I'm just starting on a FAX4 and while my gpu idled for few seconds I saw in GPU-Z that the memory used was 150mb for Win7.
Now with the card loaded with FAX4 it's at 1232mb so that's a 1082megabytes usage for FAX4. Memory controller load is at 28-29% with 800mhz memory clock (gpu-z reading)

One thing I do NOT like is the gpu load. With other long runs and other projects the gpu load is anything between 94-99%. Now it's at 86-88% ?!
CPU is 2500K@4500Mhz
I have swan_sync=0 and only three cpu tasks running along with gpugrid.
Do I really have to put my cpu at higher clocks or what?
This is the task http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=3264669

That's a pretty solid overclock already, so I wouldn't push it unless you really want to. Or if you are using LN2 to cool your cores ;).

These tasks seem to utilize less percent of the GPU than others, and I'm not sure why that is at the moment. I'm not sure if it's an issue with dividing the task between the CPU and GPU or something else (memory management, maybe?). I'll try to get back to you. There may not be anything we or you can do. We'll see.

You seen to have found the happy medium (sweet spot) nate.

I am crunching a FAX4 wu on Win7 i7 990X @ 3876MHz and a GTX570, similar GPU load as Lagittaja 86-88%, memory controller load quite a bit less @ 16% and only using 690MB memory. I have swan_sync=0 and only two cpu tasks running along with gpugrid.

It is looking like approx 13hrs 40mins to complete.

Does the usages seem right to you or is there a way to improve on this?

I'm just starting on a FAX4 and while my gpu idled for few seconds I saw in GPU-Z that the memory used was 150mb for Win7.
Now with the card loaded with FAX4 it's at 1232mb so that's a 1082megabytes usage for FAX4. Memory controller load is at 28-29% with 800mhz memory clock (gpu-z reading)

One thing I do NOT like is the gpu load. With other long runs and other projects the gpu load is anything between 94-99%. Now it's at 86-88% ?!
CPU is 2500K@4500Mhz
I have swan_sync=0 and only three cpu tasks running along with gpugrid.
Do I really have to put my cpu at higher clocks or what?
This is the task http://www.gpugrid.net/workunit.php?wuid=3264669

That's a pretty solid overclock already, so I wouldn't push it unless you really want to. Or if you are using LN2 to cool your cores ;).

These tasks seem to utilize less percent of the GPU than others, and I'm not sure why that is at the moment. I'm not sure if it's an issue with dividing the task between the CPU and GPU or something else (memory management, maybe?). I'll try to get back to you. There may not be anything we or you can do. We'll see.

Temps aren't an issue with running only three cpu tasks :)
4500Mhz I can go with 1.272v and with 4800Mhz I can go with 1.376v.

But getting to my point: Well I did raise the 2500K to 4800Mhz and the gpu load didn't get affected, still in the 86-88% ball park so it is not a cpu bottleneck for sure despite the fact that the gpu process in task mananager is showing as 25% usage as in it's hogging the free core completely I gave it with swan_sync.
Funny thing is that the gpu load seems to vary a little bit. First I see that it's jumping around between 86-88%, then suddenly it's holding steady at 90-91% and after a while it goes back to jumping between 86-88%.
Otherwise great wu's :thumb:

Thanks Nate :)
those changes should make things a little easier and more consistent.

As for the GPU usage, anything above 90% is good IMHO. 95% would be excellent.

I have no idea about the coding used, but it appears to be adaptable to the workunit on the fly. As in, usage of the GPU can change throughout the run. I too have noticed that usage can change from 80-88% during the run.
Also noticed that the time taken to complete a % can change throughout the run as well.
My last unit took significantly more time to process the last 25% of the unit than it did to do the other 75%(when observed in 25% blocks)

I think 12 hours or so is an optimum run-time. That lets us run machines overnight and complete a task so we can turn them off before we go to work. Also they are not long enough that it is too annoying if a unit fails close to the end. You would have heard my scream from Australia had that unit of mine crashed at 22+ hours of runtime :/

just lost one after 10 hours running
aaarrrrrggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
well, no harm done
and it was my falt (messing with overclocking and knowing nothing about that, just going to return it to default settings and leave it like that)

---

That's around half what I expected (1420MB).
...So is it the operating system, driver, or app?

Problem solved!
I was relying on the windows side-bar widgets (one for each card) which reports half of the memory usage that GPU-Z does.

The widgets are broken.
Damn, I feel like a newbie now!

Spatzthecat: That does seem on the slow side for 570. For these tasks 10-11 hours seems about average (for that card). Windows has slightly lower performance than Linux, so that might explain part of it. Further, looks like you are running on your display card, which will also take away some performance if you are using the system to do other stuff. I'm not sure about other factors.

Lagittaja: Thanks for the info. Still looking into it, but it seems that a script added to the simulation may be the cause. Some simulations don't have them, but this one required it. We try to optimize the scripts as much as possible but they are interpreted at runtime and cause slowdowns. Many functions, but not all, are implemented in C/C++ to help out with speed.

Simba123:

I think 12 hours or so is an optimum run-time. That lets us run machines overnight and complete a task so we can turn them off before we go to work. Also they are not long enough that it is too annoying if a unit fails close to the end.

Thanks for the comment. This was one of the additional reasons for making them shorter. I noticed a few people saying something along those lines. Some people only crunch part-time, and we don't want to lose their contribution simply because they can't run steady 24/7. We may still be a little on the long side in that respect, so we'll consider that for the next big batch that goes to the long queue.

Michael Kingsford Gray: Glad to hear you got it figured out.

My stock C2Q/GTX570 finished this FAX4 in about 14.5 hours with SWAN_SYNC=0 and 1 dedicated CPU. Almost 3 times as long to finish as a typical NATHAN_CB1 task for only twice the credit? :-( [ ;-)]

---

I'm leaving this project. My card could handle those CB1 ones. They took about 12/13 hrs (my limit of computer use) on my 460SE card.

But these FAX things are too long for me and because of the time limitation I also ran out of any bonus points with these wu's. I am not interested in your short stuff.

For the fast cards and 24/7 people, 'good luck' with these FAX batch(es.) Its time to change to a other project. Bye.

I'm leaving this project. My card could handle those CB1 ones. They took about 12/13 hrs (my limit of computer use) on my 460SE card.

But these FAX things are too long for me and because of the time limitation I also ran out of any bonus points with these wu's. I am not interested in your short stuff.

For the fast cards and 24/7 people, 'good luck' with these FAX batch(es.) Its time to change to a other project. Bye.

Wow. I guess this project is done for then. Time to shut down the servers, Mikkie is leaving.

I'm leaving this project. My card could handle those CB1 ones. They took about 12/13 hrs (my limit of computer use) on my 460SE card.

But these FAX things are too long for me and because of the time limitation I also ran out of any bonus points with these wu's. I am not interested in your short stuff.

For the fast cards and 24/7 people, 'good luck' with these FAX batch(es.) Its time to change to a other project. Bye.

I have gtx295 and gtx265, old NATHAN task were perfect for this card (runtime under 9h), but new FAX3 does run for 56hours. Sorry guys, too long. So I switched back to normal tasks and gues what? A739-TONI... task is @73% after 12h30min and aproximatley 4h30min is left to finish this task. I want to crunch this project and I dont think I have slow cards, but is it that much of a problem to make a smaller task? That 8h NATHAN tasks were ideal, even old FAX tasks with runtime 12h on my hardware wehe acceptable. Normal tasks for 18hours???

FAX3 has been replaced with FAX4, which is ~2/3rds as long.

---

FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

It appears that both the FAX3 and FAX4 tasks have exhausted, potentially rendering nagging gripes moot.

Still getting FAX4's & the occasional FAX3 here.

There are a couple of non-FAX tasks in the queue, NATHAN_CB1 and IBUCH_xxxTRYP, which could have went your way. Nate's 'Long' CB1 tasks are the sort that run faster than Kashif's 'Normal length' HIV tasks, so we are not quite gripe-free:

I4R7-NATHAN_CB1_1-88-125-RND9588_0 3227378 91249 4 Mar 2012 | 9:08:19 UTC 4 Mar 2012 | 17:18:52 UTC Completed and validated 16,961.14 16,768.88 35,811.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v6.15 (cuda31)
277-KASHIF_HIVPR_cl_ba1-28-100-RND4840_0 3226987 115641 4 Mar 2012 | 7:43:11 UTC 4 Mar 2012 | 14:36:23 UTC Completed and validated 18,222.69 18,194.16 10,552.50 ACEMD2: GPU molecular dynamics v6.15 (cuda31)

Fortunately Ignasi's TRYP tasks are bringing balance to the GeForce,

358-IBUCH_metTRYP1-0-2-RND2279_2 3270731 91249 15 Mar 2012 | 23:51:50 UTC 16 Mar 2012 | 8:25:54 UTC Completed and validated 25,956.25 8,342.53 35,400.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v6.16 (cuda31)

---

FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

I'm new and I've got 53 hours to do and it's also not crunching but saying the computer is in use I have an i5 processor and a Cuda GEFORCE 410 mobile and latest drivers, any suggestions?

Bruce

I've gone on to join World Community grid.

I'm new and I've got 53 hours to do and it's also not crunching but saying the computer is in use I have an i5 processor and a Cuda GEFORCE 410 mobile and latest drivers, any suggestions?

Your GeForce 410 mobile is too slow for this project.

I've gone on to join World Community grid.

So you figure it out by yourself. At WCG your GPU will be useful.

it's also not crunching but saying the computer is in use

You would have needed to select 'Use GPU while computer is in use', from Boinc Manager, to run GPU tasks while using the system, but as Zoltan said, your GPU is not up to running GPUGrid tasks. While WCG has just started some GPU Beta testing, your GeForce 410M would not be up to crunching their either, but WCG has plenty of good CPU projects. GPUGrid does not run CPU tasks. Perhaps your GPU is of use at Einstein, though I think they are winding up a run.

---

FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

ouch.
just picked up
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=5123672
and it's showing a time to complete of over 29 hours. :(

I'll give it an hour to see if that time comes down to below 24 hours.
If it doesn't, I'll abort it.