x38g reports

[perryjay]

Decent info along those lines could paint a clearer picture  in some cases, if some info could be printed to stderr.

Will this be coming out in a paperback edition or just hardcover?   

[Jason G]

Will this be coming out in a paperback edition or just hardcover?   

LoL, I was thinking of something along the lines of "Your GPU appears to be broken"

[Josef W. Segur]

Here's a strange one http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=771323155 Check out computer 5257703. He's showing he has two GTS460s but all his GPU work is coming up no GPUs found.

He probably installed Boinc as a service (protected application)

I thought in that case BOINC doesn't see the GPUs at all, though Windows does?
                                                              Joe

[perryjay]

Here's an oldie but a goody  http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=730523283 I know the first one was showing a couple of no heartbeats but it looks like it finished and had the same count as everybody else. Wonder why he didn't get any credit?

[Jason G]

I thought in that case BOINC doesn't see the GPUs at all, though Windows does?
                                                              Joe

I would have to check to be sure on that, but I believe everything appears normal under enumeration, except once in the application you can't initialise the selected device (cudaSetDevice() ) due to permissions or the device already being allocated to another (presumably the user) session somehow.   If that is really the case, then the approaching move to the boinc_temporary_exit() feature should help out, indefinitely stalling the work.

Jason

[Jason G]

Here's an oldie but a goody  http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=730523283 I know the first one was showing a couple of no heartbeats but it looks like it finished and had the same count as everybody else. Wonder why he didn't get any credit?

The count itself has value mostly for approximation & guessing somethings are about right,  & other aesthetic qualities. Even the later 295's that processed successfully & became canonical with x38g look to be running on the edge.  It has error results eerily matching the 560ti's with insufficient core voltage &/or cooling ( Yes, at this stage it appears the 560ti issues have been isolated as mostly attributable to those two primary factors). 

The likelihood the original 6.03 result is broken is very high, given that a flaky looking 295 weakly matched your result... the final 6.03 that resolves the quorum sits 'the other side' of the 295 result from you.  That x38g & x38e didn't perfectly match one another in this case is at first surprising until you include the multiple stability influencing factors that could be at play ... Just keep your own temps down & ensure sufficient core voltage etc, so you aren't 'the bad guy'

[Edit:] I've just had a brainwave that it may be helpful to add some indication of the number of reportable signals close to threshold, as we did with some astropulse bench testing a while back.  I'll give it some thought.

[perryjay]

I'm glad you got a handle on the 560Ti problem. Is there something you can do from this end or can you get the word out on how to fix it on the users end? I know I see a lot of my inconclusives coming from 560Tis so it sure would be nice for everybody concerned.

[Jason G]

I'm glad you got a handle on the 560Ti problem. Is there something you can do from this end or can you get the word out on how to fix it on the users end? I know I see a lot of my inconclusives coming from 560Tis so it sure would be nice for everybody concerned.

I'm currently giving it some deep thought.  There are special nVidia developer tools available that I may be  able to get temperatures & possibly voltages & clock rates.  I could in future print lots of explanation to stderr & go into a temprary exit, or at least a failsafe mode of some sort when things look really obviously bad.  I think after a long period of careful design, under certain more obvious circumstances it should be possible to choose either a hard error out to induce reissue & avoid contaminating the science database,  or under some other known conditions do a temporary exit for some short time period & try again in some predetermined time interval.  We'll see, the 560ti situation certainly raises these questions, and is no doubt a result of stock units being pushed far beyond reference nVidia specs.

Jason

[perryjay]

Got an invalid. I found 8 pulses the other two guys didn't. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=781226722

[Jason G]

Got an invalid. I found 8 pulses the other two guys didn't. http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=781226722

I have no immediate explanation for that one.  Got a copy of the task by chance ?

[Edit:] I'll try get my updated offline bench suite updated & into public downloads at some point.  Still wrestling with the fallout from juggling the new PSU etc, but should be under control soon.

[perryjay]

No, sorry, I just found it on my tasks page.

[Jason G]

No, sorry, I just found it on my tasks page.

Grab a copy while it's still there. 
http://boinc2.ssl.berkeley.edu/sah/download_fanout/a4/08mr11ai.9455.10865.12.10.23

I'll get some easy up to date bench setup organised tomorrow or so, and also run here to see if 8 pulses turn up that shouldn't, and manually see how close they are to threshold.

Jason

[Raistmer]

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=64837&nowrap=true#1129324 Is it known behavior? x38g works slower on 26x.xx drivers indeed?

[Jason G]

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=64837&nowrap=true#1129324 Is it known behavior? x38g works slower on 26x.xx drivers indeed?

The 275 drivers are a bit better with some kernels as I gradually apply some of the newer techniques.  That will apply to different cards to different degrees, so it becomes a your mileage may vary issue as usual, until more of the kernels get 'upgraded' and full asynch operation is enabled down the line.

[Edit:] like with perryjay's 8xtra pulses I just finished benching, the gradual accumulation of improvements adds up to quite a lot, under 275.50 beta, that I don't even care what old drivers do anymore....

Quick timetable

WU : 8XtraPulses_08mr11ai.9455.10865.12.10.23.wu
Lunatics_x32f_win32_cuda30_preview.exe :
  Elapsed 494.422 secs
      CPU 77.423 secs
Lunatics_x39f_win32_cuda32.exe :
  Elapsed 407.459 secs, speedup: 17.59%  ratio: 1.21
      CPU 53.430 secs, speedup: 30.99%  ratio: 1.45

Still investigating this particular task to see if perryjay broke it, or something else is going on....

[Edit2:] Bad news perryjay    You broke that one somehow... I get agreement with your wingmen under bench:

Spike count:    0
Pulse count:    0
Triplet count:  0
Gaussian count: 0

Now we just have to figure out what could have gone wrong with yours....

[Ghost0210]

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_thread.php?id=64837&nowrap=true#1129324 Is it known behavior? x38g works slower on 26x.xx drivers indeed?

Yes, the x38 & x39 series are slower on the 267.xx drivers compared to the 275.50 drivers by some margin.
I can do a shortie in ~250 seconds on the 275.50 drivers, but this shoots up to around 290-300 seconds on the 267.xx drivers