msattler, if you edit your messages after I read/answered it, I can't see a new question.. ;-)

AFAIK, you can't see which CUDA_Version will be executed.

You must look in the (correct ;-) project folder.


____________
[Optimized project applications, for to increase your PC performance (double RAC)!][Overview of abbreviations, which are used often in forum and their meaning.]

---

msattler, if you edit your messages after I read/answered it, I can't see a new question.. ;-)

AFAIK, you can't see which CUDA_Version will be executed.

You must look in the (correct ;-) project folder.


____________
[Optimized project applications, for to increase your PC performance (double RAC)!][Overview of abbreviations, which are used often in forum and their meaning.]

Sutaru........that is just my point, my friend......
If the person does not know the correct folder to look into, can the actual running version of the dll's be verified?

Without knowing where to look, can one find out what is running at the moment?

---

"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

Sutaru........that is just my point, my friend......
If the person does not know the correct folder to look into, can the actual running version of the dll's be verified?

Without knowing where to look, can one find out what is running at the moment?

You can see it for example not in the TaskManager.
I don't know in which orig. Windows prog you could look also.

Maybe you see it in a nVIDIA prog. Maybe from the system tray icon menu.. (I don't know, I have this icons disabled on my PCs)


____________
[Optimized project applications, for to increase your PC performance (double RAC)!][Overview of abbreviations, which are used often in forum and their meaning.]

---

Sutaru........that is just my point, my friend......
If the person does not know the correct folder to look into, can the actual running version of the dll's be verified?

Without knowing where to look, can one find out what is running at the moment?

You can see it for example not in the TaskManager.
I don't know in which orig. Windows prog you could look also.

Maybe you see it in a nVIDIA prog. Maybe from the system tray icon menu.. (I don't know, I have this icons disabled on my PCs)


____________
[Optimized project applications, for to increase your PC performance (double RAC)!][Overview of abbreviations, which are used often in forum and their meaning.]

So, you are telling me, as I have found, that there is not a way to verify what is running......no?

---

"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

So, you are telling me, as I have found, that there is not a way to verify what is running......no?

AFAIK, no.

But maybe you could see it over a nVIDIA prog. I don't know it, never needed.. ;-)

For to be sure, you should maybe ask at the Lunatics forum.


____________
[Optimized project applications, for to increase your PC performance (double RAC)!][Overview of abbreviations, which are used often in forum and their meaning.]

---

And, if you are checking that you have the 2.3, then "Properties > Details" on the .dll files identifies 2.3 files as "Version 2.3".

F.

[edit]Ah... not what you were looking for :-( [/edit]

Fred....you know what I am asking......

Just verifying that the correct files are resident 'somewhere' does not verify that they are in the correct place and being used by Boinc.

@Mark,

I think you are right - there is no way of telling that does no involve trashing the CUDA cache (i.e. you could rename all the CUDA files that you THINK you are using - to prevent them being deleted - and see if the CUDA cache gets trashed).

F.

---

And, if you are checking that you have the 2.3, then "Properties > Details" on the .dll files identifies 2.3 files as "Version 2.3".

F.

[edit]Ah... not what you were looking for :-( [/edit]

Fred....you know what I am asking......

Just verifying that the correct files are resident 'somewhere' does not verify that they are in the correct place and being used by Boinc.

@Mark,

I think you are right - there is no way of telling that does no involve trashing the CUDA cache (i.e. you could rename all the CUDA files that you THINK you are using - to prevent them being deleted - and see if the CUDA cache gets trashed).

F.

LOL....I don't like 'destructive testing'....
But actually, I don't think changing the dll's can lead to any WU trashing.....you are not changing the app or it's name.....just the dll's it is using.

I think this is quite transparent to Boinc.

I just don't see any way to verify that a user has got the correct dll's working.....
He may have them downloaded and installed, but if he has them in the wrong folder, for example, he may not be using them at all.

And this is a real possibility, given the changes between OS's as to where they store the critical info......

A user might be accessing some old files or folders, and think they are installing the dll's in the correct place, and alas, they are not being used.

---

"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

And, if you are checking that you have the 2.3, then "Properties > Details" on the .dll files identifies 2.3 files as "Version 2.3".

F.

[edit]Ah... not what you were looking for :-( [/edit]

Fred....you know what I am asking......

Just verifying that the correct files are resident 'somewhere' does not verify that they are in the correct place and being used by Boinc.

@Mark,

I think you are right - there is no way of telling that does no involve trashing the CUDA cache (i.e. you could rename all the CUDA files that you THINK you are using - to prevent them being deleted - and see if the CUDA cache gets trashed).

F.

LOL....I don't like 'destructive testing'....
But actually, I don't thing changing the dll's can lead to any WU trashing.....you are not changing the app or it's name.....just the dll's it is using.

I think this is quite transparent to Boinc.

Well, if you rename things so that there is no usable DLL at all - that would count as destructive testing!

But I agree with the consensus - once you've found the correct working directory, you can tell which version you have from the file sizes and (from v2.2 onwards) the tooltip popups. But if you don't know your way round the directory structure, there's no way of telling which DLL set is running, or was historically used for a task you've already reported. Only the 'before and after' run time comparison would reveal that.

Edit - the 'correct working directory' will be the one which has WU data files in - and if the question is about CUDA, some at least will be very recent. Teach people to keep their folders in 'detail' view, and how to sort them into 'date modified' order. If you let the newest files float to the top, you'll soon see whether the folder is active or not.

But actually, I don't think changing the dll's can lead to any WU trashing.....you are not changing the app or it's name.....just the dll's it is using.

I think this is quite transparent to Boinc.

I just don't see any way to verify that a user has got the correct dll's working.....
He may have them downloaded and installed, but if he has them in the wrong folder, for example, he may not be using them at all.

And this is a real possibility, given the changes between OS's as to where they store the critical info......

A user might be accessing some old files or folders, and think they are installing the dll's in the correct place, and alas, they are not being used.

If the files that are named in the app_info.xml do not exist in the required folder then Boinc will decide that it cannot do CUDA and trash any that exist in the cache (I believe - but will not be upset if corrected).

I get round this probem by knowing that I have only one each of cudart.dll and cufft.dll on my system (from a full system "Search" for the file names). All other instances I have renamed e.g. cudart-V2.2.dll / cufft-V2.2.dll. That way, if CUDA works, I know that I am using the correct .dll's.

F.

---

Dang it...

I just got asked the question, and I can't remember the answer, or if there is one...

Is it possible to verify the Cuda dll version that you are currently running?

Using Process Explorer from www.sysinternals.com you can see what dll's are being used by different programs. You need to set the GPU processing always active so that you can select the running exe without the program exiting. Or at least you have to very quick. Maybe you can make the Process Explorer to write things to a log file, I haven't studied it so thorouhly.

---

Dang it...

I just got asked the question, and I can't remember the answer, or if there is one...

Is it possible to verify the Cuda dll version that you are currently running?

Using Process Explorer from www.sysinternals.com you can see what dll's are being used by different programs. You need to set the GPU processing always active so that you can select the running exe without the program exiting. Or at least you have to very quick. Maybe you can make the Process Explorer to write things to a log file, I haven't studied it so thorouhly.

So you can:

Name	Description	Company Name	Version
...
cudart.dll	NVIDIA CUDA Runtime, Version 2.3 	NVIDIA Corporation	6.14.11.2030
cufft.dll	NVIDIA CUDA FFT Library, Version 2.3 	NVIDIA Corporation	6.14.11.2030
...

And now back to topic.. ;-)


[B^S] madmac asked because of different GPUs.


____________
[Optimized project applications, for to increase your PC performance (double RAC)!][Overview of abbreviations, which are used often in forum and their meaning.]

---

Card is not on the list, thought it was and it wa a brand new machine from a UK store. Need to get a better graphic card any idea for my quad machine?

A pre-built store machine (I think you said it was an HP?) is not likely to have a very capable power supply or cooling system - so I would keep your aspirations modest.

May I open the bidding with a GT 240? Modern, low power consumption, reasonably effective: but, before Sutaru jumps in, not a Fermi card.

Card is not on the list, thought it was and it wa a brand new machine from a UK store. Need to get a better graphic card any idea for my quad machine?

A pre-built store machine (I think you said it was an HP?) is not likely to have a very capable power supply or cooling system - so I would keep your aspirations modest.

May I open the bidding with a GT 240? Modern, low power consumption, reasonably effective: but, before Sutaru jumps in, not a Fermi card.

My best success.......pre Wormi.......

Has been with my GTX260........

---

"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

A pre-built store machine (I think you said it was an HP?) is not likely to have a very capable power supply or cooling system - so I would keep your aspirations modest.

May I open the bidding with a GT 240? Modern, low power consumption, reasonably effective: but, before Sutaru jumps in, not a Fermi card.

In this report is nothing about GT210/220/240 graphic cards..


O.K., O.K., I googled little time.. and the GT210/220/240 are with the new GT21x (40nm) chip. It's not the GT300 (Fermi) chip.
My mistake.

But it's a better choice than the old 8/9xxx GPUs.


BTW. We'll never see this Fermi chip this year.. ;-D


____________
[Optimized project applications, for to increase your PC performance (double RAC)!][Overview of abbreviations, which are used often in forum and their meaning.]

---

O.K., O.K., I googled little time.. and the GT210/220/240 are with the new GT21x (40nm) chip. It's not the GT300 (Fermi) chip.
My mistake.

But it's a better choice than the old 8/9xxx GPUs.

That would depend on what you mean by better. If better means faster, then no. Power consumption? Yes. GFlop per dollar? No. GFlop per Watt? Yes.

Some details on the following cards: (from Wikipedia)

Card/GFlops/Power (W)
210 / 69 / 30
GT 220 / 192 / 58
GT 240 / 385 / 69
GTS 250 / 705 / 150 <-- essentially a rebranded 9800 GTX+
GTX 260-16 / 874 / 171
GTX 275 / 1010 / 219
GTX 285 / 1062 / 183
GTX 295 / 1788 / 289

8600 GTS / 139 / 71
8800 GTX / 518 / 155

9600 GT / 312 / 98
9800 GTX+ / 705 / 145

I won't even try to come up with prices, but the thing to note is that the 'entry-level' 2xx series cards are very slow by comparison to the 9800 and 8800 processors.

If power consumption is a priority, the GT240 is probably a good bet -- better performance than a 9600 GT at 2/3 the power consumption. Note that the 210 in particular is a VERY slow GPU -- it's 1/5th the speed of the 240, and the 240 isn't very fast by today's standards. The crappy graphics chip built into the motherboard might be faster than a 210 (but probably won't be able to run CUDA.)

All that being said, however, it's usually not that hard, nor expensive, to put a new power supply into a pre-built computer. That might be a better option than buying a very low power -- and slow -- GPU that could work with the existing power supply. You just need to do your homework and make sure the power supply you buy has all the right connectors for your motherboard and has the sufficient power for you entire system, including GPU(s).

---

Want to find one of the largest known primes? Try PrimeGrid. Or help cure disease at WCG.

msattler wrote:

Dang it...

I just got asked the question, and I can't remember the answer, or if there is one...

Is it possible to verify the Cuda dll version that you are currently running?

Process Explorer is awesome and fascinating too.


Another way to find out is to go to your
C:\ProgramData\BOINC\slots\ (default on my Vista install)
If you have a GPU work unit in progress some info will be in one of the slots (0,1,2,...) You should be able to see what looks like cudart.dll and cufft.dll (but they are only a few bytes in size) Open one with notepad;
<soft_link>../../projects/setiathome.berkeley.edu/cufft.dll</soft_link>
That would be C:\ProgramData\BOINC\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu (on my computer)
And now you know the path to the files that are being used. (you can follow the path and verify the version of dll)

---

The best answer is to know your Boinc.......

Know it, love it. It might save your life one day.

Meow.

---

"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

msattler wrote:

Dang it...

I just got asked the question, and I can't remember the answer, or if there is one...

Is it possible to verify the Cuda dll version that you are currently running?

Process Explorer is awesome and fascinating too. Another way to find out is to go to your
C:\ProgramData\BOINC\slots\ (default on my Vista install)
If you have a GPU work unit in progress some info will be in one of the slots (0,1,2,...) You should be able to see what looks like cudart.dll and cufft.dll (but they are only a few bytes in size) Open one with notepad;
<soft_link>../../projects/setiathome.berkeley.edu/cufft.dll</soft_link>
That would be C:\ProgramData\BOINC\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu (on my computer)
And now you know the path to the files that are being used. (you can follow the path and verify the version of dll)

The trouble arises if your BOINC data directory is hidden, or you don't know where it is, or you have multiple copies on your system and don't know which one is active.

If you can find your active slots directory, then you've found the active projects directory already (they're in the same BOINC folder), and you've no longer got the problem.

And the easiest way of all is to read the name of the data directory in use from the second line in the messages tab as BOINC starts up!

That would depend on what you mean by better. If better means faster, then no. Power consumption? Yes. GFlop per dollar? No. GFlop per Watt? Yes.
[...]

This was this what I meant. Wattage.

This I posted for ~ 6 days already here: 'Video for budget machines - Message 962378' (Richard, O.K., O.K., the Fermi part isn't true.)

We SETI@home members don't buy a GPU and don't use it for CUDA.. ;-)
So the wattage is very important.

What would give it, less prize to buy - but much money for to let run?


BTW. Why we have so much threads about the same topic?


____________
[Optimized project applications, for to increase your PC performance (double RAC)!][Overview of abbreviations, which are used often in forum and their meaning.]

---