Wondering if somebody can help me to understand this? I have two computers that
I run SETI on during the winter.

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/hosts_user.php

Both of these computers have the same motherboard, ASUS M4N78 Pro. And they run
the same DDR 3 1600 memory with the same timings. Both running Lunatics and
both with 5 and 6 work units respectively. If the above link worked you can
see SetiOne has a 100MHz faster processor. Then it is running two GTX 650 TI
video cards. I am still running 64 bit Vista with ALL the bells and whistles
turned off with that machine. In turn setizero has the 100MHz slower processor
and two GTS 450 video cards and I am running 64 bit XP.

My question is why is setizero kicking SetiOne's butt as far as rack??? As you
can see not by much but still. I would have thought the 2 650 TI's would be
stomping the 2 GTS 450's all over the place. And the 100MHz faster processor
speed would have just been a tiny bit of icing on the cake. Is Vista, with ALL
the bells and whistles turned off, the problem?

Any help understanding this would be greatly appreciated!!!

I have noticed that on my two rigs that I built. The same case, motherboard, CPU, fans. Ram is that same brand Kingston Hyper x blue BUT the slower machine has 8GB ram the faster has 16 GB, the slower machine also has a EVGA 550 Ti with 1 GB ram the faster one has an Nidia 550 Ti with 1 GB ram.
The only thing I can think of is Maybe the ram and or the GPU's. I see as much as a 2,000 gap in RAC between the two.

Id like to know why also.

---

[/quote]

Old James

First let's sort out your link so we see your computers not our own:
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/hosts_user.php?userid=8826827

The bulk of the processing will be being done by the GPUs not the CPUs, so CPU speed is all but irrelevant.

A few questions:
Are you using the two computers in exactly the same way, or is one your daily driver and the other just sitting there crunching.
You say running 5/6 tasks - is this a total of 5or six tasks, or are you running 5 (6) tasks on each of your GPU.
Have you "freed up" cores to feed the CPUs?

(Vista is not the greatest OS that MS have ever released...)

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

First let's sort out your link so we see your computers not our own:
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/hosts_user.php?userid=8826827

The bulk of the processing will be being done by the GPUs not the CPUs, so CPU speed is all but irrelevant.

A few questions:
Are you using the two computers in exactly the same way, or is one your daily driver and the other just sitting there crunching.
You say running 5/6 tasks - is this a total of 5or six tasks, or are you running 5 (6) tasks on each of your GPU.
Have you "freed up" cores to feed the CPUs?

(Vista is not the greatest OS that MS have ever released...)

I think that might be one reason, He has Vista on his newest computer and Win XP on the older one. But still hes only showing a 200 RAC differance. Thats nothing.

---

[/quote]

Old James

Thank you for fixing the link!!

Yes, sorry. I am running 5 tasks on each machine with the CPU's. And 6 tasks on
both machines with the GPU's. So that leaves one core of CPU to feed the GPU's.

I tried leaving 2 cores free of CPU and didn't see any differance so I went
back to just 1 on each machine.

Both machines ONLY do Seti work, both running 24/7.

Both machines are running 8 gig of RAM @1600 with the same timings.

The GTS 450's are running at 850 MHz with 1GB of GDDR5 of memory. And 192 Cuda
Cores.

The GTX 650 TI's are running at 980 MHz with 1 gb of GDDR5 memory. And 768 Cuda
cores.

I know the little bit faster processor speed doesn't mean anything but the 650
TI's should be blowing the 450's out of the water,,,,,, shouldn't they??

I also realize the old XP machine is JUST beating the Vista one. But I don't
see how. That why I am saying head scratcher, LOL!!!

Look a the difference in Valids. The difference may be in the number of wingmen
reporting.

His one host shows 273 and the other shows 300

---

[/quote]

Old James

Those 650's are also under utilized if you're only doing 1 task on each as they'll produce more work by doing 2 tasks each.

Cheers.

His one host shows 273 and the other shows 300

Which means the 300 host was paid mere credits
than the 273 host which means a higher rac, right?

I'd try cuda50 version for the 650.

---

To overcome Heisenbergs:
"You can't always get what you want / but if you try sometimes you just might find / you get what you need." -- Rolling Stones

Philhnnss, I have 3 thoughts:

1)

Yes, sorry. I am running 5 tasks on each machine with the CPU's. And 6 tasks on both machines with the GPU's. So that leaves one core of CPU to feed the GPU's.

That's a bit ambitious with V7. Most of us have had to cut back from what we ran with v6. And your APR's for S@Hv7 / gpu anon platform are fairly low on both machines. Try 2 at a time per gpu for a week to see what happens.

2) You installed the cuda 32 app on both machines but the 650 ti is capable of running cuda 50. Try that app for a week or so and see if it helps. You can just run the installer again, no need to drain the tasks on hand because the app_info.xml will provide for them.

3) On both machines, you're running gpu tasks at the default priority of below normal. Edit mbcuda.cfg in the project's data directory and change that priority to above normal. (Use Notepad).

---

Another Fred
Support SETI@home when you search the Web with GoodSearch or shop online with GoodShop.

Thank you Fred!!!!

OK, on SetiOne, the Vista machine, I upgraded to Cuda 5.035, wouldn't let me go
5.5. Upgraded my Lunatics to Win64 V0.04. Changed my tasks to .50 for the GPU.
And changed my CPU to only run 4 tasks.

Now I would like to do your last recomendation changing my default priority but
I do not have a clue what to do???? I can build a computer. Install Windows.
But after that I am lost, LOL!!!

Can you give me a "Baby Step" walk through on how to do this? And since
you metioned both machines I am guessing I should change this setting on my XP
machine as well. So if the steps are differant between XP and Vista could you
walk me through that as well??

Thank you for your time!!!!

See how it runs for a week or so with your new settings - then modify the mbcuda.cfg file.
On your Vista PC it should be located in C:\ProgramData\BOINC\projects\setiathome.berkeley.edu (which may be a hidden location)

To edit it you need to open it using Notepad
Here's what the file looks like before modification.

;;; This configuration file is for optional control of Cuda Multibeam x41zc
;;; Currently, the available options are for
;;; application process priority control (without external tools), and
;;; per gpu priority control (useful for multiple Cuda GPU systems)
[mbcuda]
;;;;; Global applications settings, to apply to all Cuda devices
;;; You can uncomment the processpriority line below, by removing the ';', to engage machine global priority control of x41x
;;; possible options are 'belownormal' (which is the default), 'normal', 'abovenormal', or 'high'
;;; For dedicated crunching machines, 'abovenormal' is recommended
;;; raising global application priorities above the default
;;; may have system dependant usability effects, and can have positive or negative effects on overall throughput
;processpriority = abovenormal
;;; Pulsefinding: Advanced options for long pulsefinds (affect display usability & long kernel runs)
;;; defaults are conservative.
;;; WARNING: Excessive values may induce display lag, driver timeout & recovery, or errors.
;;; pulsefinding blocks per multiprocessor (1-16), default is 1 for Pre-Fermi, 4 for Fermi or newer GPUs
;pfblockspersm = 8
;;; pulsefinding maximum periods per kernel launch (1-1000), default is 100, as per 6.09
;pfperiodsperlaunch = 200

;[bus1slot0]
;;; Optional GPU specifc control (requires Cuda 3.2 or newer app), example
;processpriority = abovenormal
;pfblockspersm = 8
;pfperiodsperlaunch = 200

I've highlighted the line you need to change, you need to remove the semi-colon at the start.
You might want to see what happens in going from "below normal" "normal" first, just in case it causes any problems. The safe way to do this is copy the whole line, and put it in one line lower, then in the copy remove the semi colon an the "above".
Save the file back where it came from and the next time you restart BOINC it will read the file and you should notice GPU tasks take a bit less time - exactly how much depends on a lot of things....

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

Rob beat me to it - only thing I might do different would be to use the priority setting up in the global set rather than bus 1,slot 0 since you have 2 gpu's installed. I think the global setting will apply to both. Do it the same way, just remove the semicolon which makes the line a comment line.

Restart BOINC and check the stderr report of some of the first completed tasks to see if it is working on both gpu's.

---

Another Fred
Support SETI@home when you search the Web with GoodSearch or shop online with GoodShop.

Fred, by not "un-semi-coloning" the

;[bus1slot0]

line I'm surely working on the global settings?

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

Rob, I'm not sure since I only have one gpu and can't test, but I'm talking about the one that is higher in the file:

;;;;; Global applications settings, to apply to all Cuda devices
;;; You can uncomment the processpriority line below, by removing the ';', to engage machine global priority control of x41x
;;; possible options are 'belownormal' (which is the default), 'normal', 'abovenormal', or 'high'
;;; For dedicated crunching machines, 'abovenormal' is recommended
;;; raising global application priorities above the default
;;; may have system dependant usability effects, and can have positive or negative effects on overall throughput
processpriority = abovenormal

(bold added)

Seems like the bottom of the file is an example if you want to get slot specific.

---

Another Fred
Support SETI@home when you search the Web with GoodSearch or shop online with GoodShop.

the 650's are slower cards....they have less bandwidth...128 bits versus 256 I think.....makes a big difference

Thank you very much guys!!!

I will do as you recomend Rob. I'll wait a week or two before I make that final
change. My RAC fell considerably when the project was down yesterday, ran out
of work on both machines. So I need to wait for it to even out again.

If I frack it up I'll be back crying for help!!!

I use APR (average processing rate) instead of RAC due to the volatility of RAC. That's shown by application on the application details page- from your list of computers, click details and then appliction details. Make a note of the number of tasks completed and the APR for S@H v7 anonymous platform. Wait until that task count has increased about 2 1/2 timeS the number of pending validations you now have so that most validations are new work, and compare the APR's.

I see that cuda 50 is now running on the 650ti's so that went okay. If you have a problem with the process priority, yell.

---

Another Fred
Support SETI@home when you search the Web with GoodSearch or shop online with GoodShop.

the 650's are slower cards....they have less bandwidth...128 bits versus 256 I think.....makes a big difference

Well shoot. That's not it in my case. Both of the 650TI's I have;

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121686

And the two 450's;

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121456


both have the 128 bit memory bandwith. Hopefully what everybody has sugested
will help me. But I still would like to know why the 650's were not kicking
the 450's butt since they were both at basiclly the same settings?