But one should not load the card to the max as this leads to slowdowns (reduced cache hit rate, swapping over PCI-Express) or even errors (if there is simply no memory left) and does not help the performance. Two or three (the default value) concurrent WUs are really the best to get maximum throughput on your GPU.

I've noticed that getting CPU tasks has gotten a more tedious (0 new tasks) of late -- as it was with the larger queues. I find often I have to pulse the server with manual update requests 4 to 8 times and sometimes more to refill the cache on workstations.

The thing is, with the relatively short work unit times of 15 to 25 minutes, the small cache readily can run dry. Originally the 6 unit per core wasn't too bad as I wasn't seeing the 0 new task monster and so it offset having the small cache size. But now, it is becoming a bit of a lose-lose scenario -- small cache AND the dreaded 0 new task problem. It isn't quite as bad as it was with the 8 and 12 task per CPU configurations of a couple of months ago, but it is definitely not as clean as it was 3 or 4 weeks ago.

How come seti dosn't get an active link, but all the others do?

Other than the fact that I hate SETI@Home?

I'm sure you must be the only one ;P

Yes, I am sure that I am about the only one that feels this way ... if you look at participation rates you would think that SaH is doing something that is actually important... but I just cannot see it ...

3. Can the cpu limit be increased again because with these ATI and optimised app the work is getting done quicker?

16.03.2009 09:50:24|Milkyway@home|Finished download of stars-82-v3.txt
16.03.2009 09:50:24|Milkyway@home|[error] MD5 check failed for stars-82-v3.txt
16.03.2009 09:50:24|Milkyway@home|[error] expected bf098d0519413d638ad3efb8f86a7137, got 3623beeb20a6a24c50b1d6669f66d55e
16.03.2009 09:50:24|Milkyway@home|[error] Checksum or signature error for stars-82-v3.txt


I get this on a new machine that I just attached to MW. And I get this on various stars.txt files.

4870X2, 0.19e, cat9.2*, works fine. (And for some reason I see ~60% load now, not ~50%.)

Some progress! Looks like we to have wait for Cat 9.3 to get 70% ;)

4870/1G, 0.19e, cat9.2*, no go. Consistently 0 GPU load following a VPU recover.

Strange. The top host at MW (belonging UL1, SETI.Germany) runs 0.19e on WinXP64 with Cat9.2 and even 3 HD4870 (albeit only the 512MB version overclocked to 810MHz, he had even 4 cards running in that box for a day). He reported no real problems.

Conspiracy theories again.....paranoia abounds!

Even paranoids have enemies ...

Just because I am paranoid does not mean you are not out to get me ...

By the way, you could put version 0.19e of the ATI GPU app on zslip. The new version plays a bit nicer with the OS trying to react to user input. The system response should be quite a bit improved.

I think CrossFireX wouldn't work...and if, I guess you would have the same issue as with the X2, but this time at 33% each...

I guess that is a driver issue or something in the CAL libraries. Officially the X2 cards are not supported by ATI's Stream SDK 1.3 I've used up to now.

OIE! after reading this thread you guys made me suspicious! I just double checked gpu-z catalyst center readings and I'm getting 90% load on both cards if under full load. If I lower the value to say one task only one card will get the task.

Win 7, catalyst 9.1 for vista, under compatibility.

I'm not sure if this has anything to do with it, but when win 7 was installing, it installed some serious sounding drivers which names escapes me for the pci-e.

I'd be interested to know if any one under vista is using both x2 cards, considering I jumped ships from xp to 7!

So under Win7 both GPUs of a X2 card are used with Cat 9.1? Can anyone confirm this?

Three seperate cards. They don't run at 100%, but somewhere between 70 - 90%, so if you're for the maximum total output you should run them completely single...
I think CrossFireX wouldn't work...and if, I guess you would have the same issue as with the X2, but this time at 33% each...

I guess that is a driver issue or something in the CAL libraries. Officially the X2 cards are not supported by ATI's Stream SDK 1.3 I've used up to now.

But the Stream SDK 1.4 (released yesterday) added official support for X2 cards. They have also put some more functionality into Brook, so it should be now possible to use multiple GPUs and to have a low CPU load without modifying the official brook runtime library (brook.dll). I added those features to the 1.3 version in a quick and dirty manner. While that hack works quite well with individual cards, there are obviously some qirks with crossfire and X2 configurations. Maybe it will work only with the upcoming Cat 9.3 driver, because that will come with the CAL libraries 1.4.xx which may be needed for that functionality. While Cat 9.2 is already compatible with the 1.4 SDK (opposed to Cat 8.12 and 9.1), it has only CAL 1.3.186, so some things may not work like intended.

I guess the next version (0.19f) will be based on the 1.4 SDK and will require Cat 9.2 or newer. If Travis agrees, I would also like to report the GPU time as WU time, not the CPU time. Otherwise, with the CPU load as low as it is with 0.19d and up, the task duration correction factor is easily falling below 0.02 which may cause some work fetch problems. Furthermore the GPU time is a much more representative value than the CPU time for the actual duration of the WU.

Well... Please make your complains here...

... is anyone running a pair of 4870s (non-crossfire) or a 4870X2 with the GPU App?

If so - any benefits?

P.

... is anyone running a pair of 4870s (non-crossfire) or a 4870X2 with the GPU App?

If so - any benefits?

P.

... is anyone running a pair of 4870s (non-crossfire) or a 4870X2 with the GPU App?

If so - any benefits?

P.