?) isn't half bad either! Hey, 180K is about my average credit!

So, my feeling is, the 650Ti is not reaching EOL or becoming redundant just yet, it still has some juice! :)

That said, I am tempted to pair it in my box with a 750Ti, it's a sweet little card! I would be at ~80% of the Titan with a laughable comparable cost!

Post to thread

Message boards : Number crunching : Really long runs

//