What's wrong with my 690 host

Message boards : Number crunching : What's wrong with my 690 host
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

AuthorMessage
elec999 Project Donor

Send message
Joined: 24 Nov 02
Posts: 366
Credit: 368,273,208
RAC: 778,751
Canada
Message 2005512 - Posted: 3 Aug 2019, 15:18:20 UTC

What's me doing wrong with my 690x2 host.
ID: 2005512 · Report as offensive
rob smith Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 7 Mar 03
Posts: 17900
Credit: 408,290,194
RAC: 36,109
United Kingdom
Message 2005513 - Posted: 3 Aug 2019, 15:25:49 UTC

What have you changed recently?
What are the symptoms (error messages, messages from BOINC etc)?
Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?
ID: 2005513 · Report as offensive
Ian&Steve C.
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Sep 99
Posts: 1922
Credit: 864,076,306
RAC: 2,754,193
United States
Message 2005514 - Posted: 3 Aug 2019, 15:44:39 UTC - in response to Message 2005513.  

What have you changed recently?
What are the symptoms (error messages, messages from BOINC etc)?

+1

You’ll have to be more specific about what problem you think you’re having. Looks like it’s working fine based on a few WUs you’ve returned.
Seti@Home classic workunits: 29,492 CPU time: 134,419 hours

ID: 2005514 · Report as offensive
elec999 Project Donor

Send message
Joined: 24 Nov 02
Posts: 366
Credit: 368,273,208
RAC: 778,751
Canada
Message 2005542 - Posted: 3 Aug 2019, 18:46:56 UTC - in response to Message 2005514.  

It seems slow. Any recommendations for improvement in performance
ID: 2005542 · Report as offensive
Profile Keith Myers Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Apr 01
Posts: 10137
Credit: 982,313,356
RAC: 1,521,472
United States
Message 2005544 - Posted: 3 Aug 2019, 19:33:44 UTC - in response to Message 2005542.  

It seems slow. Any recommendations for improvement in performance

You are running stock parameters. I suggest using any the many posted alternate command lines for more aggressive tuning.
Seti@Home classic workunits:20,676 CPU time:74,226 hours
ID: 2005544 · Report as offensive
Profile Tom M
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 28 Nov 02
Posts: 3764
Credit: 224,766,904
RAC: 366,535
United States
Message 2005584 - Posted: 3 Aug 2019, 22:50:25 UTC - in response to Message 2005544.  

It seems slow. Any recommendations for improvement in performance

You are running stock parameters. I suggest using any the many posted alternate command lines for more aggressive tuning.


 -sbs 1024 -period_iterations_num 10 -spike_fft_thresh 4096 -tune 1 64 1 4 -oclfft_tune_gr 256 -oclfft_tune_lr 16 -oclfft_tune_wg 256 -oclfft_tune_ls 512 -oclfft_tune_bn 64 -oclfft_tune_cw 64


Is something Wiggo posted for gtx 1060 3GB's. It would give you a starting point if you are feeling specifically clueless (Like I often am).

Tom
A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association)
"Over the hill? WHAT Hill? I don't REMEMBER any hill...." (from a bumper sticker I bought at a truck stop).
ID: 2005584 · Report as offensive
Grant (SSSF)
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 19 Aug 99
Posts: 11780
Credit: 179,973,263
RAC: 220,021
Australia
Message 2005588 - Posted: 3 Aug 2019, 22:55:03 UTC - in response to Message 2005584.  

 -sbs 1024 -period_iterations_num 10 -spike_fft_thresh 4096 -tune 1 64 1 4 -oclfft_tune_gr 256 -oclfft_tune_lr 16 -oclfft_tune_wg 256 -oclfft_tune_ls 512 -oclfft_tune_bn 64 -oclfft_tune_cw 64

Is something Wiggo posted for gtx 1060 3GB's. It would give you a starting point if you are feeling specifically clueless (Like I often am).

If this system is for crunching only you could probably get away with -period_iterations_num 1 and add - hp - high_perf which will give the best performance. I'd suggest trying -period_iterations_num 5 or 3 first to see just how it impacts on system responsiveness. Even if it is for crunching only, you don't want the system to be effectively non-responsive to keyboard or mouse input in case you need to do something with it.
Grant
Darwin NT
ID: 2005588 · Report as offensive
rob smith Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 7 Mar 03
Posts: 17900
Credit: 408,290,194
RAC: 36,109
United Kingdom
Message 2005645 - Posted: 4 Aug 2019, 6:57:17 UTC

Those settings may not be suited to the older generation GTX690 (which is a pair of GPU, each approximately the same as a GTX670 in terms of performance). Also free up four cores at least to give the beasts a chance to get fed properly.
Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?
ID: 2005645 · Report as offensive
Bruce
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 15 Mar 02
Posts: 123
Credit: 124,869,755
RAC: 1
United States
Message 2005680 - Posted: 4 Aug 2019, 10:55:31 UTC

These settings are what I used after offline testing of my Titan-Z's. Those are newer versions of your GTX690's.

-high_prec_timer -high_perf -tt 90 -period_iterations_num 20 -sbs 384 -pref_wg_size 128 -spike_fft_thresh 2048 -tune 1 64 1 4 -oclfft_tune_gr 256 -oclfft_tune_lr 16 -oclfft_tune_wg 256 -oclfft_tune_ls 512 -oclfft_tune_bn 64 -oclfft_tune_cw 64

The higher -sbs numbers work better with the newer cards. In my testing the -sbs 256 and the -sbs 384 tied and both ran quicker than the higher -sbs numbers.

You might also consider rolling back your SoG app to the SoG-r3557, this might turn in quicker times than the SoG-r3602 that you are using.

Hope this helps.
Bruce
ID: 2005680 · Report as offensive
Profile Tom M
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 28 Nov 02
Posts: 3764
Credit: 224,766,904
RAC: 366,535
United States
Message 2005691 - Posted: 4 Aug 2019, 11:53:28 UTC - in response to Message 2005645.  

Those settings may not be suited to the older generation GTX690 (which is a pair of GPU, each approximately the same as a GTX670 in terms of performance). Also free up four cores at least to give the beasts a chance to get fed properly.


+1
A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association)
"Over the hill? WHAT Hill? I don't REMEMBER any hill...." (from a bumper sticker I bought at a truck stop).
ID: 2005691 · Report as offensive
Profile Tom M
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 28 Nov 02
Posts: 3764
Credit: 224,766,904
RAC: 366,535
United States
Message 2005692 - Posted: 4 Aug 2019, 11:58:11 UTC - in response to Message 2005584.  

It seems slow. Any recommendations for improvement in performance

You are running stock parameters. I suggest using any the many posted alternate command lines for more aggressive tuning.


 -sbs 1024 -period_iterations_num 10 -spike_fft_thresh 4096 -tune 1 64 1 4 -oclfft_tune_gr 256 -oclfft_tune_lr 16 -oclfft_tune_wg 256 -oclfft_tune_ls 512 -oclfft_tune_bn 64 -oclfft_tune_cw 64


Is something Wiggo posted for gtx 1060 3GB's. It would give you a starting point if you are feeling specifically clueless (Like I often am).

Tom


It sounds like at least the -sbs should be down at the 192/256 level based on the other responses.

A minimal command line could be:
 -sbs 192 -period_iterations_num 5 -spike_fft_thresh 4096 -tune 1 64 1 4 -tt 1500


Tom
A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association)
"Over the hill? WHAT Hill? I don't REMEMBER any hill...." (from a bumper sticker I bought at a truck stop).
ID: 2005692 · Report as offensive

Message boards : Number crunching : What's wrong with my 690 host


 
©2019 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.