Hmmmm, wonder why this one decided to go inconclusive? http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=781560387

Thats probably because best pulses may varies.
Should validate with third host.

---

With each crime and every kindness we birth our future.

Not looking too good here in my side.

I get lots of overflows: http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/results.php?hostid=6108600&offset=0&show_names=0&state=2&appid=5

Not as bad as you might think Frizz. Your wingmates are also showing as 30/30 overflows on those. Why they are going out to another is another question though.

---

PROUD MEMBER OF Team Starfire World BOINC

Not looking too good here in my side.

I get lots of overflows: http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/results.php?hostid=6108600&offset=0&show_names=0&state=2&appid=5

As said in first post then you need to reduce unroll factor.

Raistmer, he's down to an unroll of 4 and he has five different wing men also giving 30/30 overflows. It's just a bad string of work units.

---

PROUD MEMBER OF Team Starfire World BOINC

Here's some data on my first batch of units, all run in low priority. GTS 450 with 266.58 drivers running one task at a time, AMD Phenom II running CPU Seti on all 4 cores. Data is in the format of Task, Run Time, CPU Time, Blanking.

-unroll 12 -ffa_block 8192 -ffa_block_fetch 2048
2000647746	5,959.56	1,272.56	2.39
2000647748	5,735.61	1,059.23	0

-unroll 12 -ffa_block 6144 -ffa_block_fetch 1536
2000767200	5,185.02	824.29	0
2000767203	6,008.74	1,790.99	11.33
2001090114	5,217.46	1,024.21	3.03
2001090124	4,934.34	751	0
2001090144	4,940.01	750.88	0

-unroll 8 -ffa_block 6144 -ffa_block_fetch 1536
2001192123	5,261.58	1,044.43	2.88
2001242946	5,230.54	1,005.05	2.39
2001556444	12,680.55	8,374.49	82.61
2003220580	5,016.48	789.69	0
2003220651	5,220.56	1,000.50	2.34
2003220653	5,358.10	1,007.10	2.39
2003220657	13,440.94	9,143.48	90.82
2004967204	5,011.65	792.3	0

Block/Fetch of 8192/2048 produced too much screen lag. 6144/1536 only produces a minor occasional lag I can live with. Hope this is useful to somebody.

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=2001666989
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=2001666977

560ti. Both are showing up as CPU which is strange, but they both validated. Using stock settings from Claggy of:

<app>
<name>astropulse_v505</name>
</app>
<file_info>
<name>ap_5.06_win_x86_SSE3_OpenCL_NV_r521.exe</name>
<executable/>
</file_info>
<file_info>
<name>AstroPulse_Kernels_r521.cl</name>
<executable/>
</file_info>
<app_version>
<app_name>astropulse_v505</app_name>
<version_num>505</version_num>
<platform>windows_intelx86</platform>
<avg_ncpus>0.04</avg_ncpus>
<max_ncpus>0.20</max_ncpus>
<plan_class>cuda</plan_class>
<cmdline>-ffa_block 6144 -ffa_block_fetch 1536 -hp -unroll 6 -instances_per_device 2</cmdline>
<file_ref>
<file_name>ap_5.06_win_x86_SSE3_OpenCL_NV_r521.exe</file_name>
<main_program/>
</file_ref>
<file_ref>
<file_name>AstroPulse_Kernels_r521.cl</file_name>
<copy_file/>
</file_ref>
<coproc>
<type>CUDA</type>
<count>.5</count>
</coproc>
</app_version>

Any thoughts on how I should tailor those settings?

---

Executive Director GPU Users Group Inc. -
brad@gpuug.org

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=2001666989
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=2001666977

560ti. Both are showing up as CPU which is strange, but they both validated. Using stock settings from Claggy of:

<app>
<name>astropulse_v505</name>
</app>
<file_info>
<name>ap_5.06_win_x86_SSE3_OpenCL_NV_r521.exe</name>
<executable/>
</file_info>
<file_info>
<name>AstroPulse_Kernels_r521.cl</name>
<executable/>
</file_info>
<app_version>
<app_name>astropulse_v505</app_name>
<version_num>505</version_num>
<platform>windows_intelx86</platform>
<avg_ncpus>0.04</avg_ncpus>
<max_ncpus>0.20</max_ncpus>
<plan_class>cuda</plan_class>
<cmdline>-ffa_block 6144 -ffa_block_fetch 1536 -hp -unroll 6 -instances_per_device 2</cmdline>
<file_ref>
<file_name>ap_5.06_win_x86_SSE3_OpenCL_NV_r521.exe</file_name>
<main_program/>
</file_ref>
<file_ref>
<file_name>AstroPulse_Kernels_r521.cl</file_name>
<copy_file/>
</file_ref>
<coproc>
<type>CUDA</type>
<count>.5</count>
</coproc>
</app_version>

Any thoughts on how I should tailor those settings?

Its not strange at all.
Version_num has to be 506.

Your 560s have 8 compute units so try unroll -8, -10, -12

I use <avg_ncpus>0.05</avg_ncpus>
<max_ncpus>0.05</max_ncpus>

Try

<cmdline>-ffa_block 8192 -ffa_block_fetch 2048 -unroll 12 -instances_per_device 2</cmdline>

---

With each crime and every kindness we birth our future.

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=2001666989
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=2001666977

560ti. Both are showing up as CPU which is strange, but they both validated.

Its not strange at all.
Version_num has to be 506.

Version number is irrelevant - it is ignored when using anonymous_platform.

The processor shown on the website is the one to which the task was originally issued. If that task was issued in response to a CPU work request, the database will continue to show it as a CPU task, even if you subsequently reschedule it to run on a GPU.

If you have other tasks which have been rescheduled from CPU to GPU, do NOT change the version number in app_info - the mis-match will cause all cached tasks to be abandoned.

My bad sorry.

---

With each crime and every kindness we birth our future.

Your 560s have 8 compute units so try unroll -8, -10, -12

My 460 have 7 compute units, what numbers should I use?

Your 560s have 8 compute units so try unroll -8, -10, -12

My 460 have 7 compute units, what numbers should I use?

-unroll 12 should be fine.

---

With each crime and every kindness we birth our future.

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=2001666989
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=2001666977

560ti. Both are showing up as CPU which is strange, but they both validated. Using stock settings from Claggy of:

Those command parameter settings aren't the Stock settings, just settings for Hopefully Maximum Compatibility, and Minimum Lag,
there is a wider range of Nvidia OpenCL capible GPU's than ATI OpenCL GPU's, from 8400 GS up to GTX590,
the Stock Settings would be -ffa_block 8192 -ffa_block_fetch 2048 -unroll 10 (same as ATI variant)

Claggy

i gave it a shot on the one rig of mine which actually works right now.

when i crunch mb with cuda the cpu stays around 8-15% usage with this old athlon64 3600+ (2.25 real ghz)

when i crunch ap with cuda using the 5.06 my cpu stays pegged at 100% i dont like that. but i cant complain since my cpu is so slow i dont even use it for crunching. only to keep mr cuda fed.

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=2001666989
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/result.php?resultid=2001666977

560ti. Both are showing up as CPU which is strange, but they both validated. Using stock settings from Claggy of:

Those command parameter settings aren't the Stock settings, just settings for Hopefully Maximum Compatibility, and Minimum Lag,
there is a wider range of Nvidia OpenCL capible GPU's than ATI OpenCL GPU's, from 8400 GS up to GTX590,
the Stock Settings would be -ffa_block 8192 -ffa_block_fetch 2048 -unroll 10 (same as ATI variant)

Claggy

This is looking like the ol' proverbial can o' worms to the kittyman.

Question....
Are these settings mostly GPU specific, or does the system CPU capability play into it too?

Perhaps somebody could start to compile a chart with recommended starting points for these settings based on the GPU.
There is going to be an onslaught of questions regarding this once the app leaves beta and is added to the Lunatics installer.

---

"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

It is GPU related Mark but you can always start with basic settings.
Each modell has different amount of compute units.

Basic settings

-ffa_block 6144 -ffa_block_fetch 1536 -unroll 6 should work on each discrete GPU.

Rest is optimizing.

---

With each crime and every kindness we birth our future.

i gave it a shot on the one rig of mine which actually works right now.

when i crunch mb with cuda the cpu stays around 8-15% usage with this old athlon64 3600+ (2.25 real ghz)

when i crunch ap with cuda using the 5.06 my cpu stays pegged at 100% i dont like that. but i cant complain since my cpu is so slow i dont even use it for crunching. only to keep mr cuda fed.

The 100% CPU is properly due to the drivers you have installed, this is what Raistmer wrote in his post:

2 hosts already reported greatly increased CPU consumption when running with 27x.xx drivers. Rolling back to 26x.xx ones solve this issue in both cases.

i gave it a shot on the one rig of mine which actually works right now.

when i crunch mb with cuda the cpu stays around 8-15% usage with this old athlon64 3600+ (2.25 real ghz)

when i crunch ap with cuda using the 5.06 my cpu stays pegged at 100% i dont like that. but i cant complain since my cpu is so slow i dont even use it for crunching. only to keep mr cuda fed.

The 100% CPU is properly due to the drivers you have installed, this is what Raistmer wrote in his post:

2 hosts already reported greatly increased CPU consumption when running with 27x.xx drivers. Rolling back to 26x.xx ones solve this issue in both cases.

It could be also that those units are heavily blanked.
Blankings are processed by CPU.

Just finnish some tasks that we can look at it.

---

With each crime and every kindness we birth our future.

It is GPU related Mark but you can always start with basic settings.
Each modell has different amount of compute units.

Basic settings

-ffa_block 6144 -ffa_block_fetch 1536 -unroll 6 should work on each discrete GPU.

Rest is optimizing.

ffa around the block and do the dosey-doe, fetch ur padna, do a spin and try then to unroll.....LOL.

---

"Freedom is just Chaos, with better lighting." Alan Dean Foster

it takes about 40 hours to crunch an ap with this athlon64 cpu. it takes less then 1.5 hours with the 550ti. thats why i dont even use the cpu for cr4unching anymore. not worth the extra heat and power when cuda literally is 30 times faster.

i might try rolling back to earlier driver, but things are going so good on this rig, i might just leave it alone and wait for the final build of ap_nv app to come out.

why are any of us even crunching astropulse when the ap portion of seti is apparently broken?. i remember reading about that somwhere.