Times (Elapsed / CPU) for BRP5/6/6-Beta on various CPU/GPU combos - DISCUSSION Thread

Forums › Cruncher's Corner

MarkHNC
MarkHNC
Joined: 31 Aug 12
Posts: 37
Credit: 170965842
RAC: 0

RE: RE: RE: My 1st beta

12 Mar 2015 14:33:48 UTC
Message 130758 in response to message 130749
(moderation:
    )

    Quote:
    Quote:
    Quote:
    My 1st beta 1.52 is running on my Intel HD4000

    Actually we are not sure yet whether we want to keep serving the rather big BRP6 work units to the Intel iGPUs. At least the less powerful among them like the HD 2500 will take longer to crunch than we usually like tasks to take to complete. It is quite possible that we'll stop BRP6 beta on the Intel iGPUs after some initial tests.

    HB

    I have an i3 3220/HD 2500 that runs at 100% CPU and 100% GPU nearly 24/7 and that picked up two of these big tasks. I have it setup to run two Einstein tasks at the time, because it was peaking around 70% GPU utilization when running the single-unit Arecibo tasks. I also run three WCG units alongside, mostly FAAH-Vina with the occasional CEP2. So it is now running two of these biggies.

    First is 50%, elapsed 23h30m, remaining 11h52m
    Second is 48%, elapsed 24h49m, remaining 12h58m

    These two finally completed:
    First ended up run time 165,685.50, CPU time 1,104.69
    Second ended up run time 166,069.17, CPU time 1,105.88

    I am now back to (so far) receiving single-unit Arecibo tasks on this machine.

    Richard Haselgrove
    Richard Haselgrove
    Joined: 10 Dec 05
    Posts: 2143
    Credit: 2960322716
    RAC: 713055

    RE: HD2500 has just 6 EUs,

    12 Mar 2015 15:22:53 UTC
    Message 130759 in response to message 130753
    (moderation:
      )

      Quote:
      HD2500 has just 6 EUs, compared to 16 in HD4000 and 20 in HD4600.


      Doesn't appear to make as big a difference as you might expect. The fastest HD 2500 I've been able to find in the database (I haven't checked them all) is computer 6828436 (Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3570 CPU @ 3.40GHz), regularly getting below 1Ksec.

      Stef
      Stef
      Joined: 8 Mar 05
      Posts: 206
      Credit: 110568193
      RAC: 0

      So these are my

      12 Mar 2015 20:35:38 UTC
      Message 130760
      (moderation:
        )

        So these are my results.
        Looking forward for the new cuda version.

        ExtraTerrestrial Apes
        ExtraTerrestria...
        Joined: 10 Nov 04
        Posts: 770
        Credit: 578950202
        RAC: 200190

        RE: Doesn't appear to make

        12 Mar 2015 22:04:20 UTC
        Message 130761 in response to message 130759
        (moderation:
          )

          Quote:
          Doesn't appear to make as big a difference as you might expect. The fastest HD 2500 I've been able to find in the database (I haven't checked them all) is computer 6828436 (Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3570 CPU @ 3.40GHz), regularly getting below 1Ksec.


          Impressive performance of the small HD2500 and actually confirms my suspicion that 1.34(*) was/is limited elsewhere. Main memory bandwidth is a prime candidate, especially with all those copy operations taking place in 1.34. The CPU L3$ size may also play a significant role, as the fastest memory access is always the one avoided. The i5 has 6 MB, whereas Mark's i3 has just 3 MB.

          @MarkHNC: are you running dual channel memory?

          @HBM: I can has Intel 1.52?

          MrS

          (*) Just replace 1.39 in my previous post with 1.34 - thanks for spotting!

          Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

          Harri Liljeroos
          Harri Liljeroos
          Joined: 10 Dec 05
          Posts: 4362
          Credit: 3217273828
          RAC: 2035058

          Is the application name for

          13 Mar 2015 8:45:56 UTC
          Message 130762
          (moderation:
            )

            Is the application name for version 1.52 identical for Intel, Nvidia and AMD GPU? I haven't so far received any 1.52 BRP6 for my Intel but I am doing 3 at a time on my GTX970. If the application name is same for Intel my app_config makes Intel (HD4000) also try 3 at a time. This will surely fail and may crash a whole lot more WUs on other projects too (like CPDN).

            So please make Intel applications have a different application name so we can easily experiment separate settings for them.

            floyd
            floyd
            Joined: 12 Sep 11
            Posts: 133
            Credit: 186610495
            RAC: 0

            RE: So please make Intel

            13 Mar 2015 9:03:01 UTC
            Message 130763 in response to message 130762
            (moderation:
              )

              Quote:
              So please make Intel applications have a different application name so we can easily experiment separate settings for them.

              You don't need different application names, you can distinguish the versions by plan class.

              Holmis
              Joined: 4 Jan 05
              Posts: 1118
              Credit: 1055935564
              RAC: 0

              RE: So please make Intel

              13 Mar 2015 10:05:37 UTC
              Message 130764 in response to message 130762
              (moderation:
                )

                Quote:
                So please make Intel applications have a different application name so we can easily experiment separate settings for them.


                The plan classes are different and that's enough to separate them in app_config.xml.
                I use the following to run x2 on my Nvidia card and only one task on my Intel iGPU:

                [pre]

                einsteinbinary_BRP6
                BRP6-Beta-cuda32-nv301
                0.5
                0.5


                einsteinbinary_BRP6
                BRP6-Beta-opencl-intel_gpu
                1.0
                1.0

                [/pre]
                The difference is that you change the -tag to and insert a -tag.
                Then for some reason the Boinc developers choose to rename the and tags to and .
                It's all documented on this page.

                MarkHNC
                MarkHNC
                Joined: 31 Aug 12
                Posts: 37
                Credit: 170965842
                RAC: 0

                RE: RE: Doesn't appear to

                13 Mar 2015 12:05:19 UTC
                Message 130765 in response to message 130761
                (moderation:
                  )

                  Quote:
                  Quote:
                  Doesn't appear to make as big a difference as you might expect. The fastest HD 2500 I've been able to find in the database (I haven't checked them all) is computer 6828436 (Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3570 CPU @ 3.40GHz), regularly getting below 1Ksec.

                  Impressive performance of the small HD2500 and actually confirms my suspicion that 1.34(*) was/is limited elsewhere. Main memory bandwidth is a prime candidate, especially with all those copy operations taking place in 1.34. The CPU L3$ size may also play a significant role, as the fastest memory access is always the one avoided. The i5 has 6 MB, whereas Mark's i3 has just 3 MB.

                  @MarkHNC: are you running dual channel memory?

                  @HBM: I can has Intel 1.52?

                  MrS

                  (*) Just replace 1.39 in my previous post with 1.34 - thanks for spotting!

                  Yes: 2 x 4GB PC3-12800

                  Harri Liljeroos
                  Harri Liljeroos
                  Joined: 10 Dec 05
                  Posts: 4362
                  Credit: 3217273828
                  RAC: 2035058

                  Thank you for the plan_class

                  13 Mar 2015 13:06:56 UTC
                  Message 130766 in response to message 130764
                  (moderation:
                    )

                    Thank you for the plan_class information. I'll give it a try when I get home.

                    Edit: Where you can find the valid plan_classes?

                    Richard Haselgrove
                    Richard Haselgrove
                    Joined: 10 Dec 05
                    Posts: 2143
                    Credit: 2960322716
                    RAC: 713055

                    RE: Thank you for the

                    13 Mar 2015 19:21:37 UTC
                    Message 130767 in response to message 130766
                    (moderation:
                      )

                      Quote:

                      Thank you for the plan_class information. I'll give it a try when I get home.

                      Edit: Where you can find the valid plan_classes?


                      If you look on the project's applications page, the plan class names are shown in brackets after the version number.

                      Comment viewing options

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

                      Forums › Cruncher's Corner