Message boards :
Number crunching :
CPU runtime
Message board moderation
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
Send message Joined: 5 Dec 11 Posts: 147 Credit: 69,970,684 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I've just noticed that the two units that I have completed on my 660Ti have the same amount of CPU time as GPU time. Is this correct? I also notice that despite Boinc showing (0.03 CPU and 1 Nvidia GPU) that according to my resource monitor, ACEMDLONG is averaging 12.5% cpu, which, on my system, is a full core (i7-2600K) http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=6111707 http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=6043519 Are these tasks just using a lot more CPU than they used to, or do I need to change something?? Also, I am running 8 Docking tasks at the same time, I never worried about leaving a core free before because GPUGrid used to use so little CPU and leaving a core free did not make any difference to the runtime. |
ChileanSend message Joined: 8 Oct 12 Posts: 98 Credit: 385,652,461 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I thought this was normal... in my case BOINC shows 0.615 CPU + 1 NVIDIA GPU. It basically takes a whole thread (HT'ed CPU). I let BOINC use only 88% of my cores as to leave one thread available for GPUGRID, doing this, the task manager shows 100% CPU usage. Also, freeing TWO threads increases the GPU utilization from 96-97% to a solid 99%, but I rather crunch another WU with that thread at the expense of 1-2% of GPU usage. CPU: i7 3610QM GPU: GTX 660M I'd imagine the faster the GPU, the more CPU time it'd need to keep it fed... so yours should use even more CPU than mine. |
|
Send message Joined: 5 Dec 11 Posts: 147 Credit: 69,970,684 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
True, but the never used to be equal. it might have been 20 to 1 in favor of the GPU. no big deal. |
skgivenSend message Joined: 23 Apr 09 Posts: 3968 Credit: 1,995,359,260 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
GF600 uses up to 1 CPU core/thread. GF500 and earlier don't. The respawn tasks seem to use about 75% of a thread for me, while the NATHAN_RPS tasks use 1 full thread. An app_info stating to use 2 threads for these might expedite these tasks. If you have a GTX600, free up one CPU core/thread. This is recommended for 4core/8thread processors anyway. Why? There are probably some processes that now perform faster on the CPU when using a 600 series GPU. The shaders are more pleantyful but also a lot leaner. FAQ's HOW TO: - Opt out of Beta Tests - Ask for Help |
|
Send message Joined: 5 Dec 11 Posts: 147 Credit: 69,970,684 RAC: 0 Level ![]() Scientific publications ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I tried freeing up a thread, but it didn't make any difference to the runtime that I could see, nor did it change the GPU usage (96%) Probably because of the lack of GPU scheduling and that I run my CPU at 4.5 Ghz. It is interesting that these tasks on a Kepler card use so much more CPU time than on a Fermi. Use lots of Vram too, They seem to take around 1GB. |
©2025 Universitat Pompeu Fabra