I stumbled upon this unit, which caught my eye because of the unusual amount of credit.

Two cuda machines (one of which belongs to me) agreed on a 0,0,0,0 result. However, the stock cpu application (at least, that's what I think he used) gave a 0,0,0,1 result. My host runs the standard Berkeley 6.08 cuda application.

Below is first my output and second the output from the cpu host. I assumed this wasn't supposed to happen, but I guess it is an example of how 2 cuda hosts outweigh (what I presume to be) the proper result from a stock machine.

Is this worrying? Or is it unavoidable and within the range of the acceptable?

Regards,
John.

Output from my host (id: 4717536)

<core_client_version>6.4.7</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<stderr_txt>
setiathome_CUDA: Found 3 CUDA device(s):
Device 1 : GeForce 9800 GX2
totalGlobalMem = 536608768
sharedMemPerBlock = 16384
regsPerBlock = 8192
warpSize = 32
memPitch = 262144
maxThreadsPerBlock = 512
clockRate = 1512000
totalConstMem = 65536
major = 1
minor = 1
textureAlignment = 256
deviceOverlap = 1
multiProcessorCount = 16
Device 2 : GeForce 8800 GT
totalGlobalMem = 536543232
sharedMemPerBlock = 16384
regsPerBlock = 8192
warpSize = 32
memPitch = 262144
maxThreadsPerBlock = 512
clockRate = 1512000
totalConstMem = 65536
major = 1
minor = 1
textureAlignment = 256
deviceOverlap = 1
multiProcessorCount = 14
Device 3 : GeForce 9800 GX2
totalGlobalMem = 536608768
sharedMemPerBlock = 16384
regsPerBlock = 8192
warpSize = 32
memPitch = 262144
maxThreadsPerBlock = 512
clockRate = 1512000
totalConstMem = 65536
major = 1
minor = 1
textureAlignment = 256
deviceOverlap = 1
multiProcessorCount = 16
setiathome_CUDA: CUDA Device 3 specified, checking...
Device 3: GeForce 9800 GX2 is okay
SETI@home using CUDA accelerated device GeForce 9800 GX2
setiathome_enhanced 6.03 Visual Studio/Microsoft C++
libboinc: 6.3.22

Work Unit Info:
...............
WU true angle range is : 0.266877
Optimal function choices:
-----------------------------------------------------
name
-----------------------------------------------------
v_BaseLineSmooth (no other)
v_GetPowerSpectrum 0.00017 0.00000
v_ChirpData 0.01405 0.00000
v_Transpose4 0.00551 0.00000
FPU opt folding 0.00297 0.00000

Flopcounter: 35516507639839.750000

Spike count: 0
Pulse count: 0
Triplet count: 0
Gaussian count: 0
called boinc_finish




Output from the cpu host (id: 4332024)

<core_client_version>5.10.45</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<stderr_txt>
setiathome_enhanced 6.02 DevC++/MinGW
libboinc: 6.3.6

Work Unit Info:
...............
WU true angle range is : 0.266877
Optimal function choices:
-----------------------------------------------------
name
-----------------------------------------------------
v_BaseLineSmooth (no other)
v_vGetPowerSpectrumUnrolled2 0.00031 0.00000
v_ChirpData 0.04086 0.00000
v_vTranspose4x16ntw 0.01328 0.00000
BH SSE folding 0.00315 0.00000
Restarted at 11.34 percent.
Restarted at 39.15 percent.
Restarted at 44.90 percent.
Restarted at 45.19 percent.
Restarted at 46.34 percent.

Flopcounter: 29985803550053.039000

Spike count: 0
Pulse count: 0
Triplet count: 0
Gaussian count: 1
called boinc_finish

<core_client_version>5.10.45</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<stderr_txt>
setiathome_enhanced 6.02 DevC++/MinGW
libboinc: 6.3.6

No idea why this has happened, will need someone who knows about the processing side to look at it. However, it might have something to do with the no CUDA computer, because it is running the older 6.02 seti app and an older client.

---