Welcome to MilkyWay@home

ATI application updated to 0.60


Advanced search

Message boards : News : ATI application updated to 0.60
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 . . . 7 · Next

AuthorMessage
Chris S
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 20 Sep 08
Posts: 1387
Credit: 186,704,917
RAC: 22
100 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 47783 - Posted: 13 Apr 2011, 17:43:28 UTC

@Brian -
EDIT: oppps ..... 0.50's are the cpu ones ..... ignore comment .... sorry, bad hair day :)
Ummm I didn't know that ..

@Arkayan -
The apps I have on my site are just stock, just with the included app_info.xml file and Matt's configure options.
Well I seem to be getting a bit better results using your app_info. I'll monitor it.





ID: 47783 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileBeyond

Send message
Joined: 15 Jul 08
Posts: 383
Credit: 501,817,790
RAC: 0
500 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 47784 - Posted: 13 Apr 2011, 17:44:50 UTC - in response to Message 47776.  

v.62 on my two 4850s still needed more than one core (on my two processor dual core Operton system) to reach 99% GPU utilization.

Ed.T, your results on that machine show 10 seconds or less CPU/WU with v.62.
ID: 47784 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileBeyond

Send message
Joined: 15 Jul 08
Posts: 383
Credit: 501,817,790
RAC: 0
500 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 47793 - Posted: 13 Apr 2011, 18:09:32 UTC - in response to Message 47780.  

The apps I have on my site are just stock, just with the included app_info.xml file and Matt's configure options.

arkayn thanks for hosting these. One small change in the app_info.xml:
Change: <version_num>57</version_num> to <version_num>62</version_num>
ID: 47793 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profilearkayn
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Feb 09
Posts: 999
Credit: 74,932,619
RAC: 0
50 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 47796 - Posted: 13 Apr 2011, 18:23:53 UTC

I will change the version number once they get everything stabilized, but as the WU are the same no matter what it does not really matter at the moment.
ID: 47796 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profilebanditwolf
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 07
Posts: 2425
Credit: 524,164
RAC: 0
500 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 47799 - Posted: 13 Apr 2011, 18:37:38 UTC

Cpu time looks to be 20+ hours on a P4 & XP. 8.5 hours @ 41.5%

I guess the credit is ~250 still? Is/Will a opti ap be put out for cpu?
Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.
ID: 47799 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Ed.T

Send message
Joined: 1 Feb 11
Posts: 17
Credit: 14,873,794
RAC: 0
10 million credit badge8 year member badge
Message 47802 - Posted: 13 Apr 2011, 19:22:38 UTC - in response to Message 47784.  

v.62 on my two 4850s still needed more than one core (on my two processor dual core Operton system) to reach 99% GPU utilization.

Ed.T, your results on that machine show 10 seconds or less CPU/WU with v.62.


I've gotten the notion that if the CPU isn't available when GPU needs it that GPU utilization goes down. CPU time for the job wouldn't increase but PPD would still go down.

Perhaps the combination of BOINC, task manager and MSI Afterburner (plus the WCG work units running) pushed the need for "some of one core" not running a WU to "some of 2 cores" not running a work unit... IIRC, there's a tweak for raising the priority of the CPU side of the app in the works. I'm going to wait and see if that fixes it.

Some folks are saying everything is working fine. I'm saying not for everyone; we still need the additional releases.

- Ed.
Please: WCG - Help Cure Muscular Dystrophy
ID: 47802 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ConflictingEmotions

Send message
Joined: 18 Feb 09
Posts: 9
Credit: 20,005,162
RAC: 0
20 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 47806 - Posted: 13 Apr 2011, 20:21:17 UTC

Great that there is an Linux ATI app but I am getting quite a few 'Completed, validation inconclusive' results for the v0.62 app under Linux. Some WUs have 2 or 3 other ATI hosts with the same problem and some hosts are under Windows.

de_separation_13_3s_fix20_1_585272_1302651144 has 3 computing errors, my inconclusive and waiting on a CPU host
2820085 	249670 	12 Apr 2011 | 23:34:42 UTC 	12 Apr 2011 | 23:36:23 UTC 	Error while computing 	1.35 	0.06 	--- 	MilkyWay@Home v0.62 (ati14)
2822052 	44821 	12 Apr 2011 | 23:37:20 UTC 	12 Apr 2011 | 23:43:59 UTC 	Error while computing 	2.15 	0.09 	--- 	MilkyWay@Home v0.62 (ati14)
2828284 	278207 	12 Apr 2011 | 23:45:48 UTC 	13 Apr 2011 | 0:15:22 UTC 	Completed, validation inconclusive 	134.86 	6.53 	pending 	MilkyWay@Home v0.62 (ati14)
2851869 	151825 	13 Apr 2011 | 0:17:17 UTC 	13 Apr 2011 | 0:19:07 UTC 	Error while computing 	2.03 	0.05 	--- 	MilkyWay@Home v0.62 (ati14)
2855017 	274444 	13 Apr 2011 | 0:21:19 UTC 	21 Apr 2011 | 0:21:19 UTC 	In progress 	--- 	--- 	--- 	MilkyWay@Home v0.50 (sse2)
ID: 47806 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Brickhead
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 20 Mar 08
Posts: 108
Credit: 2,562,515,681
RAC: 1,669
2 billion credit badge10 year member badgeextraordinary contributions badge
Message 47809 - Posted: 13 Apr 2011, 22:07:59 UTC - in response to Message 47802.  
Last modified: 13 Apr 2011, 22:08:51 UTC

I've gotten the notion that if the CPU isn't available when GPU needs it that GPU utilization goes down. CPU time for the job wouldn't increase but PPD would still go down.

That's what I've been seeing as well.

With all respect to Matt, I don't think Cluster Physik (who practically invented MW on ATI GPUs) wrote the following about CPU process priority for no reason:

p1: normal priority in idle priority class (below normal), this is recommended for BOINC GPU applications, but apears to be not enough to enable millisecond polling of the GPU with Vista
p2: normal priority in normal priority class, the default


0.60 and 0.62 work fine on Windows XP, but on Windows 7 they sometimes want CPU time they're denied by other CPU tasks, resulting in lower GPU use than is the case without other CPU tasks..
ID: 47809 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileThe Gas Giant
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Dec 07
Posts: 1947
Credit: 240,884,648
RAC: 0
200 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 47812 - Posted: 14 Apr 2011, 1:06:03 UTC - in response to Message 47809.  

I've gotten the notion that if the CPU isn't available when GPU needs it that GPU utilization goes down. CPU time for the job wouldn't increase but PPD would still go down.

That's what I've been seeing as well.

With all respect to Matt, I don't think Cluster Physik (who practically invented MW on ATI GPUs) wrote the following about CPU process priority for no reason:

p1: normal priority in idle priority class (below normal), this is recommended for BOINC GPU applications, but apears to be not enough to enable millisecond polling of the GPU with Vista
p2: normal priority in normal priority class, the default


0.60 and 0.62 work fine on Windows XP, but on Windows 7 they sometimes want CPU time they're denied by other CPU tasks, resulting in lower GPU use than is the case without other CPU tasks..

On my Q9450 with Win7 64bit and a 5970 running 0.62, I'm pretty much seeing 98% GPU utilisation while running Aqua@home which is multithreaded.
ID: 47812 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Len LE/GE

Send message
Joined: 8 Feb 08
Posts: 261
Credit: 104,050,322
RAC: 0
100 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 47813 - Posted: 14 Apr 2011, 2:21:29 UTC - in response to Message 47802.  

v.62 on my two 4850s still needed more than one core (on my two processor dual core Operton system) to reach 99% GPU utilization.

Ed.T, your results on that machine show 10 seconds or less CPU/WU with v.62.


In task manager it shows as high cpu time used by system, that's what I am trying to explain since days.
It looks like a blocking wait of the cpu waiting for the gpu to sent data back. Whatever is causing it, it seems to have its root in the communication between cpu and gpu. Even the old app (from Gipsel) had that problem and solved it with the different parameters and defaults that worked reasonable good for many people.
The options of the new app (Matt) let you get that high cpu time by system down with a high polling number at the cost of gpu utilisation. Increasing target frequency reasonable allows to reduce the polling number again at the cost of the chunk size.

To find the sweet spot for target frequency / polling is impossible.
With the same parameters, the work packages seems to vary.
Even within 1 WU I saw
Dividing into 8 chunks
Integration range: { nu_steps = 640, mu_steps = 1600, r_steps = 1400 }
Using { 1, 8 } chunk(s) of size { 1400, 200 }
Integration time = 104.070243 s, average per iteration = 162.609754 ms
Dividing into 1 chunks
Integration range: { nu_steps = 640, mu_steps = 400, r_steps = 1400 }
Using { 1, 1 } chunk(s) of size { 1400, 400 }
Integration time = 25.759259 s, average per iteration = 40.248843 ms
For the first part it was working ok with low system cpu time but it jumped up for the second part before the final cpu calculations were done.

This all leads to the conclusion that the packet sizes send to the gpu are different on the very same gpu. Or the calculations done are different and need different time. Both are bad for a fix sleep time of the cpu. The cpu needs to know for how long it has to wait in sleep mode. The optional parameters should only be needed to fine tune the app for a certain system.

I thought target frequency and calculation speed of the gpu would lead to something like work packages per second (like frequency 30 = 30 work packages per second) but I don't see this. If it would work that way it would be easy to set frequency and polling. Different size WUs wouldn't be a problem too.

With big chunks it is hard to find the right balance, either the cpu or the gpu will wait unreasonable long. Small chunks will increase the number of data transfers but reduce the wait times and makes it easier to find the right setting of the parameters for a system. Varying work packages sizes will need parameters set for the worst case and have an overhead of unnecessary wait times for many WUs.

As long as the root problem can't be solved, a combination of high frequency and low polling number (still both far higher than the default) seems the only temporary solution. Sure this will cost some overhead for increased data transfer cpu <-> gpu.

Trying to give examples of what we need:
frequency 25 = 25 work packages per second and 38+polling sleep time of cpu
frequency 30 = 30 work packages per second and 32+polling sleep time of cpu
frequency 50 = 50 work packages per second and 19+polling sleep time of cpu

Taking the 5% cpu setting, I used a calculating of 950/work packages.
This calculated sleep time sure needs some tests.
Positive polling here is the additional number of ms added to the calculated time.
ID: 47813 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileTravis
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 30 Aug 07
Posts: 2046
Credit: 26,480
RAC: 0
10 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 47814 - Posted: 14 Apr 2011, 2:48:21 UTC - in response to Message 47806.  

Great that there is an Linux ATI app but I am getting quite a few 'Completed, validation inconclusive' results for the v0.62 app under Linux. Some WUs have 2 or 3 other ATI hosts with the same problem and some hosts are under Windows.

de_separation_13_3s_fix20_1_585272_1302651144 has 3 computing errors, my inconclusive and waiting on a CPU host
2820085 	249670 	12 Apr 2011 | 23:34:42 UTC 	12 Apr 2011 | 23:36:23 UTC 	Error while computing 	1.35 	0.06 	--- 	MilkyWay@Home v0.62 (ati14)
2822052 	44821 	12 Apr 2011 | 23:37:20 UTC 	12 Apr 2011 | 23:43:59 UTC 	Error while computing 	2.15 	0.09 	--- 	MilkyWay@Home v0.62 (ati14)
2828284 	278207 	12 Apr 2011 | 23:45:48 UTC 	13 Apr 2011 | 0:15:22 UTC 	Completed, validation inconclusive 	134.86 	6.53 	pending 	MilkyWay@Home v0.62 (ati14)
2851869 	151825 	13 Apr 2011 | 0:17:17 UTC 	13 Apr 2011 | 0:19:07 UTC 	Error while computing 	2.03 	0.05 	--- 	MilkyWay@Home v0.62 (ati14)
2855017 	274444 	13 Apr 2011 | 0:21:19 UTC 	21 Apr 2011 | 0:21:19 UTC 	In progress 	--- 	--- 	--- 	MilkyWay@Home v0.50 (sse2)


Validation inconclusive means you returned a result that we're going to use in our search population (which is used to generate new workunits), but before we actually use that result we send out another result to see if they verify against each other. Unlike other projects we don't validate every result that's returned to the server.
ID: 47814 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Matt Arsenault
Volunteer moderator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 8 May 10
Posts: 576
Credit: 15,979,383
RAC: 0
10 million credit badge8 year member badge
Message 47815 - Posted: 14 Apr 2011, 2:56:17 UTC - in response to Message 47806.  

Great that there is an Linux ATI app but I am getting quite a few 'Completed, validation inconclusive' results for the v0.62 app under Linux. Some WUs have 2 or 3 other ATI hosts with the same problem and some hosts are under Windows.

de_separation_13_3s_fix20_1_585272_1302651144 has 3 computing errors, my inconclusive and waiting on a CPU host
2820085 	249670 	12 Apr 2011 | 23:34:42 UTC 	12 Apr 2011 | 23:36:23 UTC 	Error while computing 	1.35 	0.06 	--- 	MilkyWay@Home v0.62 (ati14)
2822052 	44821 	12 Apr 2011 | 23:37:20 UTC 	12 Apr 2011 | 23:43:59 UTC 	Error while computing 	2.15 	0.09 	--- 	MilkyWay@Home v0.62 (ati14)
2828284 	278207 	12 Apr 2011 | 23:45:48 UTC 	13 Apr 2011 | 0:15:22 UTC 	Completed, validation inconclusive 	134.86 	6.53 	pending 	MilkyWay@Home v0.62 (ati14)
2851869 	151825 	13 Apr 2011 | 0:17:17 UTC 	13 Apr 2011 | 0:19:07 UTC 	Error while computing 	2.03 	0.05 	--- 	MilkyWay@Home v0.62 (ati14)
2855017 	274444 	13 Apr 2011 | 0:21:19 UTC 	21 Apr 2011 | 0:21:19 UTC 	In progress 	--- 	--- 	--- 	MilkyWay@Home v0.50 (sse2)
Those errors also look like what seems to happen with old / bad drivers.
ID: 47815 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Jesse Viviano

Send message
Joined: 4 Feb 11
Posts: 83
Credit: 40,009,857
RAC: 21,496
30 million credit badge8 year member badge
Message 47817 - Posted: 14 Apr 2011, 3:32:19 UTC

I am getting this message:
4/13/2011 11:26:17 PM	Milkyway@home	Message from server: ATI GPU: Upgrade to the latest driver to process tasks using your computer's GPU

I do not know why I am getting this message because I am using AMD's latest stable driver package, Catalyst 11.3. The driver itself is version 8.831.2.0 for Windows 7 64-bit. Did the administrator set this to accept Catalyst 11.4 and later only? That package is still a beta package.
ID: 47817 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profilekashi

Send message
Joined: 30 Dec 07
Posts: 311
Credit: 148,905,504
RAC: 0
100 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 47818 - Posted: 14 Apr 2011, 3:34:04 UTC - in response to Message 47817.  
Last modified: 14 Apr 2011, 3:34:20 UTC

I'm using 11.4 and getting the same message.
ID: 47818 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Matt Arsenault
Volunteer moderator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 8 May 10
Posts: 576
Credit: 15,979,383
RAC: 0
10 million credit badge8 year member badge
Message 47819 - Posted: 14 Apr 2011, 3:35:01 UTC - in response to Message 47817.  

I am getting this message:
4/13/2011 11:26:17 PM	Milkyway@home	Message from server: ATI GPU: Upgrade to the latest driver to process tasks using your computer's GPU

I do not know why I am getting this message because I am using AMD's latest stable driver package, Catalyst 11.3. The driver itself is version 8.831.2.0 for Windows 7 64-bit. Did the administrator set this to accept Catalyst 11.4 and later only? That package is still a beta package.
Since there are driver issues and I don't know what version works, I'm working on setting it to require 11.3 (unless somebody has it reported working with something earlier). However it appears I've done it wrong and it's just not sending.
ID: 47819 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Zydor
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Feb 09
Posts: 620
Credit: 100,587,625
RAC: 0
100 million credit badge10 year member badgeextraordinary contributions badge
Message 47820 - Posted: 14 Apr 2011, 3:39:43 UTC - in response to Message 47819.  
Last modified: 14 Apr 2011, 3:50:48 UTC

Its claiming no GPU WUs available, only CPU (I am running 11.3).

EDIT: Its back, WUs flowing - ta muchly :)

Regards
Zy
ID: 47820 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
[boinc.at] Nowi

Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 09
Posts: 99
Credit: 503,422,495
RAC: 0
500 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 47827 - Posted: 14 Apr 2011, 4:40:36 UTC

I use the application since release. On my system (Q9550, Win 7 64 Bit, 2x 5850 (Catalyst 11.3), Boinc 6.12.18, high utilization with four CPU-projects) I noticed this.

CPU-time is stable at 5 sec. CPU-usage 1 %, but higher at the end of WU for calculation likelihood (according to Matt)
GPU-time is stable:
    13s_3s_fix20: 118s
    13s_3s_free: 90 s
    10s_3s_fix20: 147 s


GPU-usage about 98-99 %.

System has a good addressability.


ID: 47827 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Bryan

Send message
Joined: 26 Jun 09
Posts: 47
Credit: 264,607,417
RAC: 282
200 million credit badge9 year member badge
Message 47828 - Posted: 14 Apr 2011, 4:44:26 UTC - in response to Message 47819.  

Matt, I have 2 machines running 5970s using CAT 10.10. I have another machine running 2 5870s also under CAT 10.10. None of these 3 machines are having any trouble at all.

OS Win7 64

I am getting this message:
4/13/2011 11:26:17 PM	Milkyway@home	Message from server: ATI GPU: Upgrade to the latest driver to process tasks using your computer's GPU

I do not know why I am getting this message because I am using AMD's latest stable driver package, Catalyst 11.3. The driver itself is version 8.831.2.0 for Windows 7 64-bit. Did the administrator set this to accept Catalyst 11.4 and later only? That package is still a beta package.
Since there are driver issues and I don't know what version works, I'm working on setting it to require 11.3 (unless somebody has it reported working with something earlier). However it appears I've done it wrong and it's just not sending.


Bryan

ID: 47828 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
PDelgado

Send message
Joined: 16 Nov 10
Posts: 17
Credit: 3,527,433
RAC: 5,868
3 million credit badge8 year member badge
Message 47830 - Posted: 14 Apr 2011, 4:47:56 UTC - in response to Message 47819.  
Last modified: 14 Apr 2011, 4:57:34 UTC

I'm working on setting it to require 11.3 (unless somebody has it reported working with something earlier).

Running 10.12 on AMD, Win7-64, 5850 with the app working and no invalids/errors. Haven't had any driver problems with any of the 57/59/60/62 versions. Tried 11.x before and found that on my system 10.12 is more stable than 11.x. My only problem seems to be an unrelated app/cc/bm scheduling thing that sometimes sends all MW work into immediate EDF mode.
ID: 47830 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
ProfileBeyond

Send message
Joined: 15 Jul 08
Posts: 383
Credit: 501,817,790
RAC: 0
500 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 47834 - Posted: 14 Apr 2011, 9:30:45 UTC - in response to Message 47819.  
Last modified: 14 Apr 2011, 9:32:17 UTC

I am getting this message:
4/13/2011 11:26:17 PM	Milkyway@home	Message from server: ATI GPU: Upgrade to the latest driver to process tasks using your computer's GPU

I do not know why I am getting this message because I am using AMD's latest stable driver package, Catalyst 11.3. The driver itself is version 8.831.2.0 for Windows 7 64-bit. Did the administrator set this to accept Catalyst 11.4 and later only? That package is still a beta package.

Since there are driver issues and I don't know what version works, I'm working on setting it to require 11.3 (unless somebody has it reported working with something earlier). However it appears I've done it wrong and it's just not sending.

Using mostly 10.12 here on 64 bit Windows. It's a bit faster than 11.3 on many machines. 11.x has problems that they're trying to resolve in 11.4..
ID: 47834 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 . . . 7 · Next

Message boards : News : ATI application updated to 0.60

©2019 Astroinformatics Group