It contains around 150 entrys at the moment and I am also including different power states (some older GCN Cards can be set to 50% power target, only zipping 50 watts instead of almost 200 while only loosing 40% compute power...). Stuff like DX Feature Level will also be included, Vulkan versions, etc... Its in the making and will be more complete over time...
In the past, I have found myself manualy browsing techpowerup etc.. to look stuff up like this - so I finally decided to put everything I ever needed int a big spreadsheet :)

The work is not lost, I use it for other stuff, too.

For anyone who wants to play around with the GPU code, the current GPU code for Nbody can be found at the sheilsGPU branch (https://github.com/Milkyway-at-home/milkywayathome_client/tree/sheilsGPU). It is out of date compared to the CPU version of Nbody though, so you will need to compare against master to see what changes have been made since then.

If you are able to produce a meaningful speedup for widely-used GPU architecture (and share the source code), we would be happy to consider implementing any upgrades you come up with! It is hard to make speedups for generic GPU architecture (which is what we would prefer to do as a BOINC project), but if most people are using a specific type of GPU that can get 50-100x speed up compared to the CPU code, we would definitely be interested.

Eh, have this computer for over 8 years now, been meaning to upgrade for about half that time (not counting the fact that I initially only meant to use it for one year, then turn it into my father's work computer and get a much better one right away). Budget for quite what I'd want never was there, but there's enough for something decent, and has been for 2-3 years now, but the problem is the OS. I will not use any Windows past 7, period, and my two attempts on Linux so far made me say I can't do that. Not because of Linux itself, but because of some other software that I've been using for decades not having Linux versions, and for the lack of the kind of security software of the kind I use on Windows, in particular application-level outbound firewall that prompts about everything not matching rules (and don't say it's not needed on Linux, I want it for control and monitoring of the system, not really for safety in itself - I mean, if I'd be so concerned about safety in itself I wouldn't still be on Win 7 long after EoS now). So sticking to this to be able to stick to what seems to be the last OS I'll ever feel comfortable using for however long it'll be until it'll fall apart or basically nothing will still work on it anymore I guess. Budget has too little to do with it.

You'd be surprised what Windows 7 will run on. And what about a newer windows with the interface returned to the good old 7? That's what I do. I get the benefits of the new Windows without the screwed up interface.

P.S. you misspelt your name, it's "Cavalry" :-)

It contains around 150 entrys at the moment

Nice to know I'm not the only one to spend hours making a spreadsheet! I've almost always bought 280X cards to run Milkyway, but now I'll sort by the SP column instead. Also considering faster ones instead of taking up lots of space with many slower ones, and creating far too much heat.

You'd be surprised what Windows 7 will run on. And what about a newer windows with the interface returned to the good old 7? That's what I do. I get the benefits of the new Windows without the screwed up interface.

P.S. you misspelt your name, it's "Cavalry" :-)

The interface is the one manageable thing, forced updates is the main problem, system possibly rebooting on its own, settings that may change without your consent, quick end of support without applying major updates that almost entail to a new version, all the additional things that can be running, resource use... Fail to see any benefits that'd hold a candle to the mountain of downsides.

Misspelled it back in the '90s when I first got on line, still use that e-mail, and kept it like that ever since. More likely to be free too.

The interface is the one manageable thing, forced updates is the main problem, system possibly rebooting on its own,

I disabled that. You can mess about with services and deny it. I've not accepted that gross stupidity since it rebooted and didn't save an open Word document!! I lost hours of work!

settings that may change without your consent,

Never seen that happen.

quick end of support without applying major updates that almost entail to a new version,

But you're using 7, which doesn't have support.

all the additional things that can be running, resource use... Fail to see any benefits that'd hold a candle to the mountain of downsides.

No crashes. Doesn't actually run slower than 7. Boots astronomically faster.

Misspelled it back in the '90s when I first got on line, still use that e-mail, and kept it like that ever since. More likely to be free too.

Email I can understand, but you can edit your name in here.

RIP Separation. I'll switch over to Nbody CPU using the app-config posted earlier in the thread on my dedicated cruncher, hopefully with it being leashed so it will behave itself and not try to murder other tasks or programs.

RIP Separation. I'll switch over to Nbody CPU using the app-config posted earlier in the thread on my dedicated cruncher, hopefully with it being leashed so it will behave itself and not try to murder other tasks or programs.

I use different app configs for each machine. I've got computers ranging from 4 to 24 cores. Nbody can be told to go up to 16 cores. And you can tell Boinc scheduler the average CPU usage. For example on a 24 core machine, the default could only fit one in, so I tell it the average is 12 and it runs two at once. If there's a GPU doing something else and that bogs it down too much, I can lower the actual cores Nbody is told to use.

For example from a Ryzen 9 3900X (24 core) with no GPU:

<app_config>
    <app_version>
        <app_name>milkyway_nbody</app_name>
        <plan_class>mt</plan_class>
        <cmdline>--nthreads 16</cmdline>  ****Tells the program how many cores to try to use.  It doesn't always achieve that, and the first bit uses only 1 core.****
        <avg_ncpus>7.670000</avg_ncpus>  ****Tells Boinc how many it uses on average, so how many of them to run at once (and fit in something from other projects with different core usage).  In this case, it runs three Nbodys, and a single core program from another project at once (because 3 x 7.67 is 23, leaving 1 core for something else).  That makes it get to 100% CPU usage.****
        <ngpus>0.000000</ngpus>
    </app_version>
    <project_max_concurrent>0</project_max_concurrent>
    <report_results_immediately>0</report_results_immediately>
</app_config>

I disagree - since it was not possible to run both on the same computer. So the Nbodys being done were on non-GPU machines.

That's not true at all.

Because when you try to run n-body and separation gpu it also downloads separation cpu

Because when you try to run n-body and separation gpu it also downloads separation cpu

That's why you setup multiple instances on the same computer. One for N-Body and one for Separation (GPU). Running both projects on the same computer is not only possible, but very easy to do.

That's why you setup multiple instances on the same computer. One for N-Body and one for Separation (GPU). Running both projects on the same computer is not only possible, but very easy to do.

Running multiple instances is pot luck if it works. It's not for the faint hearted. I did it once to make only one half of Boinc pause for another program (the idiot Boinc programmers don't realize we might want to pause the CPU and leave the GPU running), but it wasted a whole afternoon fiddling about. I copied the command line (a 20th century thing) exactly from another user, but some of my computers decided they just didn't want to start a second instance.

I doubt many people were doing that.

That's why you setup multiple instances on the same computer. One for N-Body and one for Separation (GPU). Running both projects on the same computer is not only possible, but very easy to do.

Running multiple instances is pot luck if it works. It's not for the faint hearted. I did it once to make only one half of Boinc pause for another program (the idiot Boinc programmers don't realize we might want to pause the CPU and leave the GPU running), but it wasted a whole afternoon fiddling about. I copied the command line (a 20th century thing) exactly from another user, but some of my computers decided they just didn't want to start a second instance.

I doubt many people were doing that.

Yep. I do a fair bit of crunching but have never bothered with more than 1 BOINC running.
Too complicated for me and I don't have the time to manage it across multiple pc's.

---

Yep. I do a fair bit of crunching but have never bothered with more than 1 BOINC running.
Too complicated for me and I don't have the time to manage it across multiple pc's.

I have 8 PCs and a phone, and manage them with Boinctasks. Doing it with the pathetic Boinc manager would be ridiculous. Once you get a second instance running, and Boinctasks connected to it, you can manage it ok. But persuading Boinc to let itself run twice is very difficult indeed. Even if I do precisely the same on two machines, one works and one doesn't, it's not logical at all.

That reminds me, I need to dismantle monitor number 5, I suspect worn out capacitors have reduced capacitance, and I have a new meter to play with which will tell me. It kept turning off a lot, now it's given up powering on altogether. Boinctasks needs three monitors above each other so I can see all the tasks at once!

Running multiple instances is pot luck if it works. It's not for the faint hearted. I did it once to make only one half of Boinc pause for another program (the idiot Boinc programmers don't realize we might want to pause the CPU and leave the GPU running), but it wasted a whole afternoon fiddling about. I copied the command line (a 20th century thing) exactly from another user, but some of my computers decided they just didn't want to start a second instance.

I doubt many people were doing that.

Just because you can't get it to work reliably doesn't mean it's not reliable. I run multiple instances on all of my hosts and on some hosts more than just two, regularly.

Simply because the built-in BOINC scheduler sucks. So I micro manage my hosts so they do want I want them to do and not what BOINC thinks they should do.

You are right that most people running N-Body probably isn't doing so on multiple instances, but that's not what I was saying.

Yep. I do a fair bit of crunching but have never bothered with more than 1 BOINC running.
Too complicated for me and I don't have the time to manage it across multiple pc's.

For most cases it's not needed. However, as someone else mentioned their are tools for easily managing multiple computers on a single computer. Whether it's the BOINCTasks or a BOINC Account Manager such as BAM! or custom scripts/software that does this for you. There are plenty of ways to control multiple computers (and instances) on a single computer.

I only have CPU anyway so not a biggy for me, however I have now lost another project that runs on 32 bit windows which is really starting to limit options.

However my 64 bit Linux machines can easily do N-Body work,
it is just a pity that the credit is so low when 8 cores at a time are locked up on one work unit,
and often give less points that a single Separation work unit would, and it uses just the one core.

Conan

---

Just because you can't get it to work reliably doesn't mean it's not reliable. I run multiple instances on all of my hosts and on some hosts more than just two, regularly.

You sound like a Linux geeky person and probably get along with command lines. I don't.

Simply because the built-in BOINC scheduler sucks.

I can agree with that, sometimes I watch it and try to guess what it's going to do next, and it always does something stupid. It always misses deadlines. Complain to the authors and they either blame the projects or say it would be stupid to schedule a different way. Or they say the project's running an old version of Boinc server, like Einstein, but they're doing that because they modified it since it used to be even worse, so to upgrade they'd have to adjust all sorts.

You are right that most people running N-Body probably isn't doing so on multiple instances, but that's not what I was saying.

You originally brought it up when I said "I disagree - since it was not possible to run both on the same computer. So the Nbodys being done were on non-GPU machines." - I'm referring here to most people not running multiple Boincs, so most GPU machines were not running Nbody, and they now will be, while the GPU is sent off to Einstein.

For most cases it's not needed. However, as someone else mentioned their are tools for easily managing multiple computers on a single computer. Whether it's the BOINCTasks or a BOINC Account Manager such as BAM! or custom scripts/software that does this for you. There are plenty of ways to control multiple computers (and instances) on a single computer.

I can't think of a way to manage several computers with just the basic Boinc. Hell I wouldn't manage a single computer with it. It doesn't even group queued tasks! It doesn't colour code tasks! It's unusable!

You sound like a Linux geeky person and probably get along with command lines. I don't.

Linux or Windows, doesn't matter. Both are extremely easy and straight forward. The command line does help, but just creating a .bat file in Windows to start the instance is easy enough and no command line stuff required. Just notepad and double clicking the file.

I can agree with that, sometimes I watch it and try to guess what it's going to do next, and it always does something stupid. It always misses deadlines. Complain to the authors and they either blame the projects or say it would be stupid to schedule a different way. Or they say the project's running an old version of Boinc server, like Einstein, but they're doing that because they modified it since it used to be even worse, so to upgrade they'd have to adjust all sorts.

I never have issues with missing deadlines due to the default scheduler, but I also don't ever over commit work the computer can do.

You originally brought it up when I said "I disagree - since it was not possible to run both on the same computer. So the Nbodys being done were on non-GPU machines." - I'm referring here to most people not running multiple Boincs, so most GPU machines were not running Nbody, and they now will be, while the GPU is sent off to Einstein.

I know what I quoted and I didn't bother to snip out the specific part I was referring to. I thought most people would understand that I was referring to not being able to run NBody and Separation (GPU Only, No CPU) on the same host (computer) is fairly easy to achieve and not impossible.

I can't think of a way to manage several computers with just the basic Boinc. Hell I wouldn't manage a single computer with it. It doesn't even group queued tasks! It doesn't colour code tasks! It's unusable!

The BOINC Manager is capable of connecting to many hosts. It just does it one at a time and/or you'd have to open multiple BOINC manager windows at once. Its a better solution for Windows when you only have one computer to manage. Although for Linux I prefer boinctui if I only need to manage one host.

I use BOINCTasks mostly on my main gaming rig though where I control everything.

The problem is as the datasets get bigger there's no room in memory for the numbers required in a 32bit app and still keep it anything close to efficient. Sure they can make one but if it takes 10 days to run on a 32 bit machine and only 1 day on a 64 bit machine that's not really helping anyone. I don't know your budget but Dell often has laptops on sale, I got a gently used one for about $300US that had an I7 cpu in it with 32gb of ram and a gpu that works fine but isn't powerful enough to crunch with, I don't use it for Boinc anyway so it was a great find for me.

2nd hand computers are most cheaply bought privately from Gumtree, Ebay, etc. Sometimes even Freecycle! I have a 4 core laptop from freecycle. The disk was broken, so I shoved in a 2nd hand SSD, and upgraded the RAM to the 8GB max. It runs 64 bit stuff nicely.

Eh, have this computer for over 8 years now, been meaning to upgrade for about half that time (not counting the fact that I initially only meant to use it for one year, then turn it into my father's work computer and get a much better one right away). Budget for quite what I'd want never was there, but there's enough for something decent, and has been for 2-3 years now, but the problem is the OS. I will not use any Windows past 7, period, and my two attempts on Linux so far made me say I can't do that. Not because of Linux itself, but because of some other software that I've been using for decades not having Linux versions, and for the lack of the kind of security software of the kind I use on Windows, in particular application-level outbound firewall that prompts about everything not matching rules (and don't say it's not needed on Linux, I want it for control and monitoring of the system, not really for safety in itself - I mean, if I'd be so concerned about safety in itself I wouldn't still be on Win 7 long after EoS now). So sticking to this to be able to stick to what seems to be the last OS I'll ever feel comfortable using for however long it'll be until it'll fall apart or basically nothing will still work on it anymore I guess. Budget has too little to do with it.

Thanks for the info about Asteroids. Will need to attach to it soon and check it out.

And sorry for the off topic. Should probably end this discussion here.

At some point Windows 7 will be deprecated from the Boinc Projects just like Windows XP was not long ago on most of them. I'm not saying it's imminent, I have zero inside info on that, just that it will happen at some point.

And I thought your name was pronounced cav-a-lary not a misspelling of calvary

Linux or Windows, doesn't matter. Both are extremely easy and straight forward. The command line does help, but just creating a .bat file in Windows to start the instance is easy enough and no command line stuff required. Just notepad and double clicking the file.

The bat file runs the command line. And it randomly doesn't bother working.

I never have issues with missing deadlines due to the default scheduler, but I also don't ever over commit work the computer can do.

Neither do I, I have a 1 day deadline, but several projects. It always ends up repeatedly downloading stuff for a project with more debt, and leaving the other with just enough time to run, except it always miscalculates the time. I told them it would be better to leave some leeway but they didn't understand.

I know what I quoted and I didn't bother to snip out the specific part I was referring to. I thought most people would understand that I was referring to not being able to run NBody and Separation (GPU Only, No CPU) on the same host (computer) is fairly easy to achieve and not impossible.

But I only brought that up to do with what most people are doing.

The BOINC Manager is capable of connecting to many hosts. It just does it one at a time and/or you'd have to open multiple BOINC manager windows at once.

So useless.

Its a better solution for Windows when you only have one computer to manage.

No it isn't. Boinctasks is a much better interface.

I use BOINCTasks mostly on my main gaming rig though where I control everything.

Same here. The house computer. The other stuff is in the garage along with two very loud Amazon parrots. They like the tropical temperatures.