Lunatics Windows Installer v0.44 - new release for v8 (required upgrade)

Message boards : Number crunching : Lunatics Windows Installer v0.44 - new release for v8 (required upgrade)
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 . . . 7 · Next

AuthorMessage
Ulrich Metzner
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 3 Jul 02
Posts: 1256
Credit: 13,565,513
RAC: 13
Germany
Message 1758621 - Posted: 23 Jan 2016, 13:06:29 UTC

MutliBeam ;)
Aloha, Uli

ID: 1758621 · Report as offensive
Profile jedimstr
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Oct 00
Posts: 33
Credit: 16,828,887
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1758627 - Posted: 23 Jan 2016, 13:19:37 UTC - in response to Message 1758225.  

If I understand correctly, these apps are the same as the stock apps, and you expect to be releasing optimized apps later.

...snip...



My shift on the desk. Yes, that's right - but the transition back from Anonymous Platform to stock isn't as easy as in the opposite direction.

...snip...



Just to clarify this point further, does this mean if we are using the stock apps currently with modern GPUs/CPUs, there is no performance advantage going with the Lunatics install at this point in time?
ID: 1758627 · Report as offensive
Richard Haselgrove Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 4 Jul 99
Posts: 14531
Credit: 200,643,578
RAC: 874
United Kingdom
Message 1758631 - Posted: 23 Jan 2016, 13:24:55 UTC - in response to Message 1758627.  

Just to clarify this point further, does this mean if we are using the stock apps currently with modern GPUs/CPUs, there is no performance advantage going with the Lunatics install at this point in time?

Yes for GPUs

No for CPUs. The installer does contain optimised CPU applications which have not been deployed as stock. The newer your CPU, the more likely it is to benefit: if your CPU/OS can run AVX - as any Intel Core i3/i5/i7 of third generation or later, running Windows 7 or later - should be able be able to do, you'll get the most improvement.
ID: 1758631 · Report as offensive
Profile BilBg
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 27 May 07
Posts: 3720
Credit: 9,385,827
RAC: 0
Bulgaria
Message 1758702 - Posted: 23 Jan 2016, 16:31:58 UTC - in response to Message 1758631.  

Just to clarify this point further, does this mean if we are using the stock apps currently with modern GPUs/CPUs, there is no performance advantage going with the Lunatics install at this point in time?

Yes for GPUs

Maybe there is "advantage going with the Lunatics" even for GPUs
- Apps may be the same but the server may not choose the best variant (or take too much time to settle on "the best")
- There are no Settings for stock to select exactly what you want to run on every device, e.g. only SETI@home v8 on CPU + only AstroPulse on ATI AMD + only SETI@home v8 CUDA 5 on NVIDIA
 


- ALF - "Find out what you don't do well ..... then don't do it!" :)
 
ID: 1758702 · Report as offensive
Profile TimeLord04
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Mar 06
Posts: 21100
Credit: 33,933,039
RAC: 23
United States
Message 1758744 - Posted: 23 Jan 2016, 18:51:26 UTC

Just reporting in...

Got two AP v7 WUs now running under Lunatics 0.44. Will monitor, and report Success/Failure... I anticipate that they'll run fine, though. :-)

(They're new, NOT re-sends. v7 7.10)


TL
TimeLord04
Have TARDIS, will travel...
Come along K-9!
Join Calm Chaos
ID: 1758744 · Report as offensive
Profile Jord
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Jun 99
Posts: 15183
Credit: 4,362,181
RAC: 3
Netherlands
Message 1758791 - Posted: 23 Jan 2016, 20:52:31 UTC

I have to say, keeping an eye on the times in BOINC Manager, I'd run over 100 tasks already with Mike's r3299 for my ATI HD7870 GPU. Those ran just the 'generic' ati_opencl_sah, whereas r3300 from the Lunatics installer runs opencl_ati5_sah.

The latter runs them slower. Per task by about 30 seconds to over 2 minutes.
e.g. some *11aa* tasks ran for 17m 54s on r3299, but run in 18m 22s on r3300.
Some *11ac* ran in 6m 50s on r3299, but run in 9m 09s on r3300.

The load and temperatures are about the same, I haven't seen them go over 60C yet, be it r3299 or r330. Better than Fallout 4 with its 67C and high-fan-racket. :)
ID: 1758791 · Report as offensive
Richard Haselgrove Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 4 Jul 99
Posts: 14531
Credit: 200,643,578
RAC: 874
United Kingdom
Message 1758810 - Posted: 23 Jan 2016, 21:41:16 UTC - in response to Message 1758791.  

I have to say, keeping an eye on the times in BOINC Manager, I'd run over 100 tasks already with Mike's r3299 for my ATI HD7870 GPU. Those ran just the 'generic' ati_opencl_sah, whereas r3300 from the Lunatics installer runs opencl_ati5_sah.

The latter runs them slower. Per task by about 30 seconds to over 2 minutes.
e.g. some *11aa* tasks ran for 17m 54s on r3299, but run in 18m 22s on r3300.
Some *11ac* ran in 6m 50s on r3299, but run in 9m 09s on r3300.

The load and temperatures are about the same, I haven't seen them go over 60C yet, be it r3299 or r330. Better than Fallout 4 with its 67C and high-fan-racket. :)

No, not quite right. 'ati_opencl_sah' and 'opencl_ati5_sah' don't run anything at all - they are simply plan_class labels.

Eric hasn't deployed any ati_ plan classes this time - they were mainly to fool v6 BOINC clients (which didn't have native OpenCL scheduling) into running OpenCL as if they were CAL applications. It looks like we've finally thrown away that ancient kludge.

The slowdown between r3299 and r3330 (those numbers are significant) is probably because of the increased arithmetic precision of the final released applications - see if your rate of inconclusive validations goes down.
ID: 1758810 · Report as offensive
Profile Mike Special Project $75 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 17 Feb 01
Posts: 33581
Credit: 79,922,639
RAC: 80
Germany
Message 1758814 - Posted: 23 Jan 2016, 21:53:18 UTC

This depends on the GPU in use Jord.

On my 380 3330 is faster.
Not to forget some important bugs were fixed.


With each crime and every kindness we birth our future.
ID: 1758814 · Report as offensive
Profile Jord
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Jun 99
Posts: 15183
Credit: 4,362,181
RAC: 3
Netherlands
Message 1758847 - Posted: 23 Jan 2016, 23:20:57 UTC - in response to Message 1758810.  
Last modified: 23 Jan 2016, 23:22:15 UTC

Richard wrote:
No, not quite right. 'ati_opencl_sah' and 'opencl_ati5_sah' don't run anything at all - they are simply plan_class labels.

And because I put that into my app_info.xml file, the old one had <plan_class>ati_opencl_sah</plan_class> in it, the new one has all possible ones, even one my GPU cannot run: <plan_class>opencl_ati_nocal</plan_class>

(Those are, if all is well, only for the AMD GPUs that have no hardware support for, and therefore no detection of CAL. My HD7870 still does have CAL support and does the detection, so in essence it's useless that it's included in my app_info.xml file, only there to confuse.

I know my GPU can run these tasks with that label, as they're just generic tasks with no extra bits and bobs, just saying that it shouldn't be included in an app_info.xml file of a GPU that's perfectly capable of doing the detection the plan_class says it cannot do.

If we're to confuse anyway...
But perhaps that a separate application is needed here, the _nocal_ one, that people with newer R5s, R7s, R9s can choose out of (not the rebranded HD5xxx/69xx/78xx/79xx).

Richard wrote:
The slowdown between r3299 and r3330 (those numbers are significant) is probably because of the increased arithmetic precision of the final released applications - see if your rate of inconclusive validations goes down.

Sorry I missed out on the extra 3 in the name. But then I didn't misspell Multibeam and v7/v8... :<P>>

My rate of inconclusives though? The one I have is due to this guy who has 119 of them and seems to make a sport of having them. I don't think my system has ever thrown out any inconclusive results, unless I was tinkering with it at a time I shouldn't have and something went wrong with a key file. And that must've been in 1985. So.

Mike wrote:
On my 380 3330 is faster.
Not to forget some important bugs were fixed.

Edit: err oops... there was something I wanted to say but completely forgot. Why did I quote you, Mike? Tell me? :)
ID: 1758847 · Report as offensive
Richard Haselgrove Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 4 Jul 99
Posts: 14531
Credit: 200,643,578
RAC: 874
United Kingdom
Message 1758850 - Posted: 23 Jan 2016, 23:32:32 UTC - in response to Message 1758847.  

All those plan_class names are included in the installer's AI stubs because at some time in the next six months:

Some guy might join the SETI@Home project using an old (or new, or middling) ATi (or AMD) GPU, and get the scheduler's usual mish-mash of task types.

And find the unexpected work/thermal load burns up that GPU. And go out to buy a replacement.

And then find these message boards. And immediately get told that they "should" be running Lunatics (it happens, but not from me).

And run the installer. And wondrously, all that mish-mash of strange stock tasks becomes runnable again.

But I'm not including the full gamut of Beta and archival plan_classes and version numbers as well.
ID: 1758850 · Report as offensive
Profile Raistmer
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Jun 01
Posts: 6324
Credit: 106,370,077
RAC: 121
Russia
Message 1758861 - Posted: 23 Jan 2016, 23:57:32 UTC - in response to Message 1758810.  


The slowdown between r3299 and r3330 (those numbers are significant) is probably because of the increased arithmetic precision of the final released applications - see if your rate of inconclusive validations goes down.

There were NO such thing in OpenCL app. Precision exactly the same from initial v8 introduction. All precision issues came from stock Linux x64 build and were corrected. OpenCL was with "gold standard" ;)
So any such performance differencies quite subjective and could fall only into instruction layout differencies between binaries.
ID: 1758861 · Report as offensive
Profile Jimbocous Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 13
Posts: 1849
Credit: 268,616,081
RAC: 1,349
United States
Message 1759127 - Posted: 25 Jan 2016, 1:39:40 UTC - in response to Message 1758594.  
Last modified: 25 Jan 2016, 1:50:07 UTC

Very small visual 7ypo (which don't really need correction) on ATI and Intel pages:
Can you spot it ;)


Mutlibeam:)

edit: late to the show again ...sigh
ID: 1759127 · Report as offensive
Profile Jim_S
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Feb 00
Posts: 4705
Credit: 64,560,357
RAC: 31
United States
Message 1759138 - Posted: 25 Jan 2016, 2:39:15 UTC - in response to Message 1759127.  

Very small visual 7ypo (which don't really need correction) on ATI and Intel pages:
Can you spot it ;)


Mutlibeam:)

edit: late to the show again ...sigh


Yup. ;o)

I Desire Peace and Justice, Jim Scott (Mod-Ret.)
ID: 1759138 · Report as offensive
Profile Jimbocous Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 13
Posts: 1849
Credit: 268,616,081
RAC: 1,349
United States
Message 1759140 - Posted: 25 Jan 2016, 2:48:30 UTC - in response to Message 1759138.  

Mutlibeam:)

edit: late to the show again ...sigh


Yup. ;o)

Better than Motleybeam, for sure ...
ID: 1759140 · Report as offensive
Profile Jeff Buck Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 11 Feb 00
Posts: 1441
Credit: 148,764,870
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1759143 - Posted: 25 Jan 2016, 2:51:51 UTC - in response to Message 1759138.  

Actually.....we're all late to the party. Here's the same window from v0.43b.



I guess none of us really pay attention to details when we're in a hurry to install the latest and greatest! ;^)
ID: 1759143 · Report as offensive
Profile HAL9000
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 99
Posts: 6533
Credit: 196,805,888
RAC: 57
United States
Message 1759169 - Posted: 25 Jan 2016, 4:32:27 UTC - in response to Message 1759143.  
Last modified: 25 Jan 2016, 4:37:35 UTC

Actually.....we're all late to the party. Here's the same window from v0.43b.

[img ]http://i65.tinypic.com/ayk6tg.jpg[/img]

I guess none of us really pay attention to details when we're in a hurry to install the latest and greatest! ;^)

Well you are not only late to the party, but you also missed the main error in the 0.44 installer.
You guys might want to give Richard's reply to BilBg's post a read.
SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the BP6/VP6 User Group today!
ID: 1759169 · Report as offensive
Profile Jim_S
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Feb 00
Posts: 4705
Credit: 64,560,357
RAC: 31
United States
Message 1759277 - Posted: 25 Jan 2016, 22:14:19 UTC - in response to Message 1759169.  

Ummmmm...plan_class labels.

I Desire Peace and Justice, Jim Scott (Mod-Ret.)
ID: 1759277 · Report as offensive
Profile janneseti
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Oct 09
Posts: 14106
Credit: 655,366
RAC: 0
Sweden
Message 1759444 - Posted: 26 Jan 2016, 14:10:02 UTC

I have installed this new release and everything is working fine.
But now I cant see any of the v8 workunits in the SETI webpage despite I crunched and reported several. Only v7 workunits are showing.
Any ideas?
ID: 1759444 · Report as offensive
Cruncher-American Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor

Send message
Joined: 25 Mar 02
Posts: 1513
Credit: 370,893,186
RAC: 340
United States
Message 1759445 - Posted: 26 Jan 2016, 14:13:41 UTC - in response to Message 1759444.  

I have installed this new release and everything is working fine.
But now I cant see any of the v8 workunits in the SETI webpage despite I crunched and reported several. Only v7 workunits are showing.
Any ideas?


Problem is that the replica dB is currently offline. That is where the WU info comes from.
ID: 1759445 · Report as offensive
Profile janneseti
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Oct 09
Posts: 14106
Credit: 655,366
RAC: 0
Sweden
Message 1759447 - Posted: 26 Jan 2016, 14:21:55 UTC - in response to Message 1759445.  

I see. Thanks.
ID: 1759447 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 . . . 7 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : Lunatics Windows Installer v0.44 - new release for v8 (required upgrade)


 
©2022 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.