Welcome to MilkyWay@home

Posts by CTAPbIi

1) Message boards : Number crunching : Host with WAY too many tasks. (Message 45869)
Posted 29 Jan 2011 by CTAPbIi
Post:
No comments on my posts? Looks I'm rite :-)
2) Message boards : Number crunching : Host with WAY too many tasks. (Message 45846)
Posted 28 Jan 2011 by CTAPbIi
Post:
banditwolf
I believe it went from 3 to 8 days so that Boinc wouldn't keep running them in High priority mode. Everyone was getting tired of MW always running and not letting other projects have a go.


In this case why are talking about "6 WUs per CPU core", cache and "how important to return WUs ASAP" at all? And why the project bothering with trying to catch some1 playing "games" instead of just increasing cache?

And I still can not get what's going on and where's the logic (if any) behind that...
3) Message boards : Number crunching : Host with WAY too many tasks. (Message 45844)
Posted 28 Jan 2011 by CTAPbIi
Post:
Astromancer.
OMG, you can read in my mind :-)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if deadline is EIGHT days that means that the project can wait 8 days to complete WU. Am I rite?

If so, where's the logic? How come, that project missing 8 days to make WUs better???

If WUs should come back ASAP in order to impact new WUs generating and that is crucial for the project, I'll do the following if I'm in Travis shoes:
1. Make deadline literally 1 day
2. Due to item 1 - stop crunching on CPUs at all or make that WUs 10-15 minutes long
3. Increase cache up to, let's say, 100 WUs in progress per video card. In the perfect world, cache should depends on cards' GFLOPS in BOINC manager

I understand that it's might be brutal towards CPU crunchers, but the project should go ahead. So, just say "yes" or "no" - does items above make sense?

I hold 6970 in my hands when it just been released. On stock clocks it takes 70 secs per WU and 55-56secs @950MHz (max OCing at that time - due to CCC limitations). I do believe that 6970 can easily hit 1000 and with voltage tweaking - at least 1050 and even more. That means that it can 45secs per WU. So to crunch 100Wus takes 4500-4700secs (cache - 1h15min-1h20min). Not that much, but way better then we've got now, rite?

In this case we keeping project moving ahead way faster (1 day delay rather then 8 days) and it's huge improvement against what we've got now in terms of cache. Faster cards crunching more, we depending way less on slower CPU which really causing project delay - what's the prblem?

Why that pretty evident steps are not implemented yet? Good questions, but I can not answer that...
4) Message boards : Number crunching : Host with WAY too many tasks. (Message 45840)
Posted 27 Jan 2011 by CTAPbIi
Post:
Bigred,

I really appreciate your time and that exception you did for me :-) But let's talk about the limits.

You might be kidding me :-) If I'm putting three 6970s in one rig with dual core CPU the buffer is somewhat 3 minutes. That's is, man. And even if I'll get 8 core CPU, the still is literally nothing - 12 minutes only. You think that's enough? I don't think so. And on top of that we all know how often MW servers are down. This what I'm talking about - give us at least some reliability. I'm not asking for too much, right?

Then, sure I can invest some money in new platform, but that does not solve the problem - remember, the buffer is 12min only. Let's make a simple math - $350 for i7-2600K (8 cores), $200-250 for good mobo and $150 for RAM, which gives us $700 approx. And will I get more in terms of crunching for MW? The answer is - NO. So, why I should do that? In my understanding it makes way more sense to spend this money wisely and to get two more cards and crunch more. Right? I do believe that this is a right way to go.

You did not get me. All I'm talking about is to be smart and make crunchers' life easier. On the same dual core CPU in PrimeGrid I'm getting 200WU (100WUs per each card) and there is no necessity to waste money in platform upgrade. And due to this savings I can buy two more cards and crunch more. This what I'm talking about - change that stupid rule and send WUs based on video cards qty, but not CPU cores qty, exactly like PrimeGrid does. And in order to maintain proper work flow reduce deadline - just 1-2 days should be enough. Why MW can not do so?

If you would setup a backup project you might hot get as much credit but you would keep your computers working.

Trust me, I know how to use BAM! ans setup backup project

you can always move them to another project but I doubt if you will.

If you look in the 1st line of my signature, you'll see that I already did that :-) All I wanna do is to help Travis and the project to understand that there are better ways to move forward. If this will continue like that, MW will continue to loose crunchers. Just check formula-BOINC.org to understand what I'm talking about.

Apart of AMD's epic failure with 69xx, I was fed up with my rigs babysitting and that is why I moved to another project.
5) Message boards : News : bypassing server set cache limits (Message 45805)
Posted 26 Jan 2011 by CTAPbIi
Post:
Travis,
What do you think about this post:
http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/forum_thread.php?id=2170&nowrap=true#45787
6) Message boards : Number crunching : Host with WAY too many tasks. (Message 45787)
Posted 26 Jan 2011 by CTAPbIi
Post:
we are taking on a zero-tolerance policy for ppl who manipulate the limits. I guarantee we'll address them.

that's awesome...

you prefer to fight against repercussions and users instead of reasons causing this. I think it's pretty evident that rule of thumb "6 WUs per CPU core" while crunching on video cards is not working for quiet time already.

Let's take me as an example. I had dual core rig with 4890 and 4870. I used to get 12 WUs which gives 15 min buffer only. My plan was to get three 6970 which are three time faster then 48x0. So in this case the buffer is somewhat THREE minutes only. That's ridiculous...

Why you do not want to make cruncher's life easier and finally change this (sorry to say) stupid rule when WUs limit for crunching by video card depends on qty of CPU cores? What's the logic behind this (sorry again) stupid rule?

And pls do not tell me that it's impossible to track how many video cards any rig got. For example, PrimeGrid got 100Wus per video card limit, i.e. the rig with single video card gets 100WUs and with two video cards gets 200 WUs. PrimeGrid manage to implement this. So why you do not want to contact PrimeGrid guys? I do not think they will refuse to help you with ideas and even may be with code. What r u waiting for?
7) Message boards : Number crunching : Upcoming Cayman architecture. (Message 45198)
Posted 22 Dec 2010 by CTAPbIi
Post:
WOW!

Temps and fan percentage? What's running on the CPU?

This rig living in my cool basement (somewhat +18*), so I do not really care about noise. Original fan curve IMO is too low what makes GPU too hot. That's not good for 24/7 crunching, so I increased fan speed in MSI AB. Now on 76% fan speed it's 59-60 *C

I tried to make 4870 work too, but it does not starts (can not see "welcome" screen). 10.12 driver and 10.12a hotfix for 69xx been installed.
8) Message boards : Number crunching : Upcoming Cayman architecture. (Message 45195)
Posted 21 Dec 2010 by CTAPbIi
Post:
I've got 6970.

Stock clocks (880) - 69sec per 213 credits WU and 57-58 secs - max OC'd (950). Easy takes 950 @+20% boost. Now I'm stability on 950, looks fine, for sure can tell 2morrow though. Hot thus noisy. I expected smth else...
9) Message boards : Number crunching : Upcoming Cayman architecture. (Message 45099)
Posted 18 Dec 2010 by CTAPbIi
Post:
so that folk about 70 secs w/o OCing was true :-)
10) Message boards : Number crunching : Upcoming Cayman architecture. (Message 45096)
Posted 17 Dec 2010 by CTAPbIi
Post:
not bad at all :-)
11) Message boards : Number crunching : Upcoming Cayman architecture. (Message 45094)
Posted 17 Dec 2010 by CTAPbIi
Post:
My 5970 can do a wu in 78sec when it has sufficient CPU resources available to it. Other wise it's at 82 to 84 seconds/wu. 938MHz core clock and 900MHz memory clock.

it's water cooled? to jump from 725 to 938 on dual-GPU card - that's not easy, man :-)
12) Message boards : Number crunching : Upcoming Cayman architecture. (Message 45086)
Posted 17 Dec 2010 by CTAPbIi
Post:
sure i'll post secs per WU on stock clocks and OCed one. For a while there are no way to exceed nor 950MHz nor voltage tweaking, it will not be that "sweat".

Remember, in one review guys wrote about 70 secs per WU for 6970. If we assuming 90 secs for 5870 - not that bad, somewhat 25% boost. Bur I expected more though...
13) Message boards : Number crunching : Upcoming Cayman architecture. (Message 45080)
Posted 16 Dec 2010 by CTAPbIi
Post:
But it will be here for sure tomorrow and maybe milkyway will actually be up so I can test it!!!


let's keep fingers crossed :)

I'm really way more interested in the 6990's but just had to get at least one of these!


when, now it's evident that 6990 will be dual 6950, but the price will equal to two 6970. So, what's the point, bro? :)
14) Message boards : Number crunching : Upcoming Cayman architecture. (Message 45077)
Posted 16 Dec 2010 by CTAPbIi
Post:
let's wait cncguru's tests.

Looks early next week I'll get 6970 for testing, so this will an answer for me - should I go forward with 6970 or not.
15) Message boards : Number crunching : CPUs effect on crunching (Message 45061)
Posted 16 Dec 2010 by CTAPbIi
Post:
I played with OCing CPU (Pentium E6300) on 4870 & 4890 from stock 2800 to 4000 (400*10). Literally - no difference at all.

But in order to have some buffer to crunch it make sense to have "more core" CPU
16) Message boards : Number crunching : Upcoming Cayman architecture. (Message 45054)
Posted 16 Dec 2010 by CTAPbIi
Post:
Got an XFX 6970 arriving tomorrow will post.

pls post here :-)
17) Message boards : Number crunching : Upcoming Cayman architecture. (Message 45047)
Posted 15 Dec 2010 by CTAPbIi
Post:
We are waiting for you to buy one and let us know.

ha-ha :-) I'm still not sure ...

I'm waiting for shipments to arrive my country. Hopefully next week, i will have them and will let you guys know the results.


please :-) it will be nice to see
18) Message boards : Number crunching : Upcoming Cayman architecture. (Message 45044)
Posted 15 Dec 2010 by CTAPbIi
Post:
saying frankly, I was really expected way more we've got. I really disappointed...

The only thing is that i got 4870 and 4890 in hands and I desperately need to move forward. But now I'm confused - what should I do. I wanna wait results of 6970 crunching on MW in order to make decision with open mind and reliable data in hands...

Guy who will get 6970 in hands, pls post your results here ;)
19) Message boards : Number crunching : 2 ATI GPUs on same PC (Message 45040)
Posted 15 Dec 2010 by CTAPbIi
Post:
1. u need dummy plug OR connect it to your monitor and extend your desktop

2. I'll srtongly recommend you to plug 4850 to the 1st PCIe slot and 5850 - to the 2nd one
20) Message boards : Number crunching : Upcoming Cayman architecture. (Message 45030)
Posted 15 Dec 2010 by CTAPbIi
Post:
from one review:
BOINC estimated HD 6970 w/o OCing in 3307 GFLOPS. It take 70 secs approx to crunch one MilkyWay@Home WU

AFAIK, 5870 take 90-100 secs to do so, so it's 30% approx boost. not that bad.


Next 20

©2020 Astroinformatics Group