Message boards :
Number crunching :
Time taken by WU
Message board moderation
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
Send message Joined: 9 Jan 09 Posts: 9 Credit: 4,538,901 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Hello, everyone! I started to crunch for this project today. Two WUs were downloaded and the first one started. Right now, it has been crunched for 6:46 and only 3.920% finished! Its deadline is May 2 at 18:56 GMT. I am worried if I will get this WU finished in time, if it will be of use for the project and if I will ever get credits for it! My card is NVIDIA GeForce 8400 GS. Your information would be appreciated. Thank you in advance. Best regards from Brazil, Valter Aguiar. |
DoctorNowSend message Joined: 18 Aug 07 Posts: 83 Credit: 135,208,752 RAC: 3 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
My card is NVIDIA GeForce 8400 GS. Please have a look here. Your card is one of the slowest which can run GPUGrid. Depending on the chip of your card you either have 16 or 8 shaders. With 16 it may be possible that you can reach the deadline (if you don't stop the WU meanwhile). I assume you have the 8 shaders version, because calculating on your given times and percent your card may need over 7 days for completion, that is definitely too long... Member of BOINC@Heidelberg and ATA!
|
|
Send message Joined: 9 Jan 09 Posts: 9 Credit: 4,538,901 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Thanks, DoctorNow. That is what I was suspecting of... Should I go to the end with this WU or abort it? Also, the computer has become slow. Would an increase in RAM be of help, or the only solution would be to buy a new NVIDIA card? Thank you for the help. |
X1900AIWSend message Joined: 12 Sep 08 Posts: 74 Credit: 23,566,124 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Should I go to the end with this WU or abort it? Why not try it bit more of time and calculate whether the deadline could be reached. Unfortunately I had to stop crunching F@H with my IGP (8300 mGPU: 16 SP, 500/1200 MHz) because of the deadlines (extended meanwhile to 6 days, see post from ihaque). With GPUgrid it should be possible to finish the workunits with 16 shaders, it depends on your daily runtime. I only run my systems 10-12 hours, not enough. |
|
Send message Joined: 9 Jan 09 Posts: 9 Credit: 4,538,901 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The deadline cannot be reached. It has now completed 6% after 11 hours and its deadline is May 2. I had once a Lattice WU which ended well after the deadline. At that time, people there recommended me to complete the WU, and I did. The WU was accepted and I received credits. Should I do the same with GPU or discard it? Any recommendations? Thanks. Valter. |
DoctorNowSend message Joined: 18 Aug 07 Posts: 83 Credit: 135,208,752 RAC: 3 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Should I do the same with GPU or discard it? Any recommendations? Thanks. I'm not completely sure how the server here handles the case of crossing the deadline. However, if you don't finish it will definitely handle out a second copy of the WU to another participant. You may get credit when you report the WU within a specific time not depending if the other user finishes the WU first or not. At least that is how some other projects handle this, but I don't know how it is here. Member of BOINC@Heidelberg and ATA!
|
|
Send message Joined: 21 Oct 08 Posts: 144 Credit: 2,973,555 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If you return work late, but before the machine that is reassigned the workunit, then you will get credit. If the work is returned from the second reassigned machine before yours comes back, then you will not get credit. A 16 shader card should be able to return work within the 5-day deadline if running fairly high shader clocks (I think 1700 at least). Given variable sized work here, however, some units will go longer. |
|
Send message Joined: 9 Jan 09 Posts: 9 Credit: 4,538,901 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Thank you all for your help. That WU would only be finished within about ten days from now, and was making my computer become slower. So I decided to exclude it and return to GPUGrid when I get a better NVIDIA card. Thanks again, Valter. |
|
Send message Joined: 17 Aug 08 Posts: 2705 Credit: 1,311,122,549 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
If you can justify supporting their science you might want to consider SETI@GPU. Their deadlines are longer and I think the performance hit for the desktop is less. MrS Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002 |
Paul D. BuckSend message Joined: 9 Jun 08 Posts: 1050 Credit: 37,321,185 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If you can justify supporting their science you might want to consider SETI@GPU. Their deadlines are longer and I think the performance hit for the desktop is less. THeir tasks are also shorter and less complex. My main machine is average 6.5 hours per GPU Grid task, SaH is 12 minutes to 1 hour (VLAR) per task. |
©2025 Universitat Pompeu Fabra