BRPS observations (CPU)

MarkJ
MarkJ
Joined: 28 Feb 08
Posts: 437
Credit: 139002861
RAC: 1
Topic 195542

I thought i'd start a thread about the BRPS (CPU) apps to give the developers some feedback. There is a separate thread for the cuda apps. Please give a link to the wu and mention what CPU and OS you are using.

I picked up two yesterday on one of my i7's. Links below:
1st wu
2nd wu

They both ran to completion (i7-920 running at stock, Win7 x64). Interestingly the run time is somewhat higher than the cpu time by 10,000 seconds on the 1st wu and 14,000 on the 2nd wu, which suggests its waiting on something.

I'm not sure there are any cpu optimizations for these (ie SSE2/SSE3) which might benefit it.

Jeroen
Jeroen
Joined: 25 Nov 05
Posts: 379
Credit: 740030628
RAC: 0

BRPS observations (CPU)

My systems have been running some of these tasks for the last few days.

i7 @ 3.8 GHz

Link 1

Q6600 @ 3.0 GHz

Link 2

These two systems are custom small footprint Linux systems with kernel 2.6.36.

paul milton
paul milton
Joined: 16 Sep 05
Posts: 329
Credit: 35825044
RAC: 0

yeah the time to completion

yeah the time to completion threw me for a curve ball. i havent had any units take 24+ hours for years and that was on a 2ghz celeron. not that im complaining mind you. i know the "finer the comb" the longer it takes (so to speak)

E5200 dual core at stock 2.5Ghz with 3GB's ram

Result I.D. 212839176 Run time 91,902.47 (25.52 hours) CPU time 76,074.48 (21.13 hours)

Result I.D. 212831428 Run time 87,602.96 (24.33 hours) CPU time 72,379.89 (20.10 hours)

Result I.D. 212774819 Run time 81,263.77 (22.57 hours) CPU time 73,212.80 (20.33 hours)

seeing without seeing is something the blind learn to do, and seeing beyond vision can be a gift.

mikey
mikey
Joined: 22 Jan 05
Posts: 12658
Credit: 1839055224
RAC: 4425

RE: I thought i'd start a

Quote:

I thought i'd start a thread about the BRPS (CPU) apps to give the developers some feedback. There is a separate thread for the cuda apps. Please give a link to the wu and mention what CPU and OS you are using.

I picked up two yesterday on one of my i7's. Links below:
1st wu
2nd wu

They both ran to completion (i7-920 running at stock, Win7 x64). Interestingly the run time is somewhat higher than the cpu time by 10,000 seconds on the 1st wu and 14,000 on the 2nd wu, which suggests its waiting on something.

I'm not sure there are any cpu optimizations for these (ie SSE2/SSE3) which might benefit it.

Are there any messages about any stoppage in crunching in the Messages tab of the Boinc Manager?

Bikeman (Heinz-Bernd Eggenstein)
Bikeman (Heinz-...
Moderator
Joined: 28 Aug 06
Posts: 3522
Credit: 712895154
RAC: 888424

RE: They both ran to

Quote:

They both ran to completion (i7-920 running at stock, Win7 x64). Interestingly the run time is somewhat higher than the cpu time by 10,000 seconds on the 1st wu and 14,000 on the 2nd wu, which suggests its waiting on something.

There's nothing in the app (except for the initial file IO which is minimal) that would "wait" for anything to happen. Note that the ratio run_time/cpu_time isn't so much different for the GW workunits you run. It just indicates that while the E@H apps are running, they get less than a full CPU core and your PC does other things as well. Maybe running a CUDA app for another project? Or even something that isn't BOINC related at all (e.g. virus scanner scans,or whatever else is done on your PC).

Quote:

I'm not sure there are any cpu optimizations for these (ie SSE2/SSE3) which might benefit it.

It's built for SSE. Since almost all of the computations are done using single precision math, so the benefit of SSE2 and higher seems to be limited.

HB

archae86
archae86
Joined: 6 Dec 05
Posts: 3157
Credit: 7212804931
RAC: 975991

My oldest machine, a

My oldest machine, a dual-Core Conroe 6600 running dead stock
90256591
elapsed 54,354.78, CPU 53,141.11

My second-newest machine, a 4-Core Penryn-class 9550 running dead stock
90256591
elapsed 44,537.75 CPU 43,923.48

I also have one currently in process on a 4-core Conroe Q6600 running dead stock. At the 22.4% indicated completion point it has racked up 04:23:19 elapsed and 4:14:45 CPU.

So on three samples on three hosts I'm not seeing anything unusual about the relationship of elapsed time to charged CPU time on these three hosts. Those are all Conroe or Penryn types running Windows XP Pro. I do have one Nehalem-generation host running Windows 7, but it has yet to be awarded a BRP3 result.

telegd
telegd
Joined: 17 Apr 07
Posts: 91
Credit: 10212522
RAC: 0

I am not sure if this is the

I am not sure if this is the right place to ask but, does it make sense to allocate any BRP WUs to CPUs at all? When an i7-860 takes 11+ hours and a GPU takes 1.5 hours, it would seem to be a better allocation of resources to just do the gravitational wave searches on CPUs, no?

http://einsteinathome.org/workunit/90252323

Thoughts?

Mike Hewson
Mike Hewson
Moderator
Joined: 1 Dec 05
Posts: 6588
Credit: 311898013
RAC: 125491

RE: I am not sure if this

Quote:

I am not sure if this is the right place to ask but, does it make sense to allocate any BRP WUs to CPUs at all? When an i7-860 takes 11+ hours and a GPU takes 1.5 hours, it would seem to be a better allocation of resources to just do the gravitational wave searches on CPUs, no?

http://einsteinathome.org/workunit/90252323

Thoughts?


The basic idea is that pulsar radio searches and gravitational wave searches are not intellectually or computationally equivalent ( or have yet to be framed that way ). A GPU is fantastic for problems that can be decomposed in a massively parallel fashion ( thousands of threads ) with certain restrictions on memory access patterns too. But the blindingly fast thread execution, once established, must outweigh the cost of setting up all those threads. Fortunately the ABP/BRP data suits this, but as yet ( if ever ) the GW search doesn't, or at least not of sufficient advantage.

Cheers, Mike.

I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...

... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal

telegd
telegd
Joined: 17 Apr 07
Posts: 91
Credit: 10212522
RAC: 0

RE: Fortunately the ABP/BRP

Quote:
Fortunately the ABP/BRP data suits this, but as yet ( if ever ) the GW search doesn't, or at least not of sufficient advantage.

Yes. Perhaps I worded my question badly. Why send BRP work to CPUs if it is so much faster on GPUs?

Mike Hewson
Mike Hewson
Moderator
Joined: 1 Dec 05
Posts: 6588
Credit: 311898013
RAC: 125491

RE: RE: Fortunately the

Quote:
Quote:
Fortunately the ABP/BRP data suits this, but as yet ( if ever ) the GW search doesn't, or at least not of sufficient advantage.

Yes. Perhaps I worded my question badly. Why send BRP work to CPUs if it is so much faster on GPUs?


Not everyone has a suitable ( NVidia based, sufficient free memory ..... ) GPU, but many still want to be in on the possible discovery and 'fame' of a new pulsar detected using their computer! :-)

Some background : the radio based pulsar search was introduced to the E@H scheme for several reasons. Mainly it was the forethought of Dr Bruce Allen in anticipation of a multi-year hiatus in GW processing while the LIGO detectors are being ( as we speak ) upgraded. Hence to keep the punters happy we maintain a level of interest in the project by doing a closely related area of science. You see the Continuous Wave ( gravitational ) subgroup of LIGO is looking for neutron stars and the like, binary systems and whatnot. So the involvement of a related search was natural, even though electromagnetically based. We are still examining the same overall group of astronomical objects and systems. Thus if/when we do find a GW source using continuous wave data it will hopefully correlate with known EM data also. The ABP program was quite a feat, found two new pulsars - originally only known by this data pipeline - we have sucked up all the latent Aricebo data and are now easily real-timing that source. So the BRP set includes now a data stream from Parkes ( yeah Aussies! ).

So rest assured we are always doing real science, but in a way that maintains project momentum ie. the interest of the contributors who donate so much valuable computer power not available any other way. No doubt the success of the ABP aspect has stimulated a few researchers to consider distributed computing as a solution to their computing needs too. The 'citizen scientist' paradigm is a two way street in other words, so ( reasonable ) flexibility in catering for various computing methods is important to us at E@H.

The fraction of E@H capability directed to radio pulsar work has increased from an initial one-third to one-half now. That's because there is more radio data available and because the S6 run at the LIGO detectors was somewhat more instrumentally noisier than S5 ( which is a disappointment, but new things were being tried out .... ).

Cheers, Mike.

I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...

... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal

telegd
telegd
Joined: 17 Apr 07
Posts: 91
Credit: 10212522
RAC: 0

RE: ...in anticipation of a

Quote:
...in anticipation of a multi-year hiatus in GW processing while the LIGO detectors are being ( as we speak ) upgraded.

Ok - I wasn't aware of that. Is there a rough estimate as to when the GW data will run out? How much S6 work is anticipated in the pipleline?

Sorry if this is off-topic for the thread. I can understand people wanting to have a shot at finding a binary pulsar, it just seemed more efficient to keep the CPUs for GW data and the GPUs for BRP data. However, I can see there are reasons to do otherwise.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.