I think the problem with W7 is the driver (or other Vista/Win7 drivers that change GPU/Motherboard power saving settings). NVidia dont even support Win 2003 server or Win 2008 server! A poor show by NVidia.

swan_sync=0 enables the use of one CPU (actually, I think it removes paramiters that restrict the CPU usage)?!?

- Paramiter is tested and works better with 6.10.73 and 6.10.72 tasks.

Judging by [rl=http://www.gpugrid.net/forum_thread.php?id=2129&nowrap=true#16920]this[/url] post the CPU polling is not the cause. So it's just plain simply the different driver?

MrS

---

Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

Judging by [rl=http://www.gpugrid.net/forum_thread.php?id=2129&nowrap=true#16920]this[/url] post the CPU polling is not the cause. So it's just plain simply the different driver?

MrS

Let me fix that url:

>> I do have SWAN_SYNC=0 enabled and both cards definitely have their own CPU thread. I'm not
>> using my CPU for anything else except browsing the forums with Firefox. My CPU is only at 3.4ghz.
>> My gpu usage on both cards is hovering around 55-57% at all times. Win7 x64 is just slow.

http://www.gpugrid.net/forum_thread.php?id=2129&nowrap=true#16920

Maybe it's the driver. One clue may be that the ATI apps MW & Collatz run at 99% in both XP & Win7. DNETC sometimes does and sometimes doesn't, but I'd say it's not that well programed at this stage. The the more I compare the two, the more I keep moving to ATI. It used to be that a big NVidia advantage was that their drivers were better, now that's turned around. The ATI drivers seem bulletproof and NVidia not so much. The only app that I can see buying NVidia for is GPUGRID, and with all the WU availability problems here concerning v6.72, etc. I'm becoming less enthusiastic.

Ups.. thanks!

BTW: MW and CC run so well (99%) because they're so simple - it's just the same small loop over and over again, just with different numbers. Massively parallel and not really constrained by memory bandwidth. It's the absolute best case scenario for GPU code. It's not as straight forward for GPU-Grid, e.g. you have to finish one time step before you can execute the next one and you're more memory bandwidth bound. I don't know how this utilization is calculated - does it count "waiting for memory" as busy (because they SM can't do anything else right now) or is it idle time (because it's not doing anything useful)?

ATI isn't a magical bullet. Just look how hard it's been to make GPU-Grid on a current gen ATI run half as fast as a previous gen nVidia.

MrS

---

Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002