Message boards :
News :
Separation updated to 1.00
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 . . . 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
Send message Joined: 1 Sep 08 Posts: 520 Credit: 302,525,188 RAC: 0 |
Thanks - good to know for when I make the move. Does the 5850 require a higher power supply profile than the 4850?
|
Send message Joined: 14 Feb 09 Posts: 999 Credit: 74,932,619 RAC: 0 |
I know my 5830 needs 2 pci-e power connectors, but I think the 4830 only needs one. |
Send message Joined: 24 Feb 09 Posts: 620 Credit: 100,587,625 RAC: 0 |
|
Send message Joined: 1 Sep 08 Posts: 520 Credit: 302,525,188 RAC: 0 |
Right, the 4870 requires two leads, the 4850's only one. I know my 5830 needs 2 pci-e power connectors, but I think the 4830 only needs one. |
Send message Joined: 27 Jan 12 Posts: 38 Credit: 18,084,778 RAC: 0 |
What command would be added to the the app-info file to throttle back GPU usage? It's currently at 99% and I'd like to pull it back to 80-85%. For some reason the frequency setting in the M@H preferences is ignored. The GPU runs @ 99% no matter what the setting. I tried a target frequency in the app-info file with separation 1.02 and it caused the GPU frequency and power draw to be all over the place. Had to switch back to 0.82 to get things running smoothly again. Only thing I can figure is it must be some kind of a hardware thing on my setup. |
Send message Joined: 8 May 09 Posts: 3339 Credit: 524,010,781 RAC: 1 |
I found that once I had everything set to go, I needed to just leave it alone. The WUs came in one at a time and it took a few minutes to get the next one. I had to force myself not to babysit and manually update Boinc trying to get more work every time it ran out. I let it go overnight with no other GPU projects running. By morning it was running just as before. That worked for me too, all 4 of my 5870's now have lots of work! |
Send message Joined: 1 Sep 08 Posts: 204 Credit: 219,354,537 RAC: 0 |
Results Config: HD6950, unlocked shaders (HD6970), 900 MHz GPU, 625 MHz memory, Win 7 64, i7 2600K @ 4.0 GHz, BOINC 6.12.34 Before: 0.82 CAL + app_info, 1 WU at a time, parameters: --process-priority 3 --gpu-disable-checkpointing Times: 53 - 54s GPU, 2.4s CPU Now: 1.02 OpenCL, no app_info, using AVX code path default: 56s GPU, 3.3s CPU setting refrseh rate to 10 Hz: 55s GPU, ~2.9s setting refrseh rate to 1* Hz: 55s GPU, ~2.9s That's about 3.5% slower. Previously the error rate was ~0.7%, so if these were fixed now (can't tell yet) overall throughput would be less than 3% lower. That's about 7800 credits/day less.. but running without an app_info if nicer. MrS (*) No worries, the IGP is driving my display ;) Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002 |
Send message Joined: 24 Apr 09 Posts: 13 Credit: 66,932,064 RAC: 0 |
BOINC 6.10.58 appears to be for Mac OS X. Is it safe to run in windows? |
Send message Joined: 1 Sep 08 Posts: 204 Credit: 219,354,537 RAC: 0 |
Been running 6.10.58 for a long time on Win before I switched to 6.12. MrS Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002 |
Send message Joined: 19 Feb 09 Posts: 32 Credit: 32,843,308 RAC: 0 |
For some reason the frequency setting in the M@H preferences is ignored. The GPU runs @ 99% no matter what the setting. I tried a target frequency in the app-info file with separation 1.02 and it caused the GPU frequency and power draw to be all over the place. Had to switch back to 0.82 to get things running smoothly again. Only thing I can figure is it must be some kind of a hardware thing on my setup. Strange I'm running now without app_info and the default frequency of 60Hz -> GPU load 82-85%. Before I removed the app_info I was running with "--gpu-target-frequency 40". I left it in when I switched from 0.82 to 1.00. According to the results it was used and run times where lower than now (with 60Hz). Maybe the varying GPUs react differently to the setting. Edit: A quick test changing the web preferences to 40Hz: result The setting change was recognized by the app -> GPU load 90-91%. Starfire |
Send message Joined: 24 Apr 09 Posts: 13 Credit: 66,932,064 RAC: 0 |
Thanks, I'll give it a try. |
Send message Joined: 1 Sep 08 Posts: 204 Credit: 219,354,537 RAC: 0 |
Why is your CPU load so low? I'm leaving one logical core free on my i7 and that nails GPU utilization at 99%. Otherwise performance suffered too much for my taste (0.82). MrS Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002 |
Send message Joined: 8 Feb 08 Posts: 261 Credit: 104,050,322 RAC: 0 |
Ok, it has been a long road switching from mw v0.82 with cat 11.3 to mw v1.02 with cat 12.1. Done several tests on the way. (The driver updates gave several hickups, needing manual cleanup after uninstall and cleaner program before installing the next version.) System is WinXP 32bit with HD5850 @775MHz (last tweaking of app settings only days ago) v0.82 CAL, cat 11.3: ~84.5s v0.82 CAL, cat 11.8: ~84.5s (reasonable higher system kernel times, less responsive) v0.82 CAL, cat 11.9: ~92.5s (system kernel times and response a little better) v0.82 CAL, cat 12.1: ~84.5s (system kernel times high, system response bad) v0.82 CAL, cat 12.1: ~85.3s (relaxed polling to make system responsive again) For mw v0.82 CAL, cat 12.1 is slightly slower than 11.3 but far better than 11.9. For collatz and moo I have the impression cat 12.1 is a little faster than 11.3 but no numbers to verify it. Cat 11.8 and 11.9 did _not_ impress there too. v1.02 OpenCL with default params showed high system kernel use, polling 0 dropped gpu use to 90%, polling 1 to ~83%. So I am using polling 0 with a far reduced wait factor for now. Still thinking there must be a wait factor + polling > 0 but couldn't find one without loosing bad on gpu load. Need to play more with the params to get a better understanding how they work together in this new version. The actual setting has to do for now. v1.02 OpenCL, cat 11.9: ~81.3s (cpu time includes system kernel times here!) v1.02 OpenCL, cat 12.1: ~80.9s (system kernel times hidden again) Cat 11.9 showed a high system kernel use, that was 'just' to get under control with setting command line params. With cat 12.1 and the same settings the system kernel times are roughly cut into half, so it gives a little more comfort related to system response. I think I got pretty close (within less than 1s/WU) to the best time possible before system response goes downhill again. |
Send message Joined: 25 Apr 10 Posts: 6 Credit: 31,580,349 RAC: 0 |
Along these lines: I discovered that while futzing around with Catalyst and boinc 7.08 that my online boinc account thinks I have 40 wu's in progress that I don't have in boinc manager. Pretty sure that's why I'm not getting wu's. Any solution besides waiting till 2/23 for the units to time out? |
Send message Joined: 14 Feb 09 Posts: 999 Credit: 74,932,619 RAC: 0 |
Along these lines: I discovered that while futzing around with Catalyst and boinc 7.08 that my online boinc account thinks I have 40 wu's in progress that I don't have in boinc manager. Pretty sure that's why I'm not getting wu's. Any solution besides waiting till 2/23 for the units to time out? Detach and reattach would be the quickest method. |
Send message Joined: 1 Sep 08 Posts: 204 Credit: 219,354,537 RAC: 0 |
My error rate is down to ~0.1% from a starting value of 0.7 - 0.8%. Good job here: The occasional validate errors from empty / truncated stderr should stop Edit: using the same command line parameters as with 0.82 I'm still seeing the same crunching speed as reported above. MrS Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002 |
Send message Joined: 29 Jul 08 Posts: 267 Credit: 188,848,188 RAC: 0 |
I've updated all of the separation applications to 1.00. For changes people might care about, Well Ok I see someone else has gone all Beta or maybe that should be Alpha, I'm getting 97-98% cpu use(295) and about 78%(285) while doing a gpu app. Help. I run Windows 7 x64b sp2 w/16GB ram, My driver is 275.50 x64(If I use an older gpu driver then Boinc doesn't see any usable gpu cards, 280.xx produce reboot bsods and that leaves 290.53, 291.51 causes problems someone said over at S@H and it's been reported to Nvidia), I have a GTX285 and a GTX295 in this PC and no other PCs. I use Boinc 6.10.58 x64. Frequency is set at 120, tried 60 that didn't seem to help or am I missing something? Maximum CPU % for graphics 0 ... 100: 0 |
Send message Joined: 8 May 10 Posts: 576 Credit: 15,979,383 RAC: 0 |
[quoteWell Ok I see someone else has gone all Beta or maybe that should be Alpha, I'm getting 97-98% cpu use(295) and about 78%(285) while doing a gpu app.[/quote]It's yet another Nvidia driver problem introduced in 270.something |
Send message Joined: 29 Jul 08 Posts: 267 Credit: 188,848,188 RAC: 0 |
Well Ok I see someone else has gone all Beta or maybe that should be Alpha, I'm getting 97-98% cpu use(295) and about 78%(285) while doing a gpu app.It's yet another Nvidia driver problem introduced in 270.something Sorry, but My experience with Open CL is all beta so far, so 27x.xx is a problem, would 290.53 do better? I won't touch 28x.xx as that only gave Me reboot Bsods. I've tried 266.58 with Boinc not seeing any cards. An AP Nvidia app over at S@H is only usable with 266.58 or earlier and using It with 27x.xx or newer caused driver crashes as It was only certified to with pre 27x.xx drivers so far and it's an Open CL app too. Otherwise CAL is all that will work for Me and I think You've possibly abandoned that, unless I'm wrong on that, Open CL seems to have some teething problems and the latest 295.51 beta driver is not good as it seems to have some serious problems I've read, I think Arky can confirm this. |
Send message Joined: 8 May 10 Posts: 576 Credit: 15,979,383 RAC: 0 |
I haven't tried 290 anything yet |
©2024 Astroinformatics Group