Posts by JHMarshall
log in
1) Message boards : News : Update on This Weeks Errors (Message 66747)
Posted 23 Oct 2017 by JHMarshall
I've had a couple of systems running MW on autopilot for the last few days while I address other issues. I just got back to all the commotion. WOW!! I don't know about the others, but I crunch for the science, not for the worthless credits. So, I just brought 4 more machines back onto MW because so many were whinning they were dropping out.

MW and Einstein were my first BOINC projects and they are still my favorite GPU projects.

Thanks for the hard work Jake and keep you head up, but duck when you have to!!!

2) Message boards : Number crunching : Errors (Message 66609)
Posted 15 Sep 2017 by JHMarshall
I'm seeing errors also and so are other systems crunching the same WUs.

Update: rebooted system and first 4 WUs completed normally.
Will update after more results. ???????

On my systems the "de_modfit_fast_20_3s_146_bundle5_" WUs are getting computation errors. Other WUs seem to be working.
3) Message boards : Number crunching : Updated GPU Requirements (Message 66013)
Posted 13 Dec 2016 by JHMarshall
Just added a Geforce 210 into a PC without on-board video. Looks like it is not supported by Milkyway. Tried to download some tasks, and am not getting any. I'm just checking to confirm that this card will not work here.


The GeForce 210 does not have double precision compute capability required by MW.

4) Message boards : News : Scheduled Maintenance Concluded (Message 65889)
Posted 17 Nov 2016 by JHMarshall
Great work! My 7950s,7970s, and R9 280Xs are all cranking away!

5) Message boards : Number crunching : AMD Radeon R9 Fury X - app_info.xml and apps - optimizations (Message 64946)
Posted 27 Jul 2016 by JHMarshall

I'm a bit disappointed that a project task last ~ 16 seconds with the Milkyway 1.36 ATI app on one FuryX VGA card (1 WU/GPU).
I looked to other PCs, e.g. hostid=590597 with 'R9 200 Series - Hawaii' VGA cards. This VGA card have just 44 ComputeUnits (CUs) A task last ~ 15 seconds.
The/my FuryX have 64 CUs. But a task last ~ 16 seconds.

Is there something wrong - possibilities to optimize/fine tune?


Take a look at memory speed and whether the R9 280 has 128bit, 256 bit or 384 bit thruput speeds, the faster the memory and the faster the bits get transferred at one time, the faster the card crunches. It's not JUST the CU's anymore.

It's not just memory speed here. Since MW use double precision calculations (DP) the card's DP compute capability is the real driver.

R9 280 series DP = 1/4 SP
R9 290 series DP = 1/8 SP
R9 Fury X series DP = 1/16 SP

The R9 280 series may not be the fastest single precision performer but the 1/4 DP to SP ratio makes it the leader in double precision for the $.

6) Message boards : Number crunching : Computation Error on (Message 64873)
Posted 12 Jul 2016 by JHMarshall
My systems are normally very stable on MW however in the last day I've had 68 errors and 11 invalids while successfully completing over 5000 WUs. I checked the wingman results for all the tasks producing errors and they also had errors. None of these WUs were successfully completed and all were cancelled because of too many errors. Check you wingman results on your tasks. If they also had problems it is just a batch of bad WUs.

7) Message boards : Number crunching : ATI 7770 issues (Message 56649)
Posted 27 Dec 2012 by JHMarshall

Here are some run time references for comparison to your numbers. I have a Pentium E5300 Dual core system (2.6GHz) that I have run both HD 7770 and HD 7950s recently. I don't have older run times for comparison. I run BOINC 7.0.28 and Win 7 Pro 64 bit SP1 with 8 GB ram. It's an older system with a PCI-E 1.1 bus. One core runs Einstein (CPU tasks oly) and the other core is free for MW and whatever else I'm doing like surfing. Here are the times:

HD 7770 - 515 secs runtime with 8.8 secs CPU
HD 7950 - 61 secs runtime with 3.7 secs CPU

The only difference in the runs was the GPU, everything was the same.
I run Catalyst 12.6. I've had increased run times when trying all the more recent releases so I've stuck with 12.6.

8) Message boards : Number crunching : Nvidia Geforce GTX 650 Ti slower than GTX 285 ? (Message 56554)
Posted 17 Dec 2012 by JHMarshall
Thanks Joe, it all makes sense now.

I've just read that for the GTX285 the DP performance is only 1/12 that of the SP performance, this would explain why it is faster than the GTX650 Ti even though it has a slower SP performance.

I think I'll buy an AMD card next time.

Best Regards,

Other projects, like DistRTgen and PrimeGrid, LOVE the Nvidia cards MUCH more!! There are still other projects, that like this one but SP projects, love the AMD cards more. Unfortunately there is no 'one card fits all' for all the possible gpu projects.

Right, that's why I run both types. Most of the time my Nvidia card runs Einstein, GPUGrid, or PrimeGrid. I move it to MW mostly for challenges. The AMD cards are king on MW because of the DP requirement. They also do well on Einstein (SP) which has a very good OpenCL app for AMD.

9) Message boards : Number crunching : GTX670's and the MilkyWay project (Message 56553)
Posted 17 Dec 2012 by JHMarshall
Sorry I haven't gotten back to you, I was on vacation and shut down.

I now go on vacation and leave my pc's ON and crunching, if they crash they crash, but if they don't it is better for me. It is VERY hard to compete with your Team if I don't keep them running!! I am kidding of course, your Team has some VERY prolific crunchers on it!! AND I LOVE the picture of Ingrid's home on the cliff!!

My AMD 7950 systems occasionally hang when starting a task and I hate the idea of them sucking juice and not doing anything for several days!

It sure does mess up my RAC when I shut down though!

10) Message boards : Number crunching : GTX670's and the MilkyWay project (Message 56540)
Posted 16 Dec 2012 by JHMarshall
Sorry I haven't gotten back to you, I was on vacation and shut down.

I can't see your task or work unit and I'm probably not the best person to answer /diagnose your problem. All I know is that my GTX 560 Ti runs fine but not as fast as my AMD cards.

I'm using Boinc 7.0.28, Windows 7 Pro 64 bit, and NVidia driver: (from Boinc Log)
"306.97, Cuda 5.0, Compute capabiilty 2.1" .

I looked in the top 100+ computers on MW and all NVidia cards were using 306.97. That said, when I first started using the NVidia card on Einstein it was at 301.42. I don't remember if I updated the driver before or after I started using the card on MW.

11) Message boards : Number crunching : Nvidia Geforce GTX 650 Ti slower than GTX 285 ? (Message 56539)
Posted 16 Dec 2012 by JHMarshall
Sorry, I've been on vacation. The double precision throughput of the NVidia 6xx series cards is 1/24 x the single precision.

You can see from the AMD tables on the 79xx series that they are 1/4 x single precision. This is why the AMD cards are much faster in DP. In single precision the NVidia cards and AMD cards are closely equivalent for the dollar, but in DP the AMD cards can be 6 times faster.

NVidia wants you to buy Tesla cards for several thousand dollars, but even these don't complete well on a cost basis with the AMD cards in DP. However, the Tesla cards do have lots of error checking and corrections built-in that make them more reliable for critical computations. These projects handle the reliability problems by sending out work units to multiple machines to verify results.

12) Message boards : Number crunching : Nvidia Geforce GTX 650 Ti slower than GTX 285 ? (Message 56509)
Posted 15 Dec 2012 by JHMarshall
Try these

13) Message boards : Number crunching : Nvidia Geforce GTX 650 Ti slower than GTX 285 ? (Message 56500)
Posted 14 Dec 2012 by JHMarshall
I have just bought a new PC with an NVidia GeForce GTX650 Ti video card.

I have averaged the run times for the last 10 workunits for each card ...
GTX650 Ti - 24.7 minutes
GTX285 - 17.7 minutes

Does anyone have any ideas why the GTX650 Ti is taking longer to finish workunits than the GTX285 ?

I thought it should be faster.

The GFLOPS reported by BOINC is the single precision performance. You would see the 650 Ti faster on single precision projects such as Einstein. The DP performance on these cards is not so good. However the power requirements of the 650 Ti is considerably less than the 285. So even though the 650 Ti takes longer you are getting more performance per watt.

14) Message boards : Number crunching : GTX670's and the MilkyWay project (Message 56487)
Posted 14 Dec 2012 by JHMarshall
You're welcome. Crunch away!
15) Message boards : Number crunching : GTX670's and the MilkyWay project (Message 56478)
Posted 13 Dec 2012 by JHMarshall
I am running GTX670's, driver 301.42, cuda 4.2.1. The system has an i7-3930k processor and 16 gigs DRAM.

I was advised that this computer might run MilkyWay very inefficiently in GPU processing. I am running the project on CPU on four machines; but I was looking to add to my GPU work where I only have Einstein and SETI on GPU.

My ScienceSprings blog has been tilting toward Astronomy lately, so I am beefing up that side of BOINC in my projects.

Any advice?

Your GTX 670s will run fine on MW. The Nvdidia GPU apps will run many times faster than your CPU. I run several AMD 7950s and one Nvidia GTX 560 Ti. The 560 Ti has no problems but is definitely slower than the 7950s on MW. The AMD high end cards have much faster double precision units than the Nvidia cards and MW requires DP, so the AMD high end cards are several times faster than the Nvidia cards. This may be what you heard about inefficiency. The Nvidia cards do perform on MW and will give you much more throughput than the CPU apps.


Edit: Additional information.
GTX 560 Ti ~500 seconds
AMD 7950 60-64 seconds (slightly underclocked)

I think your 670 would be twice as fast as my 560 Ti
16) Message boards : Number crunching : Validator stopped. (Message 56408)
Posted 6 Dec 2012 by JHMarshall
Same here. Over 3000 waiting for validation. I've stopped all MW tasks and moved to other projects for now.

Why no feedback from the project? What's happening?

17) Message boards : Number crunching : GPU card update? (Message 56250)
Posted 20 Nov 2012 by JHMarshall
An HD 7950 will run 1 WU in 1 min. They are around $299.99 with mail rebate from Microcenter. Haven't checked prices elsewhere. I run 3 of them spread across 2 systems. They also perform well SP on other projects that have OpenCL WUs such as Einstein.

18) Message boards : Number crunching : GPU card update? (Message 56248)
Posted 20 Nov 2012 by JHMarshall
Hi all,
I have been crunching with a GTX 260 for the past two years but think it is finally time to upgrade. I settled (pending community input) on a GTX 660ti.

GTX 660 ti model:

Will this card meet the requirements for crunching Milkyway@Home & is it by best option in the 200-300 price range?



The Nvidia cards don't have very good double precision throughput. They are fine single precision crunchers, but MW requires DP calculations. AMD cards are much superior for DP work. I would recommend an HD 7950 for the price range you quoted.

19) Message boards : Number crunching : GPU Requirements (Message 56075)
Posted 4 Nov 2012 by JHMarshall

MW requires Double Precision arithmetic. The HD 67xx series doesn't support DP.

20) Message boards : Number crunching : GPU Requirements (Message 56052)
Posted 1 Nov 2012 by JHMarshall

I have 3 Gigabyte AMD HD7950s crunching between Milkyway and Einstein. I run Win 7 Pro and Ultimate 64 bit systems, BOINC 7.0.28, and Catalyst 12.6. Performance on both Projects is great. The DP on the 79xx series can't be beat. I don't overclock and run a single task per GPU for stabiilty and to keep system heat down. The HD 7950s will complete a single 1.02 OpenCL task in less than 40 secs.


Next 20

Main page · Your account · Message boards

Copyright © 2017 AstroInformatics Group