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.

I think you're both right. AFAIK, Jason uses the old GetPrivateProfileString method designed for handling .INI files - so unless the [bus1slot0] KeyName is activated (by removing the semi-colon comment signifier from that line), the following values remain global. But you'd probably stand less chance of confusing yourself when you re-visit the file in six months' time if you used the global block for a value intended to be global.

Because this file is designed to be read by the application, there is no need to restart BOINC after making changes - it'll be read automatically each time a new task starts, and the current values used for that task. BOINC knows nothing of this.

Right, I've done a quick and dirty trial - if you don't "un-semi-colon" the

;[bus1slot0]

line the priority is affected for both GPU (on my set-up anyway); if you do then only one of the cards is affected.
I hope that clears that one up.
Further it looks as if going from below normal to normal gives somewhere between 5 and 10% improvement.
I'll let it settle for a few days and see what goes down, or hopefully up....

---

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

http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php

will give you a side by side review of the two cards

one has a bigger bandwidth, and the other has more flops

both are 128 bit

Philhnnss, it didn't occur to me the other day, but the 450's should be able to crunch cuda 42 rather than the cuda 32 you are running. See screenshot in this post in another thread:

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=73155&postid=1460069
The driver you have is okay, no need to upgrade. If in doubt, check the Boinc event log startup messages - the cuda version supported should be in the first 20 lines.

Rob, Richard: thanks for the clarification. I've just always used that first priority line.

---

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

OK, cool. Plugging in the features of both cards it show the 450's have shader
clocks running at 1631. The 650's run at 978. Every other number is VERY heavy
in favor of the 650's. So I guess for future refrance for SETI work I'll
compare the shader clock speed as well.

THANK YOU!!!

Good deal. I'll upgrade the XP machine's Lunitics and Cuda as well. I am one
of the ones the good folks at Lunitic's warn us about. When they had the run
in with Microsoft and took down the installers I pretty much forgot to look
if they were back. So I had not updated in all this time!!

The straight numbers do not tell the whole story, as there is a technology change between the 4xx and 6xx series that allows the 6xx to do far more work per core than the 4xx.
Nvidia have a useful set of graphs on their site which give a good, visual, indication of the relative performance: Look at top graph

---

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

Higher RAC

Crunching V7 on GPU is just not the same as the old V6.
The credit given is small compred to say your GPU running AP tasks .
1 AMD 1100T with 5 cores active to crunch V7 Multibeam on a M4N72-E mobo which is DDR2 ram using Hyper X DDR2 1066
I use 1 Zotac 460 GTX 768 to crunch nothing but Astropulse and I am averaging 20000 RAC a day.

If I use my GPU to crunch multibeam I will receive a much lower RAC.

Drivers as well I have noticed an increase in speed and performance.
The latest Nidia driver 331.93 has solved playback studder while crunching and watching movies at the same time.

Try overclocking your NB clock and HT link to 2.6 or better if you can with the ram your using it will be much better for speed thus feeding your GPU will be faster. Phenoms like high NB clock and HT link
When I upped mine from 2 GHZ to 2.6 the system performed much better.

Michael Miles
Team New Mexico

Wanted to say "THANK YOU" to all that helped me!!

The changes I made with setizero, the computer with the 2 450's, didn't really
make any improvements to my RAC.

But the changes you guys suggested with SetiOne has made a profound
improvement. I know RAC isn't really a true comparison, but it is easy
to track with the statistic tab. And using that tab my RAC is climbing
at an almost vertical rate!!!

I am still going to hold off a couple of weeks to change the value from below
normal to above normal. I want to see were it levels off at first.