Forum > GPU crunching
Driver, application and VRAM requirement?
Miep:
Logging shows no GPU memory takeup when Boinc starts or comes out of initial delay. Doesn't have decimals, though. When the GPU task starts it goes from 19 to 89, 106,210 used and some 15 seconds later to 218.
V12nokill and 2.1 dll (are you sure they are 2.1 and not 2.0 Richard? They don't have a version number on the details tab.) boinc 6.10.58 nvidia driver 195.62
Richard Haselgrove:
@ Raistmer - I can't confirm that BOINC takes no CUDA memory - you and Jason have a better grip on the code. Heck, you're been compiling and releasing it practically since we dicovered VLAR together, with Jord's NB, back at the transition from v6.07 to v6.08 in January 2009. All I can say is that BOINC has no business in, and nothing to be gained by using, any of the GPU memory area. No science in BOINC! BOINC is management and control only. It needs to know about the GPU - memory, speed, capabilities etc. - but all its local storage surely goes in system RAM with the eqivalent knowledge about CPU capabilities.
@ Carola - no, I'm not sure what the exact designation of the antediluvian DLLs is. There's a set downloadable from the project fanout since about December 2008, which NVidia didn't see fit to label. The next set anybody noticed was definitely 2.2: Jason tested them, and they were better. Then came 2.3: I tested them, and they were better still. Certainly, nobody registered a switch from 2.0 to 2.1: my download archives don't have separate sets. When I get back home to a proper rig (tomorrow or Monday), I can do a proper search of the NVidia toolkit archives, extract the DLLs, and do some proper research: if there's anything between stock 'cuda' and 2.2 and stock 'cuda23', I'll send it over for testing.
Miep:
So I tried the 2.2 dll again - as previously with V12: it errors out. I let it through: this task for closer inspection, but I'd say it just tries to fall back to CPU and can't.
I can try higher dlls (if somebody tells me where to get them) but don't they need even more memory?
Any thoughts on whether to try to upgrade to newest driver?
Richard Haselgrove:
--- Quote from: Miep on 24 Jul 2010, 07:31:29 pm ---So I tried the 2.2 dll again - as previously with V12: it errors out. I let it through: this task for closer inspection, but I'd say it just tries to fall back to CPU and can't.
--- End quote ---
But that stderr_txt shows you're using Raistmer's code - and I thought we'd established that the CPU fallback was broken on that build? The question would be whether you can get the STOCK v6.08 app into app_info, and run it with the 2.2 DLLs. That would give better results than Raistmer's app with 2.1 DLLs, and still have a working fallback if things go wrong.
--- Quote from: Miep on 24 Jul 2010, 07:31:29 pm ---I can try higher dlls (if somebody tells me where to get them) but don't they need even more memory?
Any thoughts on whether to try to upgrade to newest driver?
--- End quote ---
I'm afraid both newer DLLs, and newer drivers, are likely to outface your limited memory - unless you can squeeze more RAM out of the BIOS.
Miep:
--- Quote from: Richard Haselgrove on 24 Jul 2010, 08:02:06 pm ---
--- Quote from: Miep on 24 Jul 2010, 07:31:29 pm ---So I tried the 2.2 dll again - as previously with V12: it errors out. I let it through: this task for closer inspection, but I'd say it just tries to fall back to CPU and can't.
--- End quote ---
But that stderr_txt shows you're using Raistmer's code - and I thought we'd established that the CPU fallback was broken on that build? The question would be whether you can get the STOCK v6.08 app into app_info, and run it with the 2.2 DLLs. That would give better results than Raistmer's app with 2.1 DLLs, and still have a working fallback if things go wrong.
--- End quote ---
And I thought we had established that 6.08 with 2.2 does CPU fallback...
But ok, I'll swap the 6.08 and the 2.2 back in. next one up is a shorty so not too painfull for fallback...
--- Quote ---
--- Quote from: Miep on 24 Jul 2010, 07:31:29 pm ---I can try higher dlls (if somebody tells me where to get them) but don't they need even more memory?
Any thoughts on whether to try to upgrade to newest driver?
--- End quote ---
I'm afraid both newer DLLs, and newer drivers, are likely to outface your limited memory - unless you can squeeze more RAM out of the BIOS.
--- End quote ---
I'm not prepared to touch the BIOS while I need this machine.
197.16 was fine running what was there, just didn't get new tasks as per reduced reported memory. I think that might partly answer the question regarding Boinc checking GPU ram requirement.
I could maybe try removing app_info and look what boinc, the application and the server think about 6.08 with 2.1 and 2.2 respectively.
I'll probably have a go at the newest driver in an idle moment. I can always downgrade again.
Edit: forum doesn't seem to cope very well with multiple quotes, sorry.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version