Looks like the priority is applied to the application (going by Task Manager)

Try looking at it in Process Explorer instead.

Edit: the Einstein developers weren't aware of the difference either - http://einstein.phys.uwm.edu/forum_thread.php?id=8660&nowrap=true#109345

Is anybody aware at what thread priority E@H is working?

gdf

E@H is running at Below Normal
MW is running at Normal (but is still laggy on my HD 5850)

I suggest you Beta test using Normal Priority and get opinions, and go back to Below Normal if you have to.

Would it be feasible to use the existing/normal priority on long tasks and Below Normal on Short tasks; that way users could configure their systems to crunch short tasks if their system is too laggy for their needs.
That said people can already select to not run GPU apps when they are using the system via Boinc Manager.

E@H is running at Below Normal
MW is running at Normal (but is still laggy on my HD 5850)

I suggest you Beta test using Normal Priority and get opinions, and go back to Below Normal if you have to.

Would it be feasible to use the existing/normal priority on long tasks and Below Normal on Short tasks; that way users could configure their systems to crunch short tasks if their system is too laggy for their needs.
That said people can already select to not run GPU apps when they are using the system via Boinc Manager.

I am interested in Thread priority, not process priority.

gdf

OK, Thread Priority:

Einstein is presently using a Base Priority of 6.
The Dynamic priority varies, from 6 up to at least 10.

Einstein's present CPU usage is around 5%
GPU usage when running Einstein is presently around 67% on my GTX470 (with 6 CPU threads in use). It rises to 73% when no CPU's are in use (perhaps not a good sign). That said, I think tasks ran at around 47% a few weeks ago.

I see today's Beta is the same; Base Priority 6.
From Windows Task Manager Process Priority is Below Normal.
Still seeing 98% GPU Utilization for the task (on a GTX470, SWAN_SYNC on, no CPU crunching).
When crunching with 6 CPU threads, GPU utilization remained high; 97%. When starting CPU tasks there was a few spikes in the graph indicating brief periods of idleness when waiting for the CPU, but these reduced quickly (as the CPU projects loaded). CPU usage 88%.
When running 7 CPU tasks the GPU utilization stayed the same 97%. CPU usage rises to 100%
When trying to run 8 CPU tasks the GPU utilization stayed at 97% but occasionally dropped to about 93%. On average it was probably around 96%.
The CPU tasks of course were not able to use a full core each. What happened was that 2 or 3 CPU tasks only managed between 6 and 9% of the CPU (12.5% being one thread; i7-2600K).
I have experienced no lag when using the system under any of these conditions.

Going to turn SWAN_SYNC off and reboot to see what the difference is...

Same Beta Task but with SWAN_SYNC not in use:

8 CPU tasks running: GPU Utilization = 97%
7 CPU tasks running: GPU Utilization = 96%
6 CPU tasks running: GPU Utilization = 96%
0 CPU tasks running: GPU Utilization = 92%

It would seem that without SWAN_SYNC in use it is actually better to use all the CPU's; There is a clear 5% reduction in GPU utilization if you don't use the CPU to crunch any CPU tasks.
Why? The core drops it's frequency (3.6GHz down to 1.7GHz).

Different CPU's will behave differently when being utilized to different extents.
Some CPU's will remain fixed but many will downclock.

If this was your objective, it seems to be working, at least on this one system.
It seems better than the present long tasks that have Base Priority at 10, and yet GPU utilization with SWAN_SYNC off is only 85% (8 CPU threads in use).
On average the beta only used about 2% of the CPU, or 16% of one thread, with no SWAN_SYNC.
What about overall task performance compared to other apps?

It seems quite good.

gdf

Same Beta Task but with SWAN_SYNC not in use:

8 CPU tasks running: GPU Utilization = 97%
7 CPU tasks running: GPU Utilization = 96%
6 CPU tasks running: GPU Utilization = 96%
0 CPU tasks running: GPU Utilization = 92%

It would seem that without SWAN_SYNC in use it is actually better to use all the CPU's; There is a clear 5% reduction in GPU utilization if you don't use the CPU to crunch any CPU tasks.

SK,

To obtain a comprehensive view of the recent changes, you should repeat these tests (SWAN_SYNC on and off, while different number of CPU tasks running) on GIANNI_KKFREE workunits, with the new 6.15 app. I guess these are more sensitive to the number of CPU tasks running simultaneously.

Why? The core drops it's frequency (3.6GHz down to 1.7GHz).

You can disable this energy saving feature in the BIOS setup of the MB.

I did, on 3 different systems. Basically all is well, fairly similar results, though there was some differnces of minor note.

There is also of course a difference between task types; the GIANNI_KKFREE long tend to be in the 84% to 86% GPU utilization range while the Toni tasks are around 97% (with and without SWAN_SYNC); so you can run without SWAN_SYNC, and use all cores/threads. We would still have to complete many tasks with and without SWAN_SYNC to know for sure (completion times) if it no longer makes a difference.

GDF, I think you did something to your tasks before going to the USA to reduce their utilization. You might want to consider reversing that.

---
6.15 GIANNI_KKFREE task running with SWAN_SYNC OFF:
(Task Priority Below Normal, Thread Base Priority 6, Dynamic 6, task CPU usage 2.5%)
All 8 CPU threads in use – 84% GPU Utilization.
7 CPU threads in use – 84% GPU Utilization (CPU use at 90%)
4 CPU threads in use – 86% GPU Utilization
No CPU cores in use – 87% GPU Utilization

6.15 GIANNI_KKFREE task running with SWAN_SYNC ON:
(Task Priority Below Normal, Thread Base Priority 6, Dynamic 6, task CPU usage 12.5%)
All 8 CPU threads in use – 84% GPU Utilization.
7 CPU threads in use – 85% GPU Utilization (CPU use at 90%)
4 CPU threads in use – 86% GPU Utilization
No CPU cores in use – 91% GPU Utilization

The Toni task was similar but 97 to 98% GPU Utilization (both on GTX 470 cards).
My GTX260 ran a Toni task at 88% Utilization on W7.