Thanks for the update. Will this version reduce the Windows cpu usage?

No, it will just increase process priority as in this version there are already enough other changes.
If all works, the reduced cpu version will follow in two days.

gdf

If all works, the reduced cpu version will follow in two days.

If all works, the reduced cpu version will follow in two days.

Yes, this is what I'm waiting for.
I hope it will be much better than the current one, it's a mess on a slow card like mine. ;-)

WOn't change a ting for the slow cards ...

Yesterday I made my first WU aplication version 6.60 and it made less use of the GPU (the temperature is 7º lower than the same GPU processing a v.6.55 WU) and the points per hour generated were ~380 while with the v6.55 there are ~550 (so with older WUs I get ~50% more points).

Hmmm... Still get a 6.55 WU...

only get the 6.55 too

only get the 6.55 too

I'm now crunching my second v6.60 WU. The other three WUs in cache are v6.55. This one seems that it will last like the one I already done (~8.5 hours in a OC gtx280). If I switch to a v6.55 suspending the v6.60 being crunched, in five minutes the GPU goes from 58º to 65º with the fan fixed to 70%.

I'm now crunching my second v6.60 WU. The other three WUs in cache are v6.55. This one seems that it will last like the one I already done (~8.5 hours in a OC gtx280). If I switch to a v6.55 suspending the v6.60 being crunched, in five minutes the GPU goes from 58º to 65º with the fan fixed to 70%.

···Well, someone is lucky···

All the 6.60 crashed in our Windows system, so we removed it for now.


gdf

New applications uploaded.

- credits are now more consistent among WUs
- higher process priority in Windows
- several other minor changes
gdf

..... I have a couple showing version 6.61.

..... I have a couple showing version 6.61.

.... Hmm - just watching my first 6.61 WU going thru - it is making more use of the CPU than the 6.55 WUs. About a 10% uplift.

P.

.... Hmm - just watching my first 6.61 WU going thru - it is making more use of the CPU than the 6.55 WUs. About a 10% uplift.

P.

The higher priority -> higher cpu usage should result in better GPU utilization, which would mean slightly shorter calculation times, especially with 2+1 / 4+1 on a dual or quad core, respectively. Is anyone already seeing higher GPU temps? I'm still working through my 6.55s.. or am letting my GPU do the dirty work for me ;)

6.61 (CUDA) app uses 40% of my CPU (dualcore, so 80% of a single core) - even worse than 6.55!! We had a version with acceptable CPU usage (6.56), release that via app_info.xml (as has been requested numerous times). 40% CPU usage is not within an acceptable limit anymore for me, so until that is sorted, I'll only run it on my PS3.

The higher priority -> higher cpu usage should result in better GPU utilization, which would mean slightly shorter calculation times, especially with 2+1 / 4+1 on a dual or quad core, respectively. Is anyone already seeing higher GPU temps? I'm still working through my 6.55s.. or am letting my GPU do the dirty work for me ;)

MrS

There is a little bit of a conundrum going on and I thought I would post the question here ...

The "ideal" situation with BOINC running tasks on the GPU is that the actual CPU load would be negligible. GPU Grid seems to be having issues with application versions where the CPU load fluctuates as they make point releases. For those dedicated to the single GPU only project the CPU load is not an issue. For those with mixed loads the impact on CPU class projects may be less than desirable if the CPU load imposed by GPU tasks is too high.

For example, I had two GPUs in my i7 box and with BOINC Manager 6.5.0 I was running 8 + 2 as expected, well, not quite, the 8th CPU task got 0 CPU because the two GPU tasks took up too much CPU time.

My first question is why do we need to use a polling loop instead of an IRQ?

Second question, if we HAVE to use a polling loop why are we not using a single poll loop to query all GPUs and then dispatch to support threads to service those GPUs in need of grooming?

Third, why can we not have an option in BOINC Manager to select "Nice" vs. GPU Performance? In "Nice" the stress would be to use the GPU but not at the expense of huge overhead of a polling loop that is doing essentially no useful work with the tradeoff that the GPU will sometimes be idle while waiting for service. This has the added advantage for those with stressed systems that the GPU would have time to "cool" while waiting for servicing. In performance, the GPU poll loop would be higher priority and the emphasis would be on keeping the GPU at 100% usage ... Default in BOINC Manager would be "Nice" (as in GPU projects play nice with CPU projects).

I have not yet done a comparison test with SETI@Home to see what the usage is, but, at GPU Grid while running their application 6.55 my CPU usage is:

Q9300, 4 cores, single GPU, 5-11%
i7, 4 cores, HT, 8 VIrtual CPUs, 3-6%

Another participant reports: "6.61 (CUDA) app uses 40% of my CPU (dualcore, so 80% of a single core)"

Though GPU processing can be faster, when you factor in the overhead of also consuming the CPU resources at the same time it may not be such a bargain.

I am currently crunching two 6.61 WU's, and they are using 20% and 23% of a cpu core on my quad. That equates to 80-92% of a single core each, as opposed to the 6.55 WU's that were anywhere from 40%-80% of a single core. So, from my experience the cpu-usage in the best case of 6.61 is about the worst case for 6.55.

I'll have to check the run times, credits / hr, etc. to determine what to make of it.

6.61 (CUDA) app uses 40% of my CPU (dualcore, so 80% of a single core) - even worse than 6.55!!

6.61 (CUDA) app uses 40% of my CPU (dualcore, so 80% of a single core) - even worse than 6.55!!

Indeed...
Just started my first 6.61 WU and am bitterly disappointed.
My system (AMD X2 5200 and 9600GT) uses almost a complete core (about 90%!)for crunching on the GPUGrid task and becomes even more sluggish than before. :-(
I think I stop crunching here 'til a new version comes out, it's not worth it.

Yes, this way goes in the wrong direction, we need an app thats using only a little bit of a cpu core.

Oops. GDF - it looks like we need 6.55 back or preferably 6.56 - or even 6.next if you can fix 6.56 for all....

I'm looking for the GPU task to use less than 50% of a CPU so that I can run 3+2 on my box.

Just noticed a new app (6.59) running on my Linux install. That has also increased CPU usage, from ~10-12% CPU, to ~50%. Does this mean that I'm going to have to go back to running GPU 3 + 1, even on Linux? Ah well, I may as well go back to Windoze...at least I know what I'm doing there.

I have checked my latest result with 6.61 and there is no speed increase, one bad issue is that the system getting sluggerish.

New Linux App (6.59)
On Q6600 ~3GHz with GTX280 Gpu, cpu usage reach 12% (9% with Linux app version 6.58).
On Celeron 420 ~1,6 GHz with 8800GTS512 Gpu, cpu usage go to 32%.

These figures aren't very good especially for my low end computer.

...
For Linux there should be no changes at all.

gdf

As said in this thread the Windows low cpu version will come in a few days.
For Linux there should be no changes at all.

gdf

On a GTX280 in 3+1 I get this times for a 6.61 WU with 2478 credits in relation to a 6.55 WU with 2435 credits

6.61 # Approximate elapsed time for entire WU: 22036.278 s
6.55 # Approximate elapsed time for entire WU: 19793.840 s

From this point of view there is no advantage for the 6.61.

____________

On a GTX280 in 3+1 I get this times for a 6.61 WU with 2478 credits in relation to a 6.55 WU with 2435 credits

6.61 # Approximate elapsed time for entire WU: 22036.278 s
6.55 # Approximate elapsed time for entire WU: 19793.840 s

From this point of view there is no advantage for the 6.61.

The new windows application 6.61 certainly seems to sucking up huge amounts of CPU time.

On the the machine with GTX260 card switching on the monitor just gave a black screen - the only way to get the display back was to reboot having first suspended Boinc activity from the other machine.

The other machine, with the slower 8600GTS card, didn't suffer from any black screens - I'm not sure why that should be the case. Both machines drive the same monitor via a KVM switch.

On both machines I've noticed one of the the other project's tasks getting much less share of the CPU and as a result taking 50% longer than normal to complete.

Accordingly, I've had to switch both machines to 1 + 3 mode by setting % of processors to 99. Something I've been able to avoid doing until this point.

Phoneman1

Lots of reported errors with 6.61.

Lot's of Errors

Why we have to use polling at all? Sure, the concept seems very ill-conceived, but that's actually what nVidia proposed for CUDA.

Lots of reported errors with 6.61.

Lot's of Errors

Finally a version that runs fine with 4+1 Tasks (4 for CPU 1 for ACEMD).

Boinc 6.6.2 + Acemd 6.6.1 does the trick.
CPU Utilisation is at about 12% (Quad Q6600 @3.4 GHZ)

Finally a Version that produces same heat for the GTX260 as 3+1 Tasks (one Core dedicated for GPUGRID via using "processlasso"

4+1 with 6.6.2 and 6.5.0 produced about 18% CPU usage.

way to go guys - i´m really impressed that you nearly got it working now. now only thing left is the implementation of a less time-consuming polling.

Finally a version that runs fine with 4+1 Tasks (4 for CPU 1 for ACEMD).

Boinc 6.6.2 + Acemd 6.6.1 does the trick.
CPU Utilisation is at about 12% (Quad Q6600 @3.4 GHZ)

I can just point out:

before - 1 hour CPU time per WU
Now - 6 hours

NOT the way to go. I strongly encourage a solution

P.S. On linux

CPU time. Based on my current RAC of 5000 that would give me 5430 RAC. Not bad.

CPU time. Based on my current RAC of 5000 that would give me 5430 RAC. Not bad.

But has your other project(s) suffered more than GPU has gained???

You rarely get anything for nothing!

Phoneman1

Hi Paul,

about the "ill-conceived": that was actually coming from me, I was nto trying to read it into your comment. I think it's a wrong concept that the CPU has to ask the GPU if it's ready. The GPU should be able to tell the CPU about this. Don't know if there is an IRQ for this.. seems too straight forward if it was ;)

And I forgot about your comment regarding one polling loop for all GPUs. Surely seems like a good idea, but may not be neccessary if they can get the cpu usage down as expected. The only problem I see with that approach is that in BOINC every task is insulated from the others. This is by design and it's actually a strength.. it lets you utilize multi cores rather easily and protects you from all kinds of strange interaction (which you usually get when you parallelize outside a core). One would have to program this carefully, but it seems manageable nevertheless.

Regarding the VRAM: right now the WUs use about 70 - 80 MB of VRAM. More complex models could be simulated, which would require more memory, but then they time per step would go up and the screen would get really sluggish even on GT200 cards. I guess that's not what people want right now ;) Similarly if one told the GPU to compute several steps within one polling interval (to reduce the polling frquency) and I don't know if it would be possible at all. bottom line: I don't see potential for improvement by using more VRAM.

The change in 6.55 to 6.61 increased by 50% the load on the CPUs, this means that for every hour of GPU Grid I lose half an hour for some other project just due to idle polling. I know they are working on it and I am NOT ranting ... I am just expressing a little frustration

Could it be that my GPUs are underutilized?
Or is the Windows software that inefficient?

Got a 6.61 WU. 30-40% of CPU on Athlon X2. GTX 260. BOINC 6.5.0. It's terrible.

Tried a few 6.61 units on my Athlon X2 3800+, 9500GT, BOINC 6.50, 32-bit Vista Home Premium. The GPU tasks took over one full core (never dropping below 47% of total CPU usage, going as high as 73%, and most typically in the range of 52-56%). With GPU task running, the machine is virtually unusable as it takes several seconds to switch between simple tasks such as a Mozilla web page tab and an already open BOINC manager. Unfortunately, I am forced to suspend crunching GPUGRID on this box at least until another app version is available.

Something is going on with the project.

Athlon 64 X2 6000
Win Vista Home Premium 32 bit
SLI 2- XFX 9600 GSO with 798 MB DDR2 RAM. (almost 1.6 MB total)
2 Gig PC6400 DDR2

This started just a couple of days ago. When working on multiple BOINC projects along with GPU@Home, the work units under GPU@home operate normally, however the other projects just seem to crawl along. Its been taking some 8 actual seconds to to complete one CPU second of work. A couple of days ago, there was no conflicts in any BOINC project. How much actual memory is this project taking to cause such a slow down. It just seems to go against the realm of CUDA and GPU processing.
____________

Something is going on with the project.

Athlon 64 X2 6000
Win Vista Home Premium 32 bit
SLI 2- XFX 9600 GSO with 798 MB DDR2 RAM. (almost 1.6 MB total)
2 Gig PC6400 DDR2

This started just a couple of days ago. When working on multiple BOINC projects along with GPU@Home, the work units under GPU@home operate normally, however the other projects just seem to crawl along. Its been taking some 8 actual seconds to to complete one CPU second of work. A couple of days ago, there was no conflicts in any BOINC project. How much actual memory is this project taking to cause such a slow down. It just seems to go against the realm of CUDA and GPU processing.

Scott, are your cpu usage numbers set to 100% = 1 core? Otherwise they would look strange.

And the very slow responsiveness you're seeing is due to your relatively slow card (32 shaders vs recommended 50+). Nothing has changed here during the different client versions. But the WUs have changed, now we also crunch more complex models, which take even longer to process (and thus make the lag worse)

MrS

Well, here is an interesting twist:

http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=184242

I thought that work was tied to the application version, but I guess not. The two machines that errored out this unit before I got it list the app version as 6.59 and 6.61, respectively?

6.59 is the linux equivalent of 6.61 for win ;)

You have a dual core cpu, so the default windows behaviour should be to show 100% as both cores under full load and 50% for one core under full load. To exceed 50% one has to go multithreaded. When you say you se cpu usages of up to 73% that would mean 1 and a half core are used. Nobody else reported something like that before for GPU-Grid.

And regarding the other issue: so it seems the different WU types are not causing your massive slow down and it looks like the new client is really to blame for this.

MrS

...i.e. slower cards could have a disproportionately slower memory interface or something like that. But I guess a factor of 2 is not expected.

While the effects on former app versions was more evident on the slower card (vs. for example my 9600GSO), these were always relatively modest effects. Also, with 6.55 app versions, this box crunched a few of the different types (US, USPME, GPUTEST, JAN) of work with no real differences to note other than ms/time step and overall run time. It is only with the 6.61 app version that the machine is so badly affected.

I wish developers to be lucky and smart ot less than f@h founders! Wish GPUGRID luck in this New Year!

And I wish to crunch on 6.62 app version, with CPU usage less than 10% on one core......

So, what about "low CPU" app for Windowzz?

Well, it appears to have definitely been the 6.61 app. The 6.62 app is now crunching away happily on the 9500GT at the same or better speeds than were observed with 6.55. The CPU load is around 3%, and the machine is fairly smooth in usage with the severe slowdown seen under 6.61 now absent.

My machine is now again usable since v6.62. With v6.61 it was useless except for crunching. CPU usage has gone from 22% on the quad to 1%. Thanks, v6.62 is GREAT!

6.62 is amazing...running in +/- 3-4 mins of Q9950 CPU time and 2x GTX 260 Core 216 Superclocked video cards. My CPU contributions are climbing again. 6.62 looks like a winner to me! Thanks GDF & Co.


BTW, I am averaging 9K of points per card per day and climbing still.

Neil

____________
Crunching for the benefit of humanity and in memory of my dad and other family members.