Is it worth running the Intel GPU app?

Questions and Answers : GPU applications : Is it worth running the Intel GPU app?
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
Profile Jonathan Jeckell

Send message
Joined: 25 Jun 99
Posts: 30
Credit: 16,549,509
RAC: 62
United States
Message 1822248 - Posted: 6 Oct 2016, 16:48:22 UTC

I noticed a long time ago that CPU tasks take more than twice as long when I run the Intel GPU tasks. I captured some data, but not enough to model whether it's more advantageous to just turn the damned thing off.

Caveat: I'm sure more cores (like on i7 CPUs) help compensate for this, but it also slows down tasks on ALL of those cores...so...

Anyway, has anyone captured ~48 hours worth of credit using CPUs and the Intel GPU, and then done the same with just the CPU tasks? This would be easier with standardized work unit credit, like on Einstein@home. The variable credit means I can't just use the run time for the comparison.

Even if you don't have data, any thoughts on this, or the methodology I intend to use (if nobody has looked at this)?
ID: 1822248 · Report as offensive
Profile Jonathan Jeckell

Send message
Joined: 25 Jun 99
Posts: 30
Credit: 16,549,509
RAC: 62
United States
Message 1822251 - Posted: 6 Oct 2016, 17:17:49 UTC - in response to Message 1822248.  

Of course, the model of Intel GPU would matter and I forgot to mention that.

I have three machines running HD4000 GPUs
2 i5s (4 CPU threads) running Linux, and 1 i7(8 CPU threads) running Mac OS X.

I also have an i3 with an HD4400 running Windows 10, and it looks like it cranks out twice the credit per clock cycle that the HD4000 does.

So from the data I do have, it looks like the HD4000 GPU equates to the production of about two processor cores. Which seems to put things at break even when it makes CPU tasks take twice as long (and I run another CPU project). So it appears using the HD4000 is definitely a losing proposition with the i7 since it doubles the processing time for all 8 CPU threads and only gives me back about 2 CPU cores worth of performance (it looks like).
ID: 1822251 · Report as offensive
Profile BilBg
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 27 May 07
Posts: 3720
Credit: 9,385,827
RAC: 0
Bulgaria
Message 1822436 - Posted: 7 Oct 2016, 8:39:52 UTC - in response to Message 1822248.  

(if nobody has looked at this)?

Done > 2 years ago:
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=75215
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=75971
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=76814
 


- ALF - "Find out what you don't do well ..... then don't do it!" :)
 
ID: 1822436 · Report as offensive
Profile Jonathan Jeckell

Send message
Joined: 25 Jun 99
Posts: 30
Credit: 16,549,509
RAC: 62
United States
Message 1822493 - Posted: 7 Oct 2016, 14:53:31 UTC - in response to Message 1822436.  

Thanks! It didn't just give a short answer, I can see how various configurations affected things and why this is a problem.
ID: 1822493 · Report as offensive
Dimitri Debaere

Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 00
Posts: 3
Credit: 1,078,575
RAC: 0
Belgium
Message 1823221 - Posted: 10 Oct 2016, 7:27:11 UTC - in response to Message 1822436.  

I have an I7 with Intel GPU
When NOT running the GPU task, my CPU's run at 2.7 Ghz
When running the GPU taks, my CPU's run at 1.5 Ghz
=> this explains the longer time needed !
ID: 1823221 · Report as offensive

Questions and Answers : GPU applications : Is it worth running the Intel GPU app?


 
©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.