BTW, did you test the last version of the CPU AVX2 App?

Running app with command : MBv8_8.22r3588_avx2_x86_64-apple-darwin

r3588 was the old version. The new version was in the Intel-mod-1-24.zip download and named MBv8_8.22r3605_avx2_x86_64-apple-darwin

KWSN-Darwin-MBbench v2.1.08
Running on domisses-MacBook-Pro.local at Wed Feb 1 10:26:19 2017
---------------------------------------------------
Starting benchmark run...
---------------------------------------------------
Listing wu-file(s) in /testWUs :
18dc09ah.26284.16432.6.33.125.wu reference_work_unit_r3215.wu

Listing executable(s) in /APPS :
MBv8_8.22r3605_avx2_x86_64-apple-darwin

Listing executable in /REF_APPs :
MBv8_8.22r3587_ati5-SoG_ssse3_x86_64-apple-darwin
---------------------------------------------------
Current WU: 18dc09ah.26284.16432.6.33.125.wu
---------------------------------------------------
Running default app with command : MBv8_8.22r3587_ati5-SoG_ssse3_x86_64-apple-darwin -device 0
834.93 real 48.56 user 80.94 sys
Elapsed Time: ………………………………… 835 seconds
---------------------------------------------------
Running app with command : MBv8_8.22r3605_avx2_x86_64-apple-darwin
1326.32 real 1322.93 user 1.34 sys
Elapsed Time : ……………………………… 1326 seconds
Speed compared to default : 62 %
-----------------
Comparing results
Result : Strongly similar, Q= 99.48%
---------------------------------------------------
Done with 18dc09ah.26284.16432.6.33.125.wu.
Current WU: reference_work_unit_r3215.wu
---------------------------------------------------
Running default app with command : MBv8_8.22r3587_ati5-SoG_ssse3_x86_64-apple-darwin -device 0
454.47 real 34.86 user 51.23 sys
Elapsed Time: ………………………………… 455 seconds
---------------------------------------------------
Running app with command : MBv8_8.22r3605_avx2_x86_64-apple-darwin
966.12 real 963.23 user 0.87 sys
Elapsed Time : ……………………………… 966 seconds
Speed compared to default : 47 %
-----------------
Comparing results
Result : Strongly similar, Q= 99.50%
---------------------------------------------------
Done with reference_work_unit_r3215.wu.

---

Current WU: 18dc09ah.26284.16432.6.33.125.wu
Running app with command : MBv8_8.22r3605_avx2_x86_64-apple-darwin
1326.32 real 1322.93 user 1.34 sys
Elapsed Time : ……………………………… 1326 seconds
++++++++++++++
Current WU: reference_work_unit_r3215.wu
Running app with command : MBv8_8.22r3605_avx2_x86_64-apple-darwin
966.12 real 963.23 user 0.87 sys
Elapsed Time : ……………………………… 966 seconds

From earlier, https://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=80359&postid=1842860#1842860

Current WU: 18dc09ah.26284.16432.6.33.125.wu
Running default app with command : MBv8_8.06r3366_avx_x86_64-apple-darwin
1368.64 real 1364.40 user 1.68 sys
Elapsed Time: ………………………………… 1369 seconds
++++++++++++++
Current WU: reference_work_unit_r3215.wu
Running default app with command : MBv8_8.06r3366_avx_x86_64-apple-darwin
1088.36 real 1084.95 user 1.08 sys
Elapsed Time: ………………………………… 1089 seconds

Nice.
If you could, try placing r3366 in the REF_APPs folder and run them head to head.
Then place the Stock CPU App in REF_APPs and compare it with r3605. The Stock App at Beta is here http://boinc2.ssl.berkeley.edu/beta/download/setiathome_8.05_x86_64-apple-darwin
You might have to set the execute bit on the downloaded file, cd to the folder and run, sudo chmod a+x setiathome_8.05_x86_64-apple-darwin
See how they compare...

If you could, try placing r3366 in the REF_APPs folder and run them head to head.
.

Sounds good :)

---------------------------------------------------
Starting benchmark run...
---------------------------------------------------
Listing wu-file(s) in /testWUs :
18dc09ah.26284.16432.6.33.125.wu reference_work_unit_r3215.wu

Listing executable(s) in /APPS :
MBv8_8.22r3605_avx2_x86_64-apple-darwin

Listing executable in /REF_APPs :
MBv8_8.06r3366_avx_x86_64-apple-darwin
---------------------------------------------------
Current WU: 18dc09ah.26284.16432.6.33.125.wu
---------------------------------------------------
Running default app with command : MBv8_8.06r3366_avx_x86_64-apple-darwin
1529.77 real 1522.93 user 1.39 sys
Elapsed Time: ………………………………… 1530 seconds
---------------------------------------------------
Running app with command : MBv8_8.22r3605_avx2_x86_64-apple-darwin
1328.03 real 1321.80 user 1.40 sys
Elapsed Time : ……………………………… 1328 seconds
Speed compared to default : 115 %
-----------------
Comparing results
Result : Strongly similar, Q= 100.0%
---------------------------------------------------
Done with 18dc09ah.26284.16432.6.33.125.wu.
Current WU: reference_work_unit_r3215.wu
---------------------------------------------------
Running default app with command : MBv8_8.06r3366_avx_x86_64-apple-darwin
1100.40 real 1094.54 user 1.03 sys
Elapsed Time: ………………………………… 1101 seconds
---------------------------------------------------
Running app with command : MBv8_8.22r3605_avx2_x86_64-apple-darwin
964.49 real 959.79 user 0.86 sys
Elapsed Time : ……………………………… 964 seconds
Speed compared to default : 114 %
-----------------
Comparing results
Result : Strongly similar, Q= 99.98%
---------------------------------------------------
Done with reference_work_unit_r3215.wu.

---

Well.....it certainly appears as though the avx2 App is faster. I'd like to see it run with one of the current Non-VLAR BLC tasks.
It also appears to be producing the same results as the avx App. It would be nice to compare the avx2 App to the Stock App to see if the results are very similar.
I'm pretty sure the speed will be notable, look at this comparison; https://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=2417169435
Stock Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4771 CPU @ 3.50GHz = 5,402.06
AVX Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-6700HQ CPU @ 2.60GHz = 2,523.13

It might be time to switch your machine over to ATI r3610 and CPU r3605.

Well.....it certainly appears as though the avx2 App is faster. I'd like to see it run with one of the current Non-VLAR BLC tasks.
It also appears to be producing the same results as the avx App. It would be nice to compare the avx2 App to the Stock App to see if the results are very similar.
I'm pretty sure the speed will be notable, look at this comparison; https://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=2417169435
Stock Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4771 CPU @ 3.50GHz = 5,402.06
AVX Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-6700HQ CPU @ 2.60GHz = 2,523.13

It might be time to switch your machine over to ATI r3610 and CPU r3605.

Yes you're right. Good news :)

Running on domisses-MacBook-Pro.local at Thu Feb 2 11:18:36 2017
---------------------------------------------------
Starting benchmark run...
---------------------------------------------------
Listing wu-file(s) in /testWUs :
18dc09ah.26284.16432.6.33.125.wu reference_work_unit_r3215.wu

Listing executable(s) in /APPS :
MBv8_8.22r3605_avx2_x86_64-apple-darwin

Listing executable in /REF_APPs :
setiathome_8.05_x86_64-apple-darwin
---------------------------------------------------
Current WU: 18dc09ah.26284.16432.6.33.125.wu
---------------------------------------------------
Running default app with command : setiathome_8.05_x86_64-apple-darwin -verb -st -nog
1894.32 real 1886.08 user 2.29 sys
Elapsed Time: ………………………………… 1895 seconds
---------------------------------------------------
Running app with command : MBv8_8.22r3605_avx2_x86_64-apple-darwin
1544.66 real 1538.45 user 1.53 sys
Elapsed Time : ……………………………… 1544 seconds
Speed compared to default : 122 %
-----------------
Comparing results
Result : Strongly similar, Q= 99.99%
---------------------------------------------------
Done with 18dc09ah.26284.16432.6.33.125.wu.
Current WU: reference_work_unit_r3215.wu
---------------------------------------------------
Running default app with command : setiathome_8.05_x86_64-apple-darwin -verb -st -nog
1752.79 real 1745.91 user 1.49 sys
Elapsed Time: ………………………………… 1753 seconds
---------------------------------------------------
Running app with command : MBv8_8.22r3605_avx2_x86_64-apple-darwin
980.02 real 974.92 user 1.01 sys
Elapsed Time : ……………………………… 980 seconds
Speed compared to default : 178 %
-----------------
Comparing results
Result : Strongly similar, Q= 99.83%
---------------------------------------------------
Done with reference_work_unit_r3215.wu.

---

If anyone with a newer Mac with AVX2 would like to test the new CPU App post your Mac Specs and I'll post a package for your machine. I'd like to monitor how the new App preforms.

It might be time to switch your machine over to ATI r3610 and CPU r3605.

Up and running...including the Intel GPU.

---

It looks as though the minute the iGPU started the CPU tasks started taking over twice as long. It doesn't appear using the iGPU would be advantageous even if it did produce correct results. I removed the last iGPU test App awaiting another version as the last version wasn't any improvement. One has to wonder how much work is being lost by those running the iGPU instead of just using the CPU.

It looks as though the minute the iGPU started the CPU tasks started taking over twice as long. It doesn't appear using the iGPU would be advantageous even if it did produce correct results. I removed the last iGPU test App awaiting another version as the last version wasn't any improvement. One has to wonder how much work is being lost by those running the iGPU instead of just using the CPU.

iGPU tasks require around the same amount of time to process than CPU tasks....but they are freezing others CPU tasks (even if I have 4 out of 8 core free). I will finish the current iGPU tasks and will cancel iGPU tasks from the web interface.

---

Intel has changed the clock domain for iGPU with their Skylake CPUs. Its now bound to the baseclock (L3-cache, RAM, iGPU) instead of the DMI-connection (chipset and PCIe).
I do see the same behaviour on Linux on a KabyLake i7 : if iGPU in use CPU tasks are slowed down to a fourth, else the CPU cores without iGPU usage are fast.
Doesn't matter if one or more CPU threads are in use, if iGPU used for crunching the CPUs are slowed. The speedloss is bigger than running 8 threads on CPU.
The "sweet spot" seems to be running 6 or 7 threads without iGPU.

---

_\|/_
U r s

Intel has changed the clock domain for iGPU with their Skylake CPUs. Its now bound to the baseclock (L3-cache, RAM, iGPU) instead of the DMI-connection (chipset and PCIe).
I do see the same behaviour on Linux on a KabyLake i7 : if iGPU in use CPU tasks are slowed down to a fourth, else the CPU cores without iGPU usage are fast.
Doesn't matter if one or more CPU threads are in use, if iGPU used for crunching the CPUs are slowed. The speedloss is bigger than running 8 threads on CPU.
The "sweet spot" seems to be running 6 or 7 threads without iGPU.

It's not related to thermal or power limits at all?

---

Grant
Darwin NT

It's not related to thermal or power limits at all?

This is a Mac thread so lets keep this loosely related short:

Seems not related (TDP lifted to 65Watt, thermal below) or i've not found the BIOS setting to decouple the iGPU ... if there is one.

(legend: C = degree Celsius)
6 or 7 threads CPU @ 3.6GHz temps no iGPU 60 C - 65 C
1 - 7 threads CPU @ 3.6GHz temps with iGPU 48 C - 52 C

If iGPU in use CPU is somehow throttled. Bottleneck ?

---

_\|/_
U r s

Intel has changed the clock domain for iGPU with their Skylake CPUs. Its now bound to the baseclock (L3-cache, RAM, iGPU) instead of the DMI-connection (chipset and PCIe).
I do see the same behaviour on Linux on a KabyLake i7 : if iGPU in use CPU tasks are slowed down to a fourth, else the CPU cores without iGPU usage are fast.
Doesn't matter if one or more CPU threads are in use, if iGPU used for crunching the CPUs are slowed. The speedloss is bigger than running 8 threads on CPU.
The "sweet spot" seems to be running 6 or 7 threads without iGPU.

Seems they made the issue worse. The 4000 series CPUs would only be slowed by about 50% when using the iGPU. :(

---

SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[

If iGPU in use CPU is somehow throttled. Bottleneck ?

Either bottleneck (CPU/iGPU sharing caches & data paths?), or power related- Power limit for complete package; power required to run iGPU reduces available power for CPU?
Or both?

---

Grant
Darwin NT

If iGPU in use CPU is somehow throttled. Bottleneck ?

Either bottleneck (CPU/iGPU sharing caches & data paths?), or power related- Power limit for complete package; power required to run iGPU reduces available power for CPU?
Or both?

Here are some posts starting from 2014 about the same issue.
A journey: iGPU slowing CPU processing
iGPU tuning
Loading APU to the limit: performance considerations - ongoing research

I believe the leading theory was L3 cache contention when it was being looked into last.

---

SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[

First i will try to divide power different. Limit iGPU at lower wattage and give CPU more. Lets see how that works.

---

_\|/_
U r s