Are you saying it failed?
When your computers are hidden, even admins can't see them..

MJH

I’m seeing 85% GPU usage on a GTX660 and 80% usage on a GTX660Ti. ACEMD beta version 7.20 (cuda55).

The output file is very useful. Thanks for this, it will make basic troubleshooting much easier.

Stderr output

<core_client_version>7.0.64</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<stderr_txt>
# GPU [GeForce GTX 660] Platform [Windows] Rev [3170M] VERSION [55]
# SWAN Device 1 :
# Name : GeForce GTX 660
# ECC : Disabled
# Global mem : 2048MB
# Capability : 3.0
# PCI ID : 0000:02:00.0
# Device clock : 1032MHz
# Memory clock : 3004MHz
# Memory width : 192bit
# Driver version : r325_00
# Time per step (avg over 250000 steps): 3.487 ms
# Approximate elapsed time for entire WU: 871.837 s
called boinc_finish

</stderr_txt>
]]>

There is little point in running beta work and hiding your systems!

---

FAQ's

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

Are you saying it failed?

Nope, completed and validated - just the GPU utilization was low.

---

Morning all.

Version 800 is the final beta, hopefully.

I'll put some real work units on it now.

MJH

The test WUs I care about are now: NATHAN_s1p_test_titans1

The test WUs I care about are now: NATHAN_s1p_test_titans1

I've received a couple of NATHAN_s1p_test_titans2 workunits.
They have by far the highest GPU usage on GTX670 and GTX680 (97-99%).

Mine are almost complete, the titan WUs, currently @ 89% usage, which is where they should be for W7. Time to complete will be about 1:10 total.

The test WUs I care about are now: NATHAN_s1p_test_titans1

As some of you have noted, after the server/database error, they are now NATHAN_s1p_test_titans2

The test WUs I care about are now: NATHAN_s1p_test_titans1

As some of you have noted, after the server/database error, they are now NATHAN_s1p_test_titans2

Yes

http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=7205032

@+
*_*

Crédit 60,900.00

---

I have one finished too in 2h43m. A new one is running at 94% GPU load and estimated time by BOINC 46h20m? 5% done in 8m, so BOINC needs arithmetic lessons :)

---

Greetings from TJ

The test WUs I care about are now: NATHAN_s1p_test_titans1

As some of you have noted, after the server/database error, they are now NATHAN_s1p_test_titans2

Yes

http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=7205032

@+
*_*

Crédit 60,900.00

You should fine tune your system (for example: leave a core free for GPUGrid), because 5pot's GTX780 finished a similar workunit in 4200 seconds, while it took 5000 seconds on your Titan.

Finished two ok in about 1 hr. 24 min.:

I5R14-NATHAN_s1p_test_titans2-1-50-RND4698_1
I5R4-NATHAN_s1p_test_titans2-0-50-RND1283_0

GTX Titan, nVidia driver 326.41, BOINC 7.2.11, Win 7 SP1 64bit

The test WUs I care about are now: NATHAN_s1p_test_titans1

As some of you have noted, after the server/database error, they are now NATHAN_s1p_test_titans2

Yes

http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=7205032

@+
*_*

Crédit 60,900.00

You should fine tune your system (for example: leave a core free for GPUGrid), because 5pot's GTX780 finished a similar workunit in 4200 seconds, while it took 5000 seconds on your Titan.

I changed the speed of my Titan by enabling and disabling the double precision mode, being calculated, this probably explains the slow.

@+
*_*

---

I changed the speed of my Titan by enabling and disabling the double precision mode

Didn't read the entire thread, just in case it hasn't been mentioned before: enabling double precision mode disables turbo completely and hence locks the clocks speed at the base level - independently of double precision being used or not. This is a really crude solution from nVidia, they should have just let turbo cap the power as usual (from my point of view.. but I don't design these cards).

MrS

---

Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

The test WUs I care about are now: NATHAN_s1p_test_titans1

Should those who don't have Titan or GTX780 opt out beta units?

I have completed 3 of the I4R9-NATHAN_s1p_test_titans2 tasks successfully.
They ran at decent GPU utilization, and did provide some good information in stderr.txt.
However....

1) I noticed that it seems that my GTX 460's clock is erroneously doubled -- Take a look at the GTX 460 result below. Device clock should have been 763 Mhz, not 1526 Mhz. Both GPU-Z and Precision-X show 763 Mhz. Is your detection algorithm bugged somehow?

2) Also, for showing the driver version, although knowing the "branch" (r325_00) is handy, it'd be much better to show the actual driver version (326.80 in my case). Could you please make a change to include that?

GTX 660 Ti result (restarted 2 times):
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=7202451
GTX 660 Ti result (not restarted):
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=7205677
GTX 460 result (restarted 2 times):
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=7202415

The test WUs I care about are now: NATHAN_s1p_test_titans1

Should those who don't have Titan or GTX780 opt out beta units?

I think we can stay in the beta. The test, as far as I know, is if the application will work for any of the supported GPUs, including the Titan and GTX780.

1) I noticed that it seems that my GTX 460's clock is erroneously doubled --

No, it's correct. It is reporting the SM clock, which on pre-Kepler cards is double the main clock. cf http://www.nvidia.es/object/product-geforce-gtx-460-es.html

2) Also, for showing the driver version, although knowing the "branch" (r325_00) is handy, it'd be much better to show the actual driver version (326.80 in my case). Could you please make a change to include that?

Yeah, that didn't look right. I'll see if it's possible.

MJH

1) I noticed that it seems that my GTX 460's clock is erroneously doubled -- Take a look at the GTX 460 result below. Device clock should have been 763 Mhz, not 1526 Mhz. Both GPU-Z and Precision-X show 763 Mhz. Is your detection algorithm bugged somehow?

There are two clock rates in the Fermi based cards (besides the memory clock rate): the core clock, and the shader clock. You are talking about the core clock, and the debug info shows the shader clock. As you can see, the shader (or CUDA core) frequency has a fixed (by hardware) double rate of the core clock frequency in the Fermi based cards

2) Also, for showing the driver version, although knowing the "branch" (r325_00) is handy, it'd be much better to show the actual driver version (326.80 in my case). Could you please make a change to include that?

+1

Should those who don't have Titan or GTX780 opt out beta units?

No, please stay in. It's important that it is tested as widely as possible before I push it out to the production queues.

MJH

1) I noticed that it seems that my GTX 460's clock is erroneously doubled --

No, it's correct. It is reporting the SM clock, which on pre-Kepler cards is double the main clock. cf http://www.nvidia.es/object/product-geforce-gtx-460-es.html

Then could you please consider having it say something better than "Device clock"? I currently think "GPU Core clock" when you say "Device clock".
Maybe "Processor Clock (MHz)", per the English specs found here:
http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-460/specifications

2) Also, for showing the driver version, although knowing the "branch" (r325_00) is handy, it'd be much better to show the actual driver version (326.80 in my case). Could you please make a change to include that?

Yeah, that didn't look right. I'll see if it's possible.

MJH

Thank you -- Knowing the real driver version would be tremendously useful I think!