I read The Fine Manual.

Message boards : Number crunching : I read The Fine Manual.
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Batter Up

Send message
Joined: 5 May 99
Posts: 1946
Credit: 24,860,347
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1405650 - Posted: 20 Aug 2013, 21:35:13 UTC

I read TFM; If I understand correctly one gets 200 Cobblestones for crunching at 1 gigaflop for 86400 seconds.

That said can one get a more accurate comparison of work done using SETI WU types; would a "SETI@home v7 7.00 windows_intelx86 (cuda32)" "Average processing rate 166.4640465293" be comparable to another "SETI@home v7 7.00 windows_intelx86 (cuda32)" "Average processing rate 125.94004295098"

This is the same computer the only difference is the HDD and the OS; Nvidia has a driver for use only with Win 8.1, driver version number 326.01.

Win 8.1 with NVIDIA driver: 326.01 OpenCL: 1.01

Win 7 NVIDIA driver: 320.18 OpenCL: 1.01

I also did a search on the forum for "326.01" and came up empty.

ID: 1405650 · Report as offensive
Profile jason_gee
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 24 Nov 06
Posts: 7489
Credit: 91,093,184
RAC: 0
Message 1405659 - Posted: 20 Aug 2013, 21:48:24 UTC - in response to Message 1405650.  
Last modified: 20 Aug 2013, 21:53:48 UTC

Be a little wary comparing operating systems at the moment, with Cuda multibeam V7 (x41zc).

Backstage experimentation and research has verified that for mid to high angle range tasks ( those are sent to Cuda GPUs at the moment) some 20%-45% of the elapsed time (depending on system, driver & other factors) can be attributed to PCi express data transfers [i.e. no flops in them].

The general gist is (for now) there are large numbers of small transfers across the PCI express bus, and that different Windows versions (rather their WDDM driver models) handle these quite differently ( Vista=WDDM 1.0, Win7=1.1 Win8=1.2 & 8.1=1.3).

So reducing that to the simplest, one quarter to one half of any throughput comparison can be related to seemingly minor differences, and squishing out those needless variations is part of the optimisation process, as opposed to a function of Credit(New), APR or trying to compare Cuda revisions or operating systems.
"Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions.
ID: 1405659 · Report as offensive

Message boards : Number crunching : I read The Fine Manual.

©2018 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.