What's me doing wrong with my 690x2 host.

---

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?

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

It seems slow. Any recommendations for improvement in performance

---

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

A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association)

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).

 -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

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?

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

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).

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).