Message boards : Graphics cards (GPUs) : Any reason to not run cpu-heavy projects on a computer optimized for GPUGrid?
Author | Message |
---|---|
Is there any reason to not run cpu-heavy tasks (such as WCG) on a computer optimized for GPUGrid? | |
ID: 25168 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
If you do crunch for WCG on that system I would suggest you only use one CPU core. Your systems balance is a bit GPU-heavy. Some CPU processing is required to feed your GPU's, and GTX570's are powerful cards. If you tried to use the system and crunch two GPU tasks and two CPU tasks there is a fair chance you would encounter task failures or even system instability. If you are using SWAN_SYNC don't crunch on the CPU's (but using it is not really necessary). | |
ID: 25170 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
If your two CPU cores are crunching other projects they won't have time to service the two GPUs which will leave your GPUs sitting idle. GPUs need a CPU to feed them data and collect the results of operations on the data on a nearly continuous basis. | |
ID: 25171 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
I'll certainly review all the faq items. My question isn't about my single running gtx 550ti. It is about reconstituting a system, with to-be-purchased gpus and a psu, explicitly for gpugrid (and only gpugrid) tasks. Last week I disabled gpugrid tasks on all my cards except for th gtx550 per input from gpugrid. | |
ID: 25174 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
I run Rosetta at home on all of my GPUGrid computers to make sure the CPUs and GPUs stay nice and hot! Rosetta at home is a CPU only project so it never attempts to use the GPUs at all. | |
ID: 25175 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
Running CPU tasks along GPU-Grid shouldn't crash anything software-wise. That's what we've got multi-threaded OSes for. | |
ID: 25179 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
The conventional wisdom is clear that running both CPU intensive and GPU intensive apps on the same computer should cause a decrease in performance. | |
ID: 25181 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
This works because GPU-Grid runs at higher priority than CPU tasks, SWAN_SYNC=1 works quite well and GPU-Grid needs little CPU support. However, one could get really meaningful numbers by averaging over a representative set of WUs and then switching configuration and measuring again. I can't do this, as I don't have a GPU any more capable of running GPU-Grid. | |
ID: 25182 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
| |
ID: 25185 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
One could only consider WUs which ran overnight, or when ever the machine was not interactively used. If this is not possible (due to the long run times), a different machine may be needed. Preferably a dedicated cruncher. | |
ID: 25189 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
OK, but how does one evaluate performance? How about recording % GPU utilization every minute or so for each task and when the task is done record the median % usage as one measure of performance. Another measure could be the run time. Are there any other data that might be useful? Obviously I'm talking about employing a script to collect the data and another to process/analyze it later. | |
ID: 25193 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
I'm assuming that the project team knows how much work each WU contains. Based on this all we need is run time and credits for this WU (factoring in the early return bonus at GPU-Grid). Based on this one could generate different numbers. What I like to compare is the credits per day, as it equals the RAC if the machine could run this way undisturbed for about 1 month or so. | |
ID: 25195 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
I've got one machine with a GTX 550 ti. | |
ID: 25197 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
I would say go for it, kflorian, but I wonder if a same sized set is the best way to get meaningful data. There is only 1 science app in use at this project but there are several researchers submitting tasks and each type of task uses the GPU and CPU differently. The more experienced hands here can advise best but I think you/we have to make sure all types of tasks are represented equally in both sets. In other words, if the set with WCG has 10 type A, 20 type B and 16 type C tasks then the set without WCG should have the same numbers of each type of task. | |
ID: 25199 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
I run GPUGRID and Docking on my 1055T based system. Up until now I have used all 6 cores for crunching Docking. Today I have set docking to only use 5 cores to see what difference it will make to crunching times. The 6th core has been freed to service my GTX460 and GTX550Ti. | |
ID: 25203 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
With GPUGrid and Rosetta running at the same time - Monitor GPU Utilization - 60 seconds. | |
ID: 25204 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
Dagorath, your proposed python app sounds like an excellent idea for those of us who like to optimize across projects. | |
ID: 25210 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
@Paul: your data looks good and suggests there's not much to worry about here. | |
ID: 25211 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
I was running a 285GTX on an old P4! CPU which was fully loaded including HT there was no problem with GPUGrid, only needed to free the CPU as FAX4 units came, because they used alot CPU Power parallel to get 24h bonus including the nearly 1hour upload ^^ So i would say the most times you can use the full cpu. But 570 are more powerful then the 285 (witch is not the slowest card too) so it could make a difference. But on my C2D 8400 @ 3,6Ghz and 560TI i can run Fax4 with CPU full loaded with not much difference. | |
ID: 25222 | Rating: 0 | rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
Message boards : Graphics cards (GPUs) : Any reason to not run cpu-heavy projects on a computer optimized for GPUGrid?