Posts by Edboard
|
1)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Hardware Poll
(Message 38456)
Posted 9 Apr 2010 by  Edboard
Post: Gygabyte X48 DS4 Asus P5Q PRO |
|
2)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Marked as Invalid? (Part 2)
(Message 38064)
Posted 5 Apr 2010 by Edboard
Post: Today (April 5) I have counted all units done and I have aprox. 1/3 marked as invalid (160 invalid and 340 valids). All of them has lasted normal time to be processed. I have stopped to crunch in Milky for a while. |
|
3)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Website slow for anyone else?
(Message 32541)
Posted 18 Oct 2009 by Edboard
Post: you can use the "Scheduled Tasks" in Windows to do the same You can, for example, schedule a task to execute a .bat file (in the specified directory) like this one (Win Vista) every five minutes: c: cd "c:\Program Files\Boinc" "c:\Program Files\Boinc\boinccmd.exe" --project http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/ update |
|
4)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
new around! need help setting up things.
(Message 32333)
Posted 12 Oct 2009 by Edboard
Post: ···is it normal that running both wu on my 4850 i get a return time of around 1m55sec? should it not be lower?·· Normal. You are doing 1 unit every 57.5 seconds (two units 1m 55s) |
|
5)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
CUDA Application Updated
(Message 31613)
Posted 27 Sep 2009 by Edboard
Post: It's exactly the same to say: 100% faster Twice faster 100% increase in speed I chose the first because it was not exactly 100%. May be it would be more clear if I had choosen the third one: 95% increase in speed or I had said: "almost twice faster" |
|
6)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
CUDA Application Updated
(Message 31610)
Posted 27 Sep 2009 by Edboard
Post: I said "faster", so I'm comparing "speeds" not "durations". In other words, I'm comparing inverses of time (1/t) not times (t). |
|
7)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
CUDA Application Updated
(Message 31564)
Posted 26 Sep 2009 by Edboard
Post: I have crunched some units with the new app. and they last 3:20 (200 seconds) with a stock GTX280. This graphic card took 6:30 (390 seconds) with the previous one. Impressive: 95% faster than before. |
|
8)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
PCI Express x16, x8, x4
(Message 26733)
Posted 30 Jun 2009 by Edboard
Post: Now I'm crunching with two ATI4850 in a PC with 2 PCIe x8 and I'm getting approximately twice the credit that I got before, when I was crunching with one ATI4850 in a PC with one PCIe x16. |
|
9)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
How can I crunch on both GPUs in a ATI4870x2?
(Message 25751)
Posted 17 Jun 2009 by Edboard
Post: Now I would like to know whether I shall get approximately the same points/day with a 4870x2 than two 4870 single cards? |
|
10)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
How can I crunch on both GPUs in a ATI4870x2?
(Message 25061)
Posted 11 Jun 2009 by Edboard
Post: Its possible to crunsh n-WUs on y-GPUs, Gipsel's app 0.19f:··· If I only have a 4870x2 graphic card can I crunch 4 WUs at a time (two in each GPU) with n2 and the internal Xfire active? BUT: I know that with Nvidia card and CUDA the internal SLI of a dual graphic card MUST BE innactive. |
|
11)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
How can I crunch on both GPUs in a ATI4870x2?
(Message 24922)
Posted 11 Jun 2009 by Edboard
Post: I would like to know if it is already possible to use both GPUs of a dual 4870 ATI graphic card or still not. |
|
12)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
ATI Crunchers dominate top 100 list
(Message 15667)
Posted 16 Mar 2009 by Edboard
Post: It is curious, but all the people that process in GpuGrid have their Credits doubled, since they are annoted twice (as GPUGRID and PS3GRID). |
|
13)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
No work
(Message 13453)
Posted 1 Mar 2009 by Edboard
Post: Since yesterday at night I have been receiving units continuosly. My PC is non-stop crunching more than 11 hours ago ... |
|
14)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
No work
(Message 13099)
Posted 27 Feb 2009 by Edboard
Post: Welcome the uprise from 12 to 20 units in queue but for GPU-crunchers it would be necessary that it be raised to 1000 or more.... With 20 units/core in a dual core PC means reserve of 4 minutes of work.... |
|
15)
Message boards :
Application Code Discussion :
The GPU ripple
(Message 12620)
Posted 23 Feb 2009 by Edboard
Post: Thanks a lot. That guy said to me that it had tested the application unger Vista 32 and under XP 32 and they didn't work. As you have confirmed me that it works under XP pro 32, may be he is wrong (possibly with the drivers). I'll tell him. I have just got the drivers through your post about zslip (doing the same but for vista) |
|
16)
Message boards :
Application Code Discussion :
The GPU ripple
(Message 12615)
Posted 23 Feb 2009 by Edboard
Post: This PC has a small box but it has accepted previosly a gtx280 (that now is broken and returned to the shop). ¿Do you know if this appl. works with Windows Vista 32 bits? |
|
17)
Message boards :
Application Code Discussion :
The GPU ripple
(Message 12609)
Posted 23 Feb 2009 by Edboard
Post: It will fit, sure. When I say "the box" I refer to the graphic card box. After I have bought it I have been told that this application doesn't work under Vista 32 bits and if it is so, It would be easily for me to return the card with an unbroken box. |
|
18)
Message boards :
Application Code Discussion :
GPU app teaser
(Message 12606)
Posted 23 Feb 2009 by Edboard
Post: Please, I need to know if the Win32/ATI/0.19 application will work under Vista 32 bits O.S. I have a just-bought hd4850 and I need to know it before I open the box breaking the seals |
|
19)
Message boards :
Application Code Discussion :
The GPU ripple
(Message 12599)
Posted 23 Feb 2009 by Edboard
Post: Please, I need to know if the Win32/ATI/0.19 application will work under Vista 32 bits O.S. I have a just-bought hd4850 and I need to know it before I open the box... |
|
20)
Message boards :
Application Code Discussion :
GPU app teaser
(Message 12360)
Posted 22 Feb 2009 by Edboard
Post: I would like to know how much more productive it is expected to be a HD4870 versus a HD4850. |
©2024 Astroinformatics Group