Times (Elapsed / CPU) for BRP5/6/6-Beta on various CPU/GPU combos - DISCUSSION Thread
Language
Copyright © 2024 Einstein@Home. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2024 Einstein@Home. All rights reserved.
RE: RE: ... If you're not
)
I just tried it out and it works for me too! I got a performance boost of about 10% for my NVIDIA 610M. But the INTEL HD4000 does not seem to be faster. So I guess it only applies to "real" GPUs. I will have to monitor the temperature however. I hope it is not getting too hot.
I fired up an older GTX 580
)
I fired up an older GTX 580 to see how it would do with the new version of the BRP6 application. The card is performing quite well with this application.
[pre]
CPU: Intel Core i7 5960x @ 4.1 GHz
Threads: 8 - HT bypassed via process lasso
PCIe slot x16 Version 2.0
1st GPU: EVGA GTX 580 SC
RAM: 4 x 4GB DDR4 2600 MHz CL13
Concurrency: 0.5 @ 0.2 CPUs + 0.5 GPUs
CPU Tasks: 7x Asteroids@Home AVX CPU tasks
Free CPU cores: 1
OS: Windows 10 x64 Build 10049
Application Elapsed CPU time Sample Size
(Parkes PMPS XT) v1.52 6385 398 6
Daily production per elapsed time and concurrency: ~119K
[/pre]
I only have a few samples so I thought I would post here instead.
Jeroen
Do we know if a lower CPU
)
Do we know if a lower CPU fraction will increase the GPU load?
GTX 960 Maxwell stays at about 82% at the .2CPU fraction. Mem use is 301MB
Yet on SETI CUDA apps the CPU fraction I use is 0.04(with GPU at 0.5) and get GPU usage in the mid to high 90% range (637MB memory)
I don't see a cuda.cfg file to edit process priority
Both these *things improve runtime
RE: I fired up an older GTX
)
Such kind of cards are reasonably cheap on a second market.
However, I wonder how many heat it produces comparing with relatively new cards?
RE: Such kind of cards are
)
The GTX 580 has a TDP of 244w and factory temperature target of 86C. However, with a custom fan profile, this card can be kept in the 70s under load while running the BRP6 application. Also, I found that I am able to run a lower than factory GPU voltage with my cards without sacrificing stability. This can help save a bit on power draw.
The heat is usually not a
)
The heat is usually not a problem. On the other hand the power consumption - which causes the heat - can be a problem because you have to pay for it. If you're paying anything but US electricity prices that's going to hurt with a Fermi GPU, especially a high end 400 series. Assuming the GTX470 draws 200 W under BOINC load this would cost about 400€/year in Germany. At this point it's easy to see how more efficient cards in the range of 100 - 300€ would be a better deal for 24/7 number crunching, even though they cost more initially.
@JBird: there is no cuda.cfg at Einstein@Home. However, you can increase the process priority via Process Lasso. The only downside is you have to adjust this when ever the executable is renamed. Or.. I vaguely remember one can also define rules based on wildcards like *einstein*. I haven't tried to use anything like that, though.
Are you referring to the "" tag in the app_config.xml? If so: lower values make BOINC reserve less CPU ressources to run the app. If this has any effect on performance (depending onnthe magnitude of the change) it's going to be detrimental. However, you can use this to make sure there are always as many CPU cores free as you want. A solid choice is to set the same value as for "" if you're using 1 GPU. This way one logical core is reserved.
MrS
Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002
RE: However, you can
)
You can and I do, though I'd advise a bit more specificity than the example.
I just looked, and my daily use machine currently has a Process Lasso CPU priority option configured to set the priority of tasks matching einstein*cuda32*.exe to "above normal".
Come to think of it, the "cuda32" part of that match may become obsolete in the very near future, if, as hoped, an executable compiled against a higher version of CUDA emerges.
Thanks for making me look at this. At first glance I think I'll revise my match string to "einstein*cuda*.exe".
That's good advice. And while
)
That's good advice. And while we're at it: I'm also using Process Lasso to tie 4 CPU tasks to the first 2 physical cores with HT of my i7, to leave 2 physical cores free to optimally support the GPUs. This may be extreme, but the GPUs perform better than using 3 unregulated CPU tasks.
MrS
Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002
Heat isn't necessarily a
)
Heat isn't necessarily a problem. I'm planning to heat the living room with e@h next winter. 300W would be decent, I hope the R9 390/X will deliver a good performance. But I will have to see and compare what's on the market in October. And then sell it once it gets warmer outside.
That's the plan :)
The biggest problem is noise. I like it quiet. And dissipating 200-300W quietly isn't that easy without water cooling, which is too expensive.
The 750Ti provided a little too less heat past winter. The whole rig drew only about 110W including CPU tasks.
Yes, cooling 300 W quietly is
)
Yes, cooling 300 W quietly is difficult. 200 W is relatively easy for a modern mid or full tower, though. You're going to hear it, but set up well it's only going to be a faint wind sound.
I wouldn't bet too much on that heating plan, tough. 300 W is almost nothing for a bigger room, depending on the insulation to the outside. And after half a year the big GPU will still be very competitive, yet you have to sell it at a significant loss since it's used.
I'd probably choose a mid range GPU, which is easy enough to cool, and run it until something appreciably more efficient comes out.
MrS
Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002