Message boards :
Number crunching :
Lunatics Windows Installer v0.40 release notes
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 . . . 11 · 12 · 13 · 14
Author | Message |
---|---|
The Great Sun Jester Send message Joined: 16 Dec 05 Posts: 19 Credit: 2,110,657 RAC: 0 |
Ah. I thought that the benchmarks would change because of the additional computing power of the Graphics Processor. In that case, I'll go back, reset the whole thing back to BlBgs settings (big thanks for the screencaps), and give SETI about a week to sort things out. Once it does, I should start seeing an increase in the User Averages, correct? |
HAL9000 Send message Joined: 11 Sep 99 Posts: 6534 Credit: 196,805,888 RAC: 57 |
Ah. I thought that the benchmarks would change because of the additional computing power of the Graphics Processor. In that case, I'll go back, reset the whole thing back to BlBgs settings (big thanks for the screencaps), and give SETI about a week to sort things out. The benchmark is just for BOINC to get an idea of how fast your machine is to request work from projects. IIRC one of the two numbers isn't actually used any longer. Your average will creep up over time. Depending on the speed of the machine and how often it runs. Generally a few weeks, but you can check the daily stat numbers form the stat websites. SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[ |
BilBg Send message Joined: 27 May 07 Posts: 3720 Credit: 9,385,827 RAC: 0 |
Do you (anybody) see the screenshots now? It appears for me that the hosting site (prikachi.com) is not working for the moment. I can repost them using different hosting site. To see are 'they' running: in Windows Task Manager (or Process Explorer, ...) - check if any or all of the following processes run: AK_v8b2_win_SSE3_AMD.exe ap_6.01r557_SSE2_331_AVX.exe MB6_win_x86_SSE3_OpenCL_ATi_HD5_r390.exe AP6_win_x86_SSE2_OpenCL_ATI_r555.exe  - ALF - "Find out what you don't do well ..... then don't do it!" :)  |
(retired account) Send message Joined: 12 Jul 12 Posts: 6 Credit: 3,389,531 RAC: 0 |
First of all, thank you for all the work on these applications! I'm currently trying to optimize options for my 7970M (which is more or less a downclocked desktop 7870). Richard wrote that the optimal unroll value is half of the CUs, in my case 20 / 2 = 10. Question: Is this still true, if two instances run on the card or should it be lower then? Thanks in advance / Best regards |
Richard Haselgrove Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 14644 Credit: 200,643,578 RAC: 874 |
And thank you for the kind words. Although the release notes are published under my name, they're actually a collaborative effort, bringing together suggestions and knowledge gathered from a wide group of developers and testers. In particular, I only have personal experience of NVidia cards, so I don't think I ought to try to elaborate on the sections contributed by my ATI colleagues. Mike or Raistmer are probably best placed to answer your direct question: meanwhile, you might be interested in the adjacent GPU AP performance tuning thread - although they, too, have started with NVidia applications. |
Raistmer Send message Joined: 16 Jun 01 Posts: 6325 Credit: 106,370,077 RAC: 121 |
Here ATi performance tuning conducted: http://lunatics.kwsn.net/12-gpu-crunching/new-set-of-test-tasks-for-gpu-ap.msg49310.html#msg49310 |
(retired account) Send message Joined: 12 Jul 12 Posts: 6 Credit: 3,389,531 RAC: 0 |
Thank you for the link to the lunatics forum, which helped. Just a short report, how it worked so far: Using the lunatics v0.40 installer and editing the app_info file afterwards I run now two instances on my mobile 7970M (each using one core of a quadcore w/ SMT) and four instances on my desktop 7950 (each using 1/2 core of a quadcore w/ CMT). This runs fine. Did no synthetic tests, however, since I am in the middle of a challenge. Here's what I changed: 7970M / multibeam <avg_ncpus>1.00</avg_ncpus> <max_ncpus>1.00</max_ncpus> <plan_class>ati13ati</plan_class> <cmdline>-period_iterations_num 20 -instances_per_device 2</cmdline> <coproc> <type>ATI</type> <count>0.5</count> 7970M / astropulse <avg_ncpus>1.00</avg_ncpus> <max_ncpus>1.00</max_ncpus> <platform>windows_intelx86</platform> <plan_class>ati13ati</plan_class> <cmdline>-instances_per_device 2 -unroll 10 -ffa_block 4096 -ffa_block_fetch 2048 -sbs 128</cmdline> <coproc> <type>ATI</type> <count>0.5</count> 7950 / multibeam <avg_ncpus>0.50</avg_ncpus> <max_ncpus>0.50</max_ncpus> <plan_class>ati13ati</plan_class> <cmdline>-period_iterations_num 30 -instances_per_device 4</cmdline> <coproc> <type>ATI</type> <count>0.25</count> 7970M / astropulse <avg_ncpus>0.50</avg_ncpus> <max_ncpus>0.50</max_ncpus> <platform>windows_x86_64</platform> <plan_class>ati13ati</plan_class> <cmdline>-instances_per_device 4 -unroll 14 -ffa_block 4096 -ffa_block_fetch 2048 -sbs 128</cmdline> <coproc> <type>ATI</type> <count>0.25</count> Best regards |
(retired account) Send message Joined: 12 Jul 12 Posts: 6 Credit: 3,389,531 RAC: 0 |
7970M / astropulse The last section being 7950 / astropulse, of course. |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.