1) Message boards : Graphics cards (GPUs) : GTX660 - Error in all tasks (Message 40899)
Posted 3 days ago by Profile Retvari Zoltan*
It's not the same problem, as your failing workunits have many "The simulation became unstable" messages in their logs.
The most probable causes are:
1. GPU overclocking (either by the factory or by the user)
2. insufficient power supply
Try to lower your GPU's clock (or its power target - as it will reduce the GPU clock) with MSI afterburner or a similar tool.
2) Message boards : Number crunching : Error while computing (Message 40889)
Posted 4 days ago by Profile Retvari Zoltan*
Disconnect, inspect, (and if there's no burn marks, smoke remnants or blackening on any pins or sleeves) reconnect all (MB+CPU+GPU) power connectors inside your PC. If your PSU is modular, you should check the other (PSU) end of all power cables as well. While doing this you should pull out your GPU from the PCIe slot, and check its golden contacts for the same signs.
If they are all ok, try the general software troubleshooting.
3) Message boards : News : No work (Message 40888)
Posted 4 days ago by Profile Retvari Zoltan*
But looking at the Stats page, the graphs show a declining tendency.

There are two reasons for this:
1. The short queue is empty
2. Those who crunch from the long queue instead of the short loose their fast return bonus
3. There are more crunchers than workunits.

So far we had these workunits from Gerard:
Workunit delta GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_16818 16818 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_17759 941 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_49315 31556 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_55797 6482 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_73195 17398 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_125842 52647 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_212701 86859 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_222662 9961 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_233233 10571 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_236727 3494 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_243219 6492 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_567770 324551 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_573382 5612 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_575411 2029 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_575903 492 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_611872 35969 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_613126 1254 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_638167 25041 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_673023 34856 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_684798 11775 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_689890 5092 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_689911 21 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_737481 47570 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_1092080 354599 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_1138115 46035 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_1141606 3491 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_1153879 12273 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_1154384 505 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_1154545 161 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_1154732 187 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_1161511 6779 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_1163132 1621 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_1214901 51769 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_1218806 3905 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_1224524 5718 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_1356989 132465 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_1490763 133774 GERARD_FXCXCL12_LIG_1496795 6032

I expect that new workunits will show up where is a big difference between their numbers, or where is a little difference, or... :)
4) Message boards : Graphics cards (GPUs) : Help with my GTX 980 (Message 40886)
Posted 5 days ago by Profile Retvari Zoltan*
variable name: swan_sync ->
variable value: 1 ->

Shouldn't it be value=0 ?

It's value doesn't matter, only its presence. See this post.
The "recommended" value is 1. See this post.
5) Message boards : News : No work (Message 40881)
Posted 5 days ago by Profile Retvari Zoltan*
If this keeps up, we might have to resort to Folding....

Any idea on when the WUs will flow again?

I think the WUs are flowing, because there's always 2000~2300 long workunits in progress and these are predominantly Gerard's two-step workunits, therefore I think he successively fills the queue with his two-step batches. If it wouldn't be the case, these two-step workunits were finished earlier. Probably this practice is more proper for some reason regarding the current simulations.
6) Message boards : Graphics cards (GPUs) : New drivers NVIDIA GPU's (Message 40880)
Posted 5 days ago by Profile Retvari Zoltan*
This new driver has CUDA7.0 support, but until the GPUGrid app is updated to CUDA7, don't expect any performance increase.
At the moment there's no need to update to this driver from the GPUGrid's point of view.
7) Message boards : Graphics cards (GPUs) : NVidia GPU Card comparisons in GFLOPS peak (Message 40858)
Posted 7 days ago by Profile Retvari Zoltan*
This is still running after 24h:36m - 72.5%, with 8h:06m still to run on my GTX650Ti......

Is this abnormal?

You're asking in the wrong thread.
These are fairly long workunits, so it's normal that these take more than 24h on a GTX650Ti.
8) Message boards : Number crunching : Initial Replication x 2 (Message 40854)
Posted 8 days ago by Profile Retvari Zoltan*
Richard Haselgrove wrote:
v8.46 is Linux, v8.47 is Windows - since October 2014. Applications

Stoneageman wrote:
Looks like they are testing the integrity of a new application. 8.47 v 8.46

These are both v8.47:
There was a batch with Initial Replication accidentally set to 2, but it was cancelled.
9) Message boards : Number crunching : Process Hacker? (Message 40852)
Posted 8 days ago by Profile Retvari Zoltan*
Be careful with changing process priorities, you can easily make your OS unusable.
There are many tools to do it, you can do it even from command line.
The other factor which could increase the efficacy of the client is the CPU affinity of its executable. By default the executable is set to run on any of the CPU's cores. Changing the core on which the executable runs takes some time. If you set it to run on its own separate core, it could gain some performance, especially on Core 2 Quad (and their respective Xeon variants) processors, which are actually two Core 2 Duo chips in a single package, thus have their own separate caches. Switching over a process to a core on a different chip takes longer.
Using a single core for 100% could cause the chip's surface heat up differently, shortening its lifespan. But as far as I know, crunchers don't have unused CPU cores. :)
There is a tool to change the priority and the affinity of a process:
However the impact of the WDDM overhead is much more severe than it could be neutralized by these practices.
10) Message boards : Graphics cards (GPUs) : Help with my GTX 980 (Message 40810)
Posted 11 days ago by Profile Retvari Zoltan*
So just got a used Zotac AMP 980 on Ebay. Installed it this afternoon and has been running for a few hours. Wow! it gets hot. Like 72C hot. The backplate is almost too hot to touch. I backed the TDP from 80% down to 70%. The GPU clock went from 1292 to 1227. Temp is now 64C.

Do the 980s always get this hot?


Is that common?

Yes. These cards have to dissipate 165W (at most), while the GTX 660Ti has only 150W TDP, but because it's superscalar, not all of the CUDA cores could be used by the GPUGrid client, so the real TDP of a GTX 660Ti is much lower than a GTX980's.

Should I remove the back plate?

Definitely not.

Won't that help cool the card?

No, it won't.

My 660ti didn't have a back plate.

It's because a GTX660Ti is a much shorter card, and the back plate is a high-end feature.

I also noticed that the GPU load was at 80%. I cut back on 2 WCG WUs so my i7 won't hyperthread and the GPU load went up to 84%. I never thought my rig wouldn't be able to feed this beast. I have an i7 at 4Ghz with 2100 RAM. Wow.

Blame it on the Windows Display Driver Model architecture of modern Windows OSes.

Are there any other tweaks I should be doing to up the GPU load?

You could try to set the swan_sync environmental variable to make the GPUGrid client use a full CPU core.
Start button ->
type systempropertiesadvanced to the search box ->
press enter, or click on the result ->
click on the "environmental variables" button near the bottom ->
click on the "new" button near the bottom (system variables section) ->
variable name: swan_sync ->
variable value: 1 ->
click OK 3 times ->
exit BOINC manager with stopping all scientific applications ->
restart BOINC manager

Thanks as always.

You're welcome.

Next 10