Message boards :
Number crunching :
That wierd
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
W-K 666 Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 19012 Credit: 40,757,560 RAC: 67 |
All tasks received with the last three hours, have the same estimated completion time, whether they are for the cpu or the gpu. They are all MB's and with DCF at 0.93 they are reading 02:33:00 +/- 3 mins |
rob smith Send message Joined: 7 Mar 03 Posts: 22160 Credit: 416,307,556 RAC: 380 |
Hmm - I've just looked at my load, that have come in since this morning (UK). All have the same time (CPU & GPU mix), but a different one to you - 2hrs16min.... Obviously using dice to determine the run time, which might be better if they could get the correct sided dice... Bob Smith Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society) Somewhere in the (un)known Universe? |
W-K 666 Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 19012 Credit: 40,757,560 RAC: 67 |
Now that computer has started crunching theese tasks d/loaded recently I can say they are all VHAR's the "tapes" are all dated 02, 21, 24jl11 |
rob smith Send message Joined: 7 Mar 03 Posts: 22160 Credit: 416,307,556 RAC: 380 |
That may be the case, but it doesn't explain why the "guess time" for both CPU & GPU tasks are the same. Also the CPU guess time is more or less correct, but the GPU guess overestimates by a factor of about 40. Bob Smith Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society) Somewhere in the (un)known Universe? |
W-K 666 Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 19012 Credit: 40,757,560 RAC: 67 |
That may be the case, but it doesn't explain why the "guess time" for both CPU & GPU tasks are the same. The times on my cpu are ~40mins, and on the GPU ~8mins. Which is normal time for VHAR tasks. So if my DCF was 1.00000 then the estimated times are about 4 * for the CPU, and 20 * for the GPU. |
Richard Haselgrove Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 14649 Credit: 200,643,578 RAC: 874 |
That may be the case, but it doesn't explain why the "guess time" for both CPU & GPU tasks are the same. You can always get a quick 'rule of thumb' on task duration by looking at the deadline column - shorties are currently arriving with a deadline of somewhat after 09:00 UTC 05 Oct 2011 - anything in late October or early November is a mid- or low- AR task. You will get identical runtime estimates for CPU and GPU tasks if: you are running anonymous platform, and no APR correction is currently being applied to the GPU tasks on that host. The could mean that your individual computer has picked up a new HostID along the way, and started a fresh set of application details: or it could mean that APR has been disabled for the whole project, for the time being at least. Could you have a delve into your host records, please, and help us work out which it is? |
rob smith Send message Joined: 7 Mar 03 Posts: 22160 Credit: 416,307,556 RAC: 380 |
Looking at the computer ID suggests that it hasn't changed since 2009, so it looks as if APR is not functioning. Bob Smith Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society) Somewhere in the (un)known Universe? |
W-K 666 Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 19012 Credit: 40,757,560 RAC: 67 |
That may be the case, but it doesn't explain why the "guess time" for both CPU & GPU tasks are the same. HostID hasn't changed and APR correction SETI@home Enhanced (anonymous platform, CPU) Number of tasks completed 1624 Max tasks per day 214 Number of tasks today 21 Consecutive valid tasks 114 Average processing rate 21.008039955223 Average turnaround time 4.26 days SETI@home Enhanced (anonymous platform, nvidia GPU) Number of tasks completed 2716 Max tasks per day 454 Number of tasks today 52 Consecutive valid tasks 355 Average processing rate 104.62213864253 Average turnaround time 2.00 days Astropulse v505 (anonymous platform, CPU) Number of tasks completed 64 Max tasks per day 126 Number of tasks today 0 Consecutive valid tasks 27 Average processing rate 55.896231237772 Average turnaround time 2.22 days |
Richard Haselgrove Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 14649 Credit: 200,643,578 RAC: 874 |
OK, I've got a host I'm monitoring very closely for straws in the wind. It runs VHARs in 4 minutes 15 seconds, give or take, and runs with a DCF of about 0.025 when showing accurate estimates for continuous shorties - just high enough to allow continuous work fetch. That's with the doubled APR cap introduced last week. Before that was released, DCF on continual VHARs was below the magic 0.02, so I had to resort to manual intervention to get work. I've just had a mid-AR resend go through, so DCF has been kicked higher - 0.0343 - and VHAR estimates are now 05:46. That sounds proportionate, suggesting the APR treatment is unchanged since last week. Anyone else got any observations to chip in? |
rob smith Send message Joined: 7 Mar 03 Posts: 22160 Credit: 416,307,556 RAC: 380 |
Richard - details for your consideration (this host takes about 4mins to complete a "shorty" on the GPU - a GTS250) SETI@home Enhanced 6.03 windows_intelx86 Number of tasks completed 345 Max tasks per day 424 Number of tasks today 0 Consecutive valid tasks 201 Average processing rate 4.2641769609151 Average turnaround time 7.66 days SETI@home Enhanced 6.09 windows_intelx86 (cuda23) Number of tasks completed 1371 Max tasks per day 301 Number of tasks today 0 Consecutive valid tasks 6 Average processing rate 25.48554602749 Average turnaround time 10.43 days SETI@home Enhanced (anonymous platform, CPU) Number of tasks completed 830 Max tasks per day 677 Number of tasks today 0 Consecutive valid tasks 578 Average processing rate 4.67252804848 Average turnaround time 6.44 days SETI@home Enhanced (anonymous platform, nvidia GPU) Number of tasks completed 13063 Max tasks per day 1681 Number of tasks today 181 Consecutive valid tasks 1581 Average processing rate 193.10907358688 Average turnaround time 1.27 days Astropulse v505 (anonymous platform, CPU) Number of tasks completed 54 Max tasks per day 127 Number of tasks today 0 Consecutive valid tasks 28 Average processing rate 7.0024699071515 Average turnaround time 7.92 days Bob Smith Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society) Somewhere in the (un)known Universe? |
Richard Haselgrove Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 14649 Credit: 200,643,578 RAC: 874 |
And what's your DCF, when estimates are matching reality? (after a long continuous run of VHAR 'shorties' on GPU is the best time to check). I'm watching a week-old 9800GT account, with SETI@home Enhanced (anonymous platform, nvidia GPU) Number of tasks completed 582 Max tasks per day 338 Number of tasks today 60 Consecutive valid tasks 238 Average processing rate 191.29744959377 Average turnaround time 0.58 days - so pretty well matched to your GTS250 |
Iona Send message Joined: 12 Jul 07 Posts: 790 Credit: 22,438,118 RAC: 0 |
I have also been getting GPU tasks sent which have estimated times very similar to CPU tasks. I strongly suspect you are correct, Richard, when you opine that APR has been disabled.....my ludicrously high ATI GPU MB APR has not changed a bit. That being so, I am relieved that I correctly saw the chance to process GPU MB, with last weeks very high time estimates - it did me a favour. Usually, a 'shortie' takes around 24 mins to the GPUs 12 mins, but with AP, things are a bit different.....roughly 10 hrs CPU to the GPUs 3 hrs. Application details are as below. SETI@home Enhanced (anonymous platform, CPU) Number of tasks completed 715 Max tasks per day 2984 Number of tasks today 0 Consecutive valid tasks 2364 Average processing rate 28.023010646597 Average turnaround time 0.94 days SETI@home Enhanced (anonymous platform, ATI GPU) Number of tasks completed 15 Max tasks per day 139 Number of tasks today 0 Consecutive valid tasks 40 Average processing rate 1390.280653876 Average turnaround time 0.10 days Astropulse v505 (anonymous platform, CPU) Number of tasks completed 24 Max tasks per day 164 Number of tasks today 0 Consecutive valid tasks 64 Average processing rate 44.213757313418 Average turnaround time 2.72 days Astropulse v505 (anonymous platform, ATI GPU) Number of tasks completed 22 Max tasks per day 126 Number of tasks today 0 Consecutive valid tasks 26 Average processing rate 193.72450987751 Average turnaround time 1.38 days Task duration correction factor 0.207809 Don't take life too seriously, as you'll never come out of it alive! |
Josef W. Segur Send message Joined: 30 Oct 99 Posts: 4504 Credit: 1,414,761 RAC: 0 |
As it happens, with <avg_cpus>0.04</avg_cpus> and <count>1</count> in the app_version section of an app_info.xml file without <flops> the BOINC core client will be sending a <flops> value for the GPU which is just 4% higher than the <flops> it sends for CPU. The server scaling is based on twice those values if the APRs are above that. The core client's DCF affects each project task equally, so it is not surprising if CPU and GPU runtime estimates are nearly equal in that case. A host with 1.92589e09 Whetstones and MB APRs for anonymous platform of 4.67252804848 CPU and 193.10907358688 GPU is in that condition. So is a host with 3.07063e09 Whetstones, MB APRs of 28.023010646597 and 1390.280653876, and AP APRs of 44.213757313418 and 193.72450987751. Joe |
Fred J. Verster Send message Joined: 21 Apr 04 Posts: 3252 Credit: 31,903,643 RAC: 0 |
Another host, with a GTS250 and a Q6600, stock, WIN32XP, this host. DETAILS SETI@home Enhanced (anonymous platform, Unknone) Number of tasks completed 60 Max tasks per day 60 Number of tasks today 0 Consecutive valid tasks 0 Average processing rate 19.287435425713 Average Turnaround Time 3.49 days SETI@home Enhanced (anonymous platform, CPU) Number of tasks completed 2003 Max tasks per day 187 Number of tasks today 0 Consecutive valid tasks 98 Average processing rate 18.342186573779 Average Turnaround Time 2.65 days SETI@home Enhanced (anonymous platform, nvidia GPU) Number of tasks completed 28189 Max tasks per day 1643 Number of tasks today 309 Consecutive valid tasks 1544 Average processing rate 177.2357327562 Average Turnaround Time 1.66 days Astropulse v505 (anonymous platform, CPU) Number of tasks completed 54 Max tasks per day 104 Number of tasks today 0 Consecutive valid tasks 4 Average processing rate 38.590850210474 Average Turaround Time 4.58 days But only this host got many shorties, all other MBs are being crunched by (SSSE3;optimized) CPUs, MW is blowing my 5870 GPUs to it's limit, but the new (Bêta)Rev.365 works very good and has a far better GPU load, first GPU=44% avg., second 36% avg. (Highest was 57% on 1st GPU and 51% for the 2nd GPU, both average over a ~1000 second MB WU). But that's this host and drifting away....................... |
Cosmic_Ocean Send message Joined: 23 Dec 00 Posts: 3027 Credit: 13,516,867 RAC: 13 |
What I have observed is that on separate work requests, as long as I have not completed and reported any tasks, I will get identical ETAs on all WUs that come in, until at least one gets reported. On my main cruncher, this can be upwards of a full 24 hours in which I can get new WUs with identical ETAs. Linux laptop: record uptime: 1511d 20h 19m (ended due to the power brick giving-up) |
Fred J. Verster Send message Joined: 21 Apr 04 Posts: 3252 Credit: 31,903,643 RAC: 0 |
Isn't that part of the way BOINC is designed to work, also after some time, and a sufficient number of completed and validated work is uploaded and canonical result is reached, after awhile estimated time, should not be that far off. That's ofcoarse pure theory cause if it's attached network hasn't sufficient bandwidth, it's gettin further and further delays, up-- &down-loads get slowed or stuck! (I do notice a speedup in downloads, though). |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.