Message boards :
Number crunching :
Panic Mode On (111) Server Problems?
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 . . . 28 · 29 · 30 · 31
Author | Message |
---|---|
Wiggo Send message Joined: 24 Jan 00 Posts: 36604 Credit: 261,360,520 RAC: 489 |
. . Well there's Einstein@home, they give good credit and are doing useful work. Before CreditScrew there wasn't a great deal of difference between crunching here or over at E@H credit wise, but you can certainly see a huge difference these days. Cheers. |
Keith Myers Send message Joined: 29 Apr 01 Posts: 13164 Credit: 1,160,866,277 RAC: 1,873 |
. . Yep, exactly what I have found, on good GPUs running a special sauce form of CUDA you do better with tasks other than AP. But Keith is also running Windows boxes and I think that is where he is benefitting. Yep, exactly. Primary benefit are the 3 Windows Hosts, not the 2 CUDA90 Hosts. Two of the Windows hosts are not speed demons in any way. Seti@Home classic workunits:20,676 CPU time:74,226 hours A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association) |
juan BFP Send message Joined: 16 Mar 07 Posts: 9786 Credit: 572,710,851 RAC: 3,799 |
Not realy a panic: Results ready to send 0 6 710,223 |
Ghia Send message Joined: 7 Feb 17 Posts: 238 Credit: 28,911,438 RAC: 50 |
All this may be true. But I just have a big bother with inefficiency. It just bugs me to see a cpu core tied up for 4 hours with a AP task when it could be done in 12 minutes on the gpu. As you say, it likely is hurting my RAC. And it definitely is messing with the cpu APR. Exactly what I was trying to say. And when inefficiency even hurts your RAC... I could be doing 20 APs on the GPU in the same time it takes to do 1 on the CPU. Humans may rule the world...but bacteria run it... |
Grant (SSSF) Send message Joined: 19 Aug 99 Posts: 13846 Credit: 208,696,464 RAC: 304 |
All this may be true. But I just have a big bother with inefficiency. It just bugs me to see a cpu core tied up for 4 hours with a AP task when it could be done in 12 minutes on the gpu. As you say, it likely is hurting my RAC. And it definitely is messing with the cpu APR. But the same thing applies to the MB work as well. Why spend 2 hours processing a WU on the CPU when the GPU can do it in 5? For all the time it takes to do a single AP WU, you get more Credit for doing that 1 AP WU than for all the MB WUs you would have processed over the same period, whether you do them on the CPU or the GPU. Grant Darwin NT |
Stephen "Heretic" Send message Joined: 20 Sep 12 Posts: 5557 Credit: 192,787,363 RAC: 628 |
. . Well there's Einstein@home, they give good credit and are doing useful work. . . As you said before, if it was all about the credit I wouldn't be here :). As Sirius B said, everybody wants to be the 1st to find E.T. :) Stephen :) |
Stephen "Heretic" Send message Joined: 20 Sep 12 Posts: 5557 Credit: 192,787,363 RAC: 628 |
. . Well there's Einstein@home, they give good credit and are doing useful work. +1 Stephen :) |
Grant (SSSF) Send message Joined: 19 Aug 99 Posts: 13846 Credit: 208,696,464 RAC: 304 |
Given how much the server load has dropped off with all the AP work & Arecibo VLARs going to NVidia GPUs now, maybe Seti could re-enable Resend lost tasks? Even if it was only for a few hours a day it would help clear Ghosts out of the system much faster than waiting for them to time out, and help reduce the load of the database even further. Grant Darwin NT |
Stephen "Heretic" Send message Joined: 20 Sep 12 Posts: 5557 Credit: 192,787,363 RAC: 628 |
Given how much the server load has dropped off with all the AP work & Arecibo VLARs going to NVidia GPUs now, maybe Seti could re-enable Resend lost tasks? Even if it was only for a few hours a day it would help clear Ghosts out of the system much faster than waiting for them to time out, and help reduce the load of the database even further. +1 there as well. Stephen :) |
Kissagogo27 Send message Joined: 6 Nov 99 Posts: 716 Credit: 8,032,827 RAC: 62 |
I'm seeing results that seem to imply AP tasks run against CPUs award much lower credit than those run by Two GPUs. There is a bit of blanking, but at first look it seems some of the longer CPU tasks also pay less credit. I brought my ATI cards out of retirement just to run some APs, but it seems they are getting robbed. The blanked tasks take longer on the ATIs, but if the CPU takes a short time then the ATIs get much less credit for a longer task. Take a look at some of the run-times verses credit, https://setiathome.berkeley.edu/results.php?hostid=6796475&offset=60&appid=20 This one is more depressing than most, it's a longer than normal time, but scores a faction of normal; Task Computer Sent Time reported Status Run time CPU time Credit Application 6573740896 8260247 18 Apr 2018, 1:17:28 UTC 18 Apr 2018, 7:47:00 UTC Completed and validated 14,620.79 14,551.17 163.35 AstroPulse v7 v7.03 (sse2) windows_x86_64 6573740897 6796475 18 Apr 2018, 1:17:28 UTC 18 Apr 2018, 6:51:54 UTC Completed and validated 2,132.81 441.49 163.35 AstroPulse v7 Anonymous platform (ATI GPU) Blah! 131.04 pts for a normal AP, https://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=2941091313[/quote] 2938647197 6565741678 7019416 14 Apr 2018, 11:41:37 UTC 18 Apr 2018, 18:32:46 UTC Terminé et validé 99,246.44 90,508.01 467.80 AstroPulse v7 Plateforme anonyme (CPU) 6565741679 7432785 14 Apr 2018, 11:41:37 UTC 15 Apr 2018, 16:24:38 UTC Terminé et validé 1,669.14 174.03 467.80 AstroPulse v7 v7.07 (opencl_ati_mac) x86_64-apple-darwin first GPU mine second CPU , nice credit .. 2936686975 6561641219 8363701 12 Apr 2018, 19:54:27 UTC 18 Apr 2018, 23:43:09 UTC Terminé et validé 11,626.94 10,786.14 186.73 AstroPulse v7 v7.03 (sse) windows_intelx86 6561641220 7019416 12 Apr 2018, 19:54:29 UTC 14 Apr 2018, 21:14:16 UTC Terminé et validé 2,116.25 183.27 186.73 AstroPulse v7 Plateforme anonyme (GPU ATI) another one with less credit, same order GPU first (mine) and CPU second ... it's more a WU dépendent credit than CPU or GPU order .. 2940701359 CPU first -> 494cr |
Kissagogo27 Send message Joined: 6 Nov 99 Posts: 716 Credit: 8,032,827 RAC: 62 |
I'm seeing results that seem to imply AP tasks run against CPUs award much lower credit than those run by Two GPUs. There is a bit of blanking, but at first look it seems some of the longer CPU tasks also pay less credit. I brought my ATI cards out of retirement just to run some APs, but it seems they are getting robbed. The blanked tasks take longer on the ATIs, but if the CPU takes a short time then the ATIs get much less credit for a longer task. Take a look at some of the run-times verses credit, https://setiathome.berkeley.edu/results.php?hostid=6796475&offset=60&appid=20 2938647197 6565741678 7019416 14 Apr 2018, 11:41:37 UTC 18 Apr 2018, 18:32:46 UTC Terminé et validé 99,246.44 90,508.01 467.80 AstroPulse v7 Plateforme anonyme (CPU) 6565741679 7432785 14 Apr 2018, 11:41:37 UTC 15 Apr 2018, 16:24:38 UTC Terminé et validé 1,669.14 174.03 467.80 AstroPulse v7 v7.07 (opencl_ati_mac) x86_64-apple-darwin first GPU mine second CPU , nice credit .. 2936686975 6561641219 8363701 12 Apr 2018, 19:54:27 UTC 18 Apr 2018, 23:43:09 UTC Terminé et validé 11,626.94 10,786.14 186.73 AstroPulse v7 v7.03 (sse) windows_intelx86 6561641220 7019416 12 Apr 2018, 19:54:29 UTC 14 Apr 2018, 21:14:16 UTC Terminé et validé 2,116.25 183.27 186.73 AstroPulse v7 Plateforme anonyme (GPU ATI) another one with less credit, same order GPU first (mine) and CPU second ... it's more a WU dépendent credit than CPU or GPU order .. 2940701359 CPU first -> 494cr |
juan BFP Send message Joined: 16 Mar 07 Posts: 9786 Credit: 572,710,851 RAC: 3,799 |
@Kissagogo27 Welcome to the misteries of the Random number generator of CreditScrew. The same happening with MB WU. |
Dimly Lit Lightbulb 😀 Send message Joined: 30 Aug 08 Posts: 15399 Credit: 7,423,413 RAC: 1 |
. . Well there's Einstein@home, they give good credit and are doing useful work. Stats from single GPU crunching. Member of the People Encouraging Niceness In Society club. |
Brent Norman Send message Joined: 1 Dec 99 Posts: 2786 Credit: 685,657,289 RAC: 835 |
All this may be true. But I just have a big bother with inefficiency. It just bugs me to see a cpu core tied up for 4 hours with a AP task when it could be done in 12 minutes on the gpu. As you say, it likely is hurting my RAC. And it definitely is messing with the cpu APR.It depends how you look at it. 16 threads @ 240 minutes each = 15m/task overall. [/quote] |
Stephen "Heretic" Send message Joined: 20 Sep 12 Posts: 5557 Credit: 192,787,363 RAC: 628 |
[quote] Stats from single GPU crunching. <graph omitted> . . The numbers tell the story ... <shrug> Stephen :( |
Stephen "Heretic" Send message Joined: 20 Sep 12 Posts: 5557 Credit: 192,787,363 RAC: 628 |
[/quote]All this may be true. But I just have a big bother with inefficiency. It just bugs me to see a cpu core tied up for 4 hours with a AP task when it could be done in 12 minutes on the gpu. As you say, it likely is hurting my RAC. And it definitely is messing with the cpu APR.It depends how you look at it. 16 threads @ 240 minutes each = 15m/task overall. . . tsk, tsk ... you didn't allow for GPU support ... [ 12 threads for 240 mins = 20 mins per task, but since they take less than that, maybe 180 mins that would bring it back to 15 mins per task] Stephen :) |
Bernie Vine Send message Joined: 26 May 99 Posts: 9958 Credit: 103,452,613 RAC: 328 |
There is a new thread 112 |
©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.