1) Message boards : Number crunching : BitCoin Utopia went crazy credit-wise (Message 37336)
Posted 3 days ago by Profile skgiven
https://bitcoinwisdom.com/bitcoin/calculator

I filled in the data for the new (July) AntMiner S3. It would never come close to breaking even mining Bitcoins. Probably wouldn't even pay for half it's cost and within 6months or so it would yield less than what the electric costs.

It begs the question, are any mining devices profitable?
If not then as a funding project, donations would be better.
2) Message boards : Number crunching : BitCoin Utopia went crazy credit-wise (Message 37326)
Posted 3 days ago by Profile skgiven
You could have a lot more than that if you used a USB hub, and some of them daisy-chain!

If also attached to WUPROP, some stats are collected. Other previous and potential NCI projects could be attached too...


The credit is still skewed though; while it might reflect some relative performances it neglects the fact that a USB device needs to be attached to a computer!


Well, you can have four of the critters on a single Raspberry Pi...

It's such a shame that Cryptocoin proof-of-work functions aren't comuting anything useful as a side effect.

Matt

3) Message boards : Number crunching : BitCoin Utopia went crazy credit-wise (Message 37323)
Posted 3 days ago by Profile skgiven
The project is fairly new (about a year old).
While many people have participated on CPU's and GPU's this was ineffective - the yield was low.
However, attention to the project has grown in the last month or so due to the credit awarded to ASIC's. Recently, the number of ASICs attached has significantly increased and will inevitably continue to increase. To boot, the project might yet facilitate more ASIC models, so as a funding project it might turn out to be quite fruitful (if enough high end ASIC's can be attached)...

The credit is still skewed though; while it might reflect some relative performances it neglects the fact that a USB device needs to be attached to a computer!
4) Message boards : Number crunching : BitCoin Utopia went crazy credit-wise (Message 37317)
Posted 4 days ago by Profile skgiven
We should remember that this idea (of funding through mining) was first actuated in the form of Donate@home. The same issues were seen there. Donate wasn’t just a proof of concept project, it trail-blazed funding through mining, proved that there was enough interest and that it could be successful; ultimately Donate resulted in funding for a PhD student.

It was inevitable that another similar project would emerge.
Donate used GPU’s to mine one unit of currency (Bit coins) and had to retire because of the emergence of ASIC’s which increased the level of difficulty to the point of no return.
Donate could have tried to mine on CPU’s, but there were not enough crunchers for this to happen, yields were tiny and the implementation too much effort.
Donate could also have waited for and then started using ASIC’s, but there would have been too few crunchers with ASIC’s, new apps would have been needed and it would have distracted the researchers away from molecular dynamics.
Donate could also have diverged, crunching for a number of alternative currencies, but again it would have taken a lot of effort from what is a small team.
It really wasn't until a few months ago that ASIC mining had matured enough and became popular enough to make an ASIC based funding project viable. Prior to this however, it simply wasn’t.

The reality of crunching is that you can start-up whatever Boinc project you like, and crunchers can crunch whatever they like and for whatever reason they want.
Some crunchers crunch for whatever gives the biggest credit at any time. In the past these migratory credit opportunists typically crunched for projects such as Collatz, PrimeGrid, MilkyWay, Moo! Wrapper, Distributed Rainbow Table Generator, SubsetSum, ABC… and often only did so when the credits were highest, but many also chipped in at POEM, GPUGRID and WCG (when they had the HCC on GPU for a few months).
It’s no surprise to see the same crunchers over at Bitcoin Utopia, and to me this is an improvement. Crunching Pi, Soduko or any other meaningless crap resulted in nothing positive, Bitcoin Utopia on the other hand results in money going into research projects.
The only problem is the credits, and in the same way as GPU’s result in massive credits compared to CPU’s, ASIC’s result in massive credits compared to GPU’s. The difference however is that GPU’s can be used to do a range of scientific research, while ASIC’s can only be used to mine. Comparing CPU’s to GPU’s to ASIC’s is a bit like comparing a pair of shoes to a tram to an elevator in a sky-scraper.

In terms of Boinc cross-project stats I'm starting to drop too; was around 280ish, now 290 and falling... Entirely down to BitCoin Utopia as I had been rising slowly.
Personally, I'm not particularly bothered whether I'm 250th or 400th, but I expect many crunchers in the top 10 or 100 wouldn't like to be shifted from that hard earned position because a couple of hundred people plugged in USB sticks!

Again, regarding credits there needs to be a segregation by project types (various scientific areas and non-scientific fields).

The present fields (according to the Boinc Client) are:

- Biology and Medicine
- Cognative Science and AI
- Distributed sensing
- Earth Sciences
- Mathematics, Computing and...
- Multiple Applications
- Physical Science

I don't think any of this is respected in any of the stats sites though.
Unless Boinc command steps in and sorts this out, it's down to the stat sites to deal with this, after all it's their stats that are looking pointless!

This would do the trick,
- Funding/Mining (doesn't count for cross-project credit)

However, the stat sites can count what they like, so it's down to them.
5) Message boards : Server and website : Not getting short WUs (Message 37312)
Posted 4 days ago by Profile skgiven
I think I sort of know what the issue is.

My setup is different and to test this I wanted to only run short tasks on GPU 0 (a GTX770), but run long tasks on a GTX660Ti (I don't always want to crunch on the 770).

My cc_config file (without the logs) is,
    <cc_config>
    <options>
    <start_delay>30</start_delay>
    <use_all_gpus>0</use_all_gpus>

    <exclude_gpu>
    <url>http://www.gpugrid.net/</url>
    <type>NVIDIA</type>
    <device_num>0</device_num>
    <app>acemdlong</app>
    </exclude_gpu>

    <exclude_gpu>
    <url>http://www.gpugrid.net/</url>
    <type>NVIDIA</type>
    <device_num>1</device_num>
    <app>acemdshort</app>
    </exclude_gpu>

    </options>
    </cc_config>



I was running one Long WU on GPU 1. GPU 0 was free, and remained so after a restart, but Boinc would not ask for short work for GPU 0.

Instead I got the message,

19/07/2014 19:03:31 | GPUGRID | [coproc] NVIDIA instance 0; 1.000000 pending for 37x2-NOELIA_BI_3-10-14-RND2323_1

19/07/2014 19:03:31 | GPUGRID | [coproc] NVIDIA instance 1: confirming 1.000000 instance for 37x2-NOELIA_BI_3-10-14-RND2323_1

To me this suggests a WU is being linked with both GPU's (GPU0 has 1 pending WU - which is wrong because it's running on GPU1) so Boinc thinks the GPU isn't available to run other tasks because there is a pending WU?
If my interpretation is correct-ish then there is a bug. Maybe this has already been fixed in a beta?

I suspected it might have worked in 4h, when the Long WU completed, but I didn't want to wait, so I tried to force the issue.
First I told my system to only get short tasks and then to start using both cards for all types of work. After downloading a short task, I suspended both tasks read the cc_config file and then enabled the tasks. They started running on the correct cards.

I've changed back to both types of work in the profile. I suppose I will have to wait and see if it keeps working before I know for sure, but I think that demonstrates that it will work, but not straight away - running tasks would first need to complete...

Another problem is that Boinc doesn't ask for a specific task type when downloading work - it just asks for work, so if you need short tasks but download a long task then it will sit in the queue and you will not get a short task,

20/07/2014 09:28:04 | GPUGRID | [coproc] NVIDIA instance 0; 1.000000 pending for 2x19x1x6-NOELIA_THROMBIN1-2-3-RND8291_0
20/07/2014 09:28:04 | GPUGRID | [coproc] NVIDIA instance 1: confirming 1.000000 instance for 2x19x1x6-NOELIA_THROMBIN1-2-3-RND8291_0
20/07/2014 09:28:04 | GPUGRID | [coproc] Insufficient NVIDIA for 2x26x1x13-NOELIA_THROMBIN1-2-3-RND1179_0; need 1, available 0

So unless you changed profile before asking for tasks (every time), to ensure you only get short (or long) tasks when you need them, this won't work. IMO this is all too complicated as is, so even if a fix turned up the way forward can only be hardware orientation (allocate per hardware unit). Try writing a detailed cc_config file for a system with an Intel CPU/GPU, an ATI, 2 NVidia's and a mix of external mining devices.

The only other thing I can think of would be to run two instances of Boinc, disabling one GPU in each (and I don't know if that would actually work or not).

...
Tried 7.4.8, same problem,
20/07/2014 14:03:47 | GPUGRID | [coproc] NVIDIA instance 0; 1.000000 pending for 2x26x1x13-NOELIA_THROMBIN1-2-3-RND1179_0
20/07/2014 14:03:47 | GPUGRID | [coproc] NVIDIA instance 1: confirming 1.000000 instance for 2x26x1x13-NOELIA_THROMBIN1-2-3-RND1179_0

Changed profile to ask for Short tasks and other tasks if no short tasks available!

20/07/2014 13:36:06 | GPUGRID | No tasks sent
20/07/2014 13:36:06 | GPUGRID | No tasks are available for Short runs (2-3 hours on fastest card)
20/07/2014 13:36:06 | GPUGRID | No tasks are available for CPU only app

6) Message boards : Server and website : Not getting short WUs (Message 37311)
Posted 4 days ago by Profile skgiven
I made a couple of corrections to my previous post. I thought it worked but my setup is complex and another cc_config file kicked in. If I get it working I'll let you know...
7) Message boards : Server and website : Not getting short WUs (Message 37306)
Posted 5 days ago by Profile skgiven
Firstly, a GTX 670 is quite capable of running Long WU's.

Secondly, this isn't going to work by itself,

<exclude_gpu>
<url>http://www.gpugrid.net/</url>
<device_num>1</device_num>
<type>NVIDIA</type>
<app>acemdlong</app>
</exclude_gpu>

You would need to do more:
Make sure you also have short tasks selected for that system profile, otherwise it's just not going to work.
Presuming you only want to run long tasks on the bigger card you would also need to exclude short tasks for that GPU.

On the server the app names are displayed as,
Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card)
Short runs (2-3 hours on fastest card)
However they are really acemdlong and acemdshort

Device type and number in this order,
<type>NVIDIA</type>
<device_num>0</device_num>

testing,

    <exclude_gpu>
    <url>http://www.gpugrid.net/</url>
    <type>NVIDIA</type>
    <device_num>1</device_num>
    <app>acemdlong</app>
    </exclude_gpu>

    <exclude_gpu>
    <url>http://www.gpugrid.net/</url>
    <type>NVIDIA</type>
    <device_num>0</device_num>
    <app>acemdshort</app>
    </exclude_gpu>



If you needed to alter your profile then do a project update afterwards from Boinc.
After reconfiguring your cc_config file(s), read the config files from within Boinc (Advanced).

Note that there might not always be short tasks!

- Correcting...

8) Message boards : Graphics cards (GPUs) : Comparison of two GTX 660s (Message 37303)
Posted 5 days ago by Profile skgiven
Leaving the unreported GPU frequencies aside and just looking at the system specs (CPU, RAM, Bus) there is a big difference:

You are comparing an "AMD 8350" to a "Dell 9100 dual-core that runs at 3.40 GHz".
The AMD 8350 CPU is much more powerful and uses DDR3, while the Pentium is less powerful and uses DDR2.

As some of the ACEMD apps code is run on the CPU, performance depends on the PCIE bandwidth, the CPU, RAM and system bus, and that's assuming the Pent system is well configured (isn't running out of system RAM, drive space, or saturating the CPU).

Last time I compared an old DDR2 system to an i7 system the difference was around 20% for crunching here on a GPU.

- corrected for CPU's, and if it's a skt478 model the system memory would be DDR400!
9) Message boards : Number crunching : Multiple Teslas in one box. Is there a limit per machine for tasks? (Message 37245)
Posted 16 days ago by Profile skgiven
4 possibilities come to mind:

1. Boinc cant facilitate any more GPU's
2. The ACEMD app limits the number
3. It's processor related
4. It's PCIE lane related.

I can't answer these possibilities but I can explain my thinking,

1. Is there a Boinc GPU cap/limit? If so that's the issue.
2. Are the apps limited to 8 GPUs? If so then this is the problem.
3. The E5-2670 is an 8core 16 thread S2 processor and there are two mounted. It would make sense to use 1 CPU until the next is needed (energy saving) and probably to use the next before using HT. Is there a problem starting the second CPU up? Do the drivers or the app not see it? Do the processors power settings need to be altered?
4. The maximum number of PCI Express Lanes is 40 for that processor. Don't know if the board supports twice that or not? Also, while it might be PCIE3.0 for the first slot (possibly 2nd, 3rd and 4th also), I doubt that they are all PCIE3 and would expect it to drop to PCIE2. These 40 lanes are also shared with other devices so in reality you might only have 32 which means 4 lanes per 8 GPU cores. The point is, your GPU's might not operate if there is less than 4 lanes/GPU.
10) Message boards : Graphics cards (GPUs) : Easier work around for Debian users (Message 37222)
Posted 19 days ago by Profile skgiven
7.4.8 is a Boinc test version for Windows. The test version for Linux is 7.3.19,


For GPUGRID you need to use the x64 version!



Next 10