Welcome to MilkyWay@home

Posts by [TA]Assimilator1

1) Message boards : Number crunching : Updated GPU Requirements (Message 69852)
Posted 24 May 2020 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
Mickey,
I not understand. once you say you want to use both GPU and once you speak about overheat !!!
Milky use about one core from your CPU. So it can not produce overheat.
If you run at same time other CPU project, it is logical that overheat comes.

By the way, you not crunch on Milky already 5 days. Are you sure your question is on the right place ?
You speak about laptop. Is it your i7-3612QM under Win10 , IntelGraphic HD4000, who was the latest seen on 30 april !?
All seem to be unclear !
Best regards. Take care, stay at home

Is there a reason why no one has created an app for Intel graphics. Seems like there are a lot of them out there to take advantage of.

Very weak double precision performance, AFAIK.


Also heat, at the projects they do work at most people use their laptops and the heat can kill a laptop.


Lol, you say mikey's post isn't clear, neither is yours :p.

Btw running the GPU alone (along with 1 CPU core) can be enough to overheat the laptop, (from the GPU of course). Without specialist cooling, or a very well built laptop with good built in cooling anyway (if such a laptop exists).
2) Message boards : Number crunching : Updated GPU Requirements (Message 69847)
Posted 22 May 2020 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
Is there a reason why no one has created an app for Intel graphics. Seems like there are a lot of them out there to take advantage of.

Very weak double precision performance, AFAIK.
3) Message boards : Number crunching : New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new! (Message 69800)
Posted 10 May 2020 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
Nice one :)
And I've been on earth for some while :D, but thanks anyway ;)
4) Message boards : Number crunching : Updated GPU Requirements (Message 69799)
Posted 10 May 2020 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
Nice one :).

The AMD Radeon VII should work fine for MilkyWay GPU-Tasks with it´s high DP crunching power, but it´s not shown in the "Statistics" for GPU-models (neither Windows/Linux/Mac). Why?
It "should" be better than the Tahiti-Chip or do you have other informations/details?


It has a more powerful DP than Tahiti, even the HD 7990! https://www.anandtech.com/show/13923/the-amd-radeon-vii-review/3

[edit] Lol, didn't realise your post was 1yr old! Well, better late than never answer! ;)
5) Message boards : Number crunching : New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new! (Message 69640)
Posted 1 Apr 2020 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
From August last year ;)

Interesting information, some rapid times posted here with the Radeon VII & the Tesla V100! :D

Btw, as you guys have probably noticed, the WU credit/type has changed again, atm it seems the 227.51 & .53 are the most common.
This frequent change in WU type makes it impossible to collect stats over the longer term, so I am no longer posting stats tables.

But feel free to carry on posting valid task WU times along with it's exact credit to compare amongst yourselves :).
6) Message boards : Number crunching : New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new! (Message 68960)
Posted 8 Aug 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
And which credit WUs are those?? ;)
7) Message boards : Number crunching : Benchmark thread 1-2019 on - GPU & CPU times wanted for new WUs, old & new hardware! (Message 68950)
Posted 4 Aug 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
Assimilator1 -

Have you looked at the Milkyway main mage, Community, Statistics, and then either CPU Models or GPU Models? That shows the relative rating of all of the CPU and GPU models.

What are you trying to do that is not shown there?


What Bluestang said, and I've already covered that question in the op ;).

tic toc
Awesome card the Radeon VII! :D
The 5700 XT looks interesting too, I'd forgotten it existed until you mentioned it! ;), will have have to read up about it.

Jim 1348
I should look into under volting my RX 580, what do you use to test stability though?
Times between different 227.xx credit WUs can vary a fair bit between them.

Jstateson
x5690 3.47ghz 1@RX-580 0.44 second per credit STATS

Interesting stats site you use there, is the credit/s consistent over different credited WUs on the same machine? I have a feeling it doesn't, which would make those stats just a rough estimate unfortunately.
Btw, that site isn't going to the 2nd decimal point.

Btw, as you guys have probably noticed, the WU credit/type has changed again, atm it seems the 227.51 & .53 are the most common.
This frequent change in WU type makes it impossible to collect stats over the longer term, so I am no longer posting stats tables.

But feel free to carry on posting valid task WU times along with it's exact credit to compare amongst yourselves :).
And thanks for the useful stats posted here so far :).
8) Message boards : Number crunching : New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new! (Message 68949)
Posted 4 Aug 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
Interesting information, some rapid times posted here with the Radeon VII & the Tesla V100! :D

Btw, as you guys have probably noticed, the WU credit/type has changed again, atm it seems the 227.51 & .53 are the most common.
This frequent change in WU type makes it impossible to collect stats over the longer term, so I am no longer posting stats tables.

But feel free to carry on posting valid task WU times along with it's exact credit to compare amongst yourselves :).
9) Message boards : Number crunching : New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new! (Message 68163)
Posted 16 Feb 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
How are you limiting GPU time?

What credit WUs were those?
10) Message boards : Number crunching : New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new! (Message 68086)
Posted 31 Jan 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
Yea over in the AnandTech thread we've noticed the 227.62 WUs have gone & been largely replaced by 227.1x WUs :/, not sure how they compare to the former time wise yet.
Even so, 10s for a 227.1x WU seems bloody fast! :D
11) Message boards : Number crunching : Updated GPU Requirements (Message 68085)
Posted 31 Jan 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
Huh? Care to clarify? Do you mean the forum or the project? (not that it's really relevant to this thread).
12) Message boards : Number crunching : New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new! (Message 68018)
Posted 16 Jan 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
tictoc
Got it, thanks :).

hoppisaur
Ok I'm confused now lol, so previously your AMD A12-9800 APU @4.2 GHz managed a time of 120s, but now it's at 3.8 GHz & managing 101s? You mentioned you tweaked the bios, did you by chance increase the iGPU clock? (if that's possible?).
Sorry to hear about the dead m/brd :(.

vseven
What CPU does that machine have? (I'm not trawling through pages of this thread & I don't see you listed in the AnandTech thread).

************************************************************************

Btw, apologies folks, I meant to post a link here to the new benchmark thread in this forum & forgot! :o

After the 3 folks above have answered their questions here, I'd appreciate it if further benchmarks were posted to the new thread. Thanks :)

New benchmark thread here! - http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/forum_thread.php?id=4379
13) Message boards : Number crunching : New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new! (Message 68017)
Posted 16 Jan 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
where is link to your task times..? why you hide computer/s ?
or screenshot ..))
this benchmark thread is pure joke, one man show.
first tasks is always fast.. after it going slower..
I have also first 100 task about 20-25 sec. and after settle in 40-50, depend on cpu speed.


Beg your pardon!!?? If you think you can do a better job then go ahead & do it!
Yes it's a 1 man show because I started this off after seeing a benchmark thread in the Folding@home forums years ago, (& a MW one in the AnandTech DC forum).
So instead of spouting empty BS insults why don't you explain why this thread is a joke? You're taking the piss after the amount of time I've put into this thread!

And I assume you're talking to tictoc about hiding computers, he's entirely entitled to do so! Some people have genuine security reasons for doing so, e.g a person on my team lived in a very sparsely populated area of a small population country & he has many computers, getting his IP to get a rough location of where he is could be enough to find his house.

Links to tasks times aren't very useful as the results move on, links to individual tasks may be more useful but it would be a pain to look at every single task for every single time posted by every user.
Yes a screenshot would be useful, but not required as this is done on trust, if a time looks dodgy then we can inquire more about it, it could be an innocent mistake, like wrong credit WUs, faulty machine, maths error etc.
Theirs no need to take the accusatory tone that you are taking!

And no, the 1st task is not always the fastest, something odd about your machine it seems! Or you're badly explaining yourself, that sentence is badly written.
If you're getting task times varying from 20-25 to 40-50 then theirs something wrong with your setup, that is not a normal variation, even when running multiple WUs!

The average of 5 result tasks smooths out any slight variations that typically occur.
14) Message boards : Number crunching : Benchmark thread 1-2019 on - GPU & CPU times wanted for new WUs, old & new hardware! (Message 68005)
Posted 12 Jan 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
Firstly, please note I cannot edit this post 1hr after posting it, so for the latest table & any changes in benchmark requirements check out my latest posts here.
Or check out the AnandTech MW benchmark thread I created there, as I can update that indefinitely, AFAIK! And it includes links to the peoples original time posted.
It's link http://forums.anandtech.com/threads/milkyway-h-benchmark-thread-winter-2016-on-updated-1-2019-gpu-cpu-times-wanted-for-new-wus.2495905/.

I know lots of people running MW@H would like to know how their rigs compare to other peoples & would like to see how an upgrade could improve output.
Whilst you can look through the MW BOINC stats the info is rather vague, it doesn't give clock speeds or specific GPUs for example, nor does it account for anything that might add to WU times.

So please share your new scores for old & new GPUs & CPUs alike!

At some point in, or near the summer 2018 MW changed the WUs again, currently it seems that 227.62 & 203.92 WUs are the common ones, so here's a new table with the 227.62 credit WU. The app is still v1.46 for the GPU.
I've added a table for running concurrent WUs as many people do that, & Nvidia cards in particular benefit from doing that. Note though that times from doing that can be more erratic than running singularly.


Requirements for the benchmark :-


Average of at least 5 WU times (not cherry picked please! ;)).


A dedicated physical CPU core for each GPU (for optimal MW WU times). If only using BOINC for CPU tasks, & you have an HT capable CPU, then the only way to be certain of this (bar disabling HT) is to set the BOINC computing preferences (in advanced mode>options) so that you have 1 less CPU thread running then you do physical cores. Don't panic too much about lost CPU ppd, it doesn't take long to run MW GPU WUs ;) (see table).


Please state what speed & type CPU you have, as it now has a significant affect on GPU WU times!


Please state GPU clock speeds if overclocked (including factory overclocks) or state 'stock'.


Please only crunch 1 WU at a time per GPU, preferably. Or if you are running concurrent WUs, state how many & I'll put your time in the 2nd GPU table.


For CPU times please state whether Hyper Threading (or equivalent) is enabled or not
, times for both states welcomed.


It would also be useful if you could state your BOINC & driver version, & OS, incase it does make any difference.

If you find your WU times are fluctuating more than a couple of % for singly run WUs then use GPU-Z or your grx card driver tools to check that your GPU is able to hit near 100% load (although I'm not sure that Nvidia cards can hit that for MW). Note that even when crunching normally, the GPU load will be on/off on this current MW app, so the GPU load graph should look like a series of blocks. Just looking at my RX 580, it was going to zero load roughly every 27s.

Also check using task manager that your CPU does actually have the spare load to give to MW (& btw, GPU crunching won't show up in the TM).


Current GPU statistics ~ Average Run Time to Complete 1 MW v1.46 227.62 credit WU :-


HD 7970, GPU 1200 MHz(!) (CPU, Xeon E5 ES 10 core @2.7 GHz (ht off) ...... 38.2s .... tictoc

R9 290, GPU 1000 MHz, (CPU, ???....................) ....................................... 70.9s .... tictoc

HD 7870 XT 3GB(DS), GPU 925 MHz (CPU, C2 Q9550 @3.58 GHz) ............... 73.2s .... Assimilator1

RX 580 GB, GPU 1350 MHz (CPU, i7 4930k @4.1 GHz) .............................. 97.3s .... Assimilator1

RTX 2080 Ti, GPU ???? MHz (CPU, i7-8700K @4.7 GHz no AVX) ............... 110.6s .... IEC

R7 iGPU on an AMD A12-9800 APU (CPU, 4.2 GHz) ................................. 120.3s .... hoppisaur

RX 570, GPU stock (CPU, i7-4771 ?? GHz) ............................................. 121s ....... Jim1348


Current GPU statistics ~ Average Run Time to Complete multiple MW v1.46 227.62 credit WU :-


RX 570, GPU stock (CPU, i7-4771 ?? GHz) (2 concurrent WUs) .............. 194s ....... Jim1348


Current CPU statistics ~ Average Run Time to Complete 1 MW v1.74 227.62 credit WU :-


Previous benchmark thread here http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/forum_thread.php?id=3551&sort_style=6&start=0

************************************************************

Mods
Please could you stickify this one & un-stick the other one?
Thanks :)
15) Message boards : Number crunching : New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new! (Message 68004)
Posted 12 Jan 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
New benchmark table posted in the AnandTech thread here http://forums.anandtech.com/threads/milkyway-h-benchmark-thread-winter-2016-on-updated-1-2019-gpu-cpu-times-wanted-for-new-wus.2495905/ (more up to date, as I can actually update posts there beyond 1hr!).

Mods
Could you de-stickfy this thread please?


I will post a new thread soon....
16) Message boards : Number crunching : New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new! (Message 68003)
Posted 12 Jan 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
Here's some of the new 227.62 tasks for your database. All times are with one task running per GPU.

OS: Arch Linux kernel 4.19
BOINC Version: 7.12.1
GPU Driver: Catalyst 15.12
CPU: Intel Xeon E5 ES 10 core @ 2700MHz (ht off)

GPU: AMD HD7970 @ 1200/1400
10 WU avg run-time - 38.23s

GPU: AMD R9 290 @ 1000/1300
10 WU avg run-time - 70.94s


Hi, added times to the AnandTech benchmark thread, but are both those GPUs in the same machine? If not what CPUs are with which GPUs?

It is trending slower today as I turned off motherboard core boost (3.8 -> 4.2) to see if I am hitting a wall with what the motherboard is able to deliver. 10WU avg is now 135.06. I think my powersupply isn't up to the task of boosting the cpu while the iGPU units are being used. Or it could just be driver or mobo related. I am going to try other hardware as it was frozen this morning (locked up).

Yes, agreed, I think the proximity of the gpu and cpu units is advantageous in an otherwise mediocre chip. Or maybe they share the cache?


Is the 135s time with the CPU at 3.8 GHz with 227.62 WUs? (I'll add that time too if so).

Will link the AT thread again in a moment.
17) Message boards : Number crunching : New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new! (Message 67986)
Posted 5 Jan 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
A link to valid tasks is no use for my table, I need a calculated average of 5 benchmark WUS :), also you say the last 5 averaged were 121s, but looking at your current page (for 227.62 credit) WUs I'd say the average is about 193-194s, something on your rig change?

[edit]
Just seen your inbetween reply ;).
I've just remembered this thread has been stickified, I'll have to get this one unstuck & the new one stickified once we've received further confirmation on the 227.62 WUs.

OK, I think you have it straight now. The 121 seconds was the average of the last 5 (running 1x), but I then increased it to 2x. It seems to be mildly helpful, with a proportionate increase in output for a corresponding increase in power.

I am interested to see how the RX 570 does in comparison to the other cards; I am mainly interested in efficiency though, rather than just output.


Hi Jim
I am (mainly) after singly run WUs, so your 1st time was the right one :), I just wanted to clarify what changed the times. But yea running 2 (& more on some cards)at once certainly can improve throughput.
(Btw, CPUs are much slower at MW than GPUs, so that's not what's giving hoppisaur APU a good score IMO).

Will add yours, hoppisaur & tictocs time when I post the new thread (at some point! ;)).

hoppisaur
I see the R7 is a 3rd gen GCN architecture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_Core_Next#third, which is what the Radeon R9 285 is based on, that's why it's got fairly decent MW times :).
18) Message boards : Number crunching : Updated GPU Requirements (Message 67981)
Posted 3 Jan 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
Matthew

Any chance of an updated table for what old & new GPUs work with the new apps?
19) Message boards : Number crunching : New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new! (Message 67938)
Posted 11 Dec 2018 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
I just started with an RX 570 running at the stock clock of 1244 MHz under Win7 64-bit, and supported by two cores of an i7-4771. And I am using the latest AMD drivers (Radeon 18.9.3) if it matters any more.

My last five work units averaged 121 seconds.
https://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/results.php?hostid=737912&offset=0&show_names=0&state=4&appid=

I was surprised at how well it did compared to my GTX 1070, which ran about twice as long as I recall. But the really significant part is how cool it runs by under-volting to 0.900 volts. I used the Phantom utility, as it is an Asrock card, and it is now at 50 C. Also, GPU-Z shows the GPU power at 50 watts, but that is not the whole card. My UPS shows a difference of 65 watts between running and not running, or considering the 90% efficiency of the power supply, 58.5 watts to the card. That is also lower than the GTX 1070.

It has been a while since I had an AMD card, and if you set them right, they run rather well even if the DP performance is not what it used to be.


A link to valid tasks is no use for my table, I need a calculated average of 5 benchmark WUS :), also you say the last 5 averaged were 121s, but looking at your current page (for 227.62 credit) WUs I'd say the average is about 193-194s, something on your rig change?

[edit]
Just seen your inbetween reply ;).
I've just remembered this thread has been stickified, I'll have to get this one unstuck & the new one stickified once we've received further confirmation on the 227.62 WUs.
20) Message boards : Number crunching : All Milkyway@Home 1.02 tasks ending in computation error on HD6950. (Message 67936)
Posted 11 Dec 2018 by [TA]Assimilator1
Post:
You're sure grx card isn't over-heating? Btw this thread is talking about HD6950 issues :p.


Next 20

©2020 Astroinformatics Group