Advanced search

Message boards : Number crunching : Not enough time to complete by deadline.

Author Message
KAMCOBILL
Send message
Joined: 7 Jul 07
Posts: 8
Credit: 960,646
RAC: 0
Level
Gly
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 11150 - Posted: 15 Jul 2009 | 19:58:15 UTC
Last modified: 15 Jul 2009 | 19:59:26 UTC

Hi,

I have tried several WUs and the same happens on deadline. Here's last WU http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=945503

Since this card is listed color netural, I've been testing it. It seems to be able to run the WUs, but not in time. Is there a problem making the deadline longer (e.g. 7 days instead of 5)?

I haven't had any problems with the duration on 9600GT. Just the 8500GT.

Thanks

Bill

Profile rebel9
Send message
Joined: 9 Mar 09
Posts: 1
Credit: 63,709,035
RAC: 0
Level
Thr
Scientific publications
watwatwat
Message 11151 - Posted: 15 Jul 2009 | 20:16:47 UTC - in response to Message 11150.


Yes, I agree. I, and I expect most of us, run the GPU apps when I'm not using the machine, i.e. "Use GPU while computer is in use" is disabled. I also have a low-end card, for BOINC CUDA purposes. It has taken me months, on and off, to get to the point where a WU will complete without crashing this thing or aborting, through numerous crashes and BOINC and driver upgrades and finally having to install TThrottle. I finally finished one yesterday after some huge number of hours. I ran that one past the return date just to see if it would finish. Most WUs I get allow me around 3 or 4 days to complete. No-one who's running GPU WUs this way is likely to be able to do that. You really need to give us a lot more time to get these things through. I received no credit for my almost 200 hours of work. Equally, no-one wants to have to abort a WU that's consumed over a hundred hours because the deadline can't be met. I'm not a credit junkie so I'm more interested that the science is useful but it is pretty annoying and will deter a lot of potential crunchers.

Cheers,

Gary.

TomaszPawel
Send message
Joined: 18 Aug 08
Posts: 121
Credit: 59,836,411
RAC: 0
Level
Thr
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 11156 - Posted: 16 Jul 2009 | 11:35:52 UTC - in response to Message 11151.

If you have "weak" GPU i recomended Seti@Home or starting Collatz Conjecture.

Gues from GPUGRID want quick back WU.
____________
POLISH NATIONAL TEAM - Join! Crunch! Win!

KAMCOBILL
Send message
Joined: 7 Jul 07
Posts: 8
Credit: 960,646
RAC: 0
Level
Gly
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 11157 - Posted: 16 Jul 2009 | 16:41:17 UTC

Ht TomaszPawel,

Thanks, been running all the GPU projects since they came out with WUs. This is the only projects having trouble making deadline. The reason I was wonder if the deadline could be changed was if I run for 5 days and it is resent back out then it could take up to 10 days to return the result for that WU. Seven is less than 10. I'm trying 1 more WU before I detach.

Thanks Again

Bill

ExtraTerrestrial Apes
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 17 Aug 08
Posts: 2705
Credit: 1,311,122,549
RAC: 0
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 11208 - Posted: 20 Jul 2009 | 19:15:30 UTC - in response to Message 11157.

The card you're trying to use has 16 shaders. Officially recommended are 50+. I wouldn't even dream about using such a card for GPU-Grid. Well, not if it's not a nightmare ;)

MrS
____________
Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

Profile GDF
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Project scientist
Send message
Joined: 14 Mar 07
Posts: 1947
Credit: 629,356
RAC: 0
Level
Gly
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwat
Message 11221 - Posted: 21 Jul 2009 | 9:12:57 UTC - in response to Message 11208.

The reason why we are not using cards with 16 shaders is that a normal cpu is probably faster. So, it is not really possible for our heavy applications.

gdf

Betting Slip
Send message
Joined: 5 Jan 09
Posts: 670
Credit: 2,498,095,550
RAC: 0
Level
Phe
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 11233 - Posted: 21 Jul 2009 | 19:23:23 UTC - in response to Message 11150.

Hi,

I have tried several WUs and the same happens on deadline. Here's last WU http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=945503

Since this card is listed color netural, I've been testing it. It seems to be able to run the WUs, but not in time. Is there a problem making the deadline longer (e.g. 7 days instead of 5)?

I haven't had any problems with the duration on 9600GT. Just the 8500GT.

Thanks

Bill


There is no way you are going to complete in time with that card. I have just completed a WU with a 8600GT twice as many shaders and cores, plus it's 3 times faster than a 8500GT and it's over clocked and it took over 55hrs of processing time and 3 days and 6 hours in computer time because it can't run when I am at the computer. In addition, this computer is on 24/7
____________
Radio Caroline, the world's most famous offshore pirate radio station.
Great music since April 1964. Support Radio Caroline Team -
Radio Caroline

[AF>HFR] www.motostar44.f...
Send message
Joined: 20 Jul 09
Posts: 2
Credit: 0
RAC: 0
Level

Scientific publications
wat
Message 11236 - Posted: 21 Jul 2009 | 23:29:06 UTC

hi !
Every WU is 5 days ???

with my :
CUDA device: Quadro NVS 160M (driver version 18603, compute capability 1.1, 256MB, est. 4GFLOPS)
i need a minimum of 10 days to finish the WUs sent... and only if i let it work 24/24 7/7...

the post http://www.gpugrid.net/forum_thread.php?id=867#7753 should be posted directly in the home page of the project !

the server should not send work for computers that doesn't meet minimum requirement...

--RonanKER

ExtraTerrestrial Apes
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 17 Aug 08
Posts: 2705
Credit: 1,311,122,549
RAC: 0
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 11259 - Posted: 22 Jul 2009 | 19:22:35 UTC - in response to Message 11236.

the post should be posted directly in the home page of the project !


It's right here, the 2nd point of joining.

the server should not send work for computers that doesn't meet minimum requirement...


GDF once said something like "too bad we can't avoid sending work to hosts which are too slow". Which was not received well - not because he can't, but because he'd even think about something like that.

MrS
____________
Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

KAMCOBILL
Send message
Joined: 7 Jul 07
Posts: 8
Credit: 960,646
RAC: 0
Level
Gly
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 11621 - Posted: 3 Aug 2009 | 3:44:01 UTC - in response to Message 11233.

Hi,

I have tried several WUs and the same happens on deadline. Here's last WU http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=945503

Since this card is listed color netural, I've been testing it. It seems to be able to run the WUs, but not in time. Is there a problem making the deadline longer (e.g. 7 days instead of 5)?

I haven't had any problems with the duration on 9600GT. Just the 8500GT.

Thanks

Bill


There is no way you are going to complete in time with that card. I have just completed a WU with a 8600GT twice as many shaders and cores, plus it's 3 times faster than a 8500GT and it's over clocked and it took over 55hrs of processing time and 3 days and 6 hours in computer time because it can't run when I am at the computer. In addition, this computer is on 24/7


I know. That's what I said. It took 5 1/2 days. WUs only have 5 day deadline. It finished but was too late by 10 hours.

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 16 Apr 09
Posts: 163
Credit: 919,609,146
RAC: 72,669
Level
Glu
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 11680 - Posted: 5 Aug 2009 | 22:47:37 UTC

It looks like at least some of the new round of workunits are twice the size (timewise) as in the past.

On a 9800GT running with an AMD940 CPU on Windows XP, that means instead of 16 hours, I'm seeing 32 hours. That is OK on a 9800GT (assuming the awarded credits change in proportion to the run time), and even works on a 9600GT.

However, in the past, I could just barely complete a workunit in 5 days with a 9400GT. For those configurations, it looks like the change means no more GPUGrid for those workstations -- I know they are considered marginal in the GPUGrid afficianado circles, but it is disappointing. Those workstations will probably migrate over to Aqua.

What is also disappointing is the ongoing non-support of ATI GPU's -- which provide more processing power per dollar (and support double precision calculations). It seems a tad inconsistent to push toward 9600 and up nvidia while excluding 38xx and 47xx and 48xx ATI cards from the fun.

ExtraTerrestrial Apes
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 17 Aug 08
Posts: 2705
Credit: 1,311,122,549
RAC: 0
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 11691 - Posted: 6 Aug 2009 | 20:19:36 UTC - in response to Message 11680.

What is also disappointing is the ongoing non-support of ATI GPU's -- which provide more processing power per dollar (and support double precision calculations). It seems a tad inconsistent to push toward 9600 and up nvidia while excluding 38xx and 47xx and 48xx ATI cards from the fun.


Double precision is no bonus, as GPU-Grid gets by with single precision (and the ATIs are also much faster in single). BOINC support is still.. quasi-nonexistent. But what I think is the killer argument: they'd have to rewrite the client thoroughly.. maybe to the point where they'd have to maintain a 3rd different client besides PS3 and CUDA. Developing under ATIs stream SDK is different from CUDA and the underlying architectures are different: with nVidia you execute one instruction on 32 data in parallel, whereas on ATI you execute 5 instructions on one data at a time. That's why I think you can hardly write one client and have it run fast on both architectures.

MrS
____________
Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

Post to thread

Message boards : Number crunching : Not enough time to complete by deadline.

//