Well, looks like I just had the first of these...http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=140145

9600GSO (G92) with factory OC, WinXP Pro 32-bit, 6.3.21 default install. Only one so far from numerous workunits. Only change in the machine was my participation in the PrimeGrid challenge with the 2 CPU cores on this machine. Since the LLR app. from PrimeGrid is extremely CPU intensive, I wonder if this could have caused some issues?

I highly doubt it and I can tell you for sure that I'm not running prime grid (QMC & Milkyway).

MrS

---

Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

Well, this time it took a little longer, until it appeared again for me - to be precise 4 successful WUs were between, but now I have one again.
All the time they ran with 1700 MHz, with some little breaks between when I wanted to game.
I guess I'm trying to take it down again by 100 MHz, but more isn't very senseful in my eyes, I want to make at least 1 WU per day. ;-)

Anyway, from the regularly times that it appears, I have the feeling now that it's a little hardware problem from my GPU, but nothing really spectacular and uninteresting, at least not so long until it gets worse.

Btw:
I'm happy that you guys don't purge the database and every result is still watchable. :-)
That gives a pretty good overview about the done work.

---

Member of BOINC@Heidelberg and ATA!

Yes, 100 MHz should do. I'd also take the core down a bit (like I probably wrote somewhere above) .. approximately 50 MHz.

MrS

---

Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

After a while and some finished WUs with an uninstalled RivaTuner, installed ntune + BOINC 6.4.2 I have no more errors seen yet. So a possible error reason could be RivaTuner.

No, I still have RivaTuner installed and got the error. No other ones since I clocked down, but then they were not frequent to begin with (2 in a couple of months).

MrS

---

Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

Does anyone of you also chrunch seti@home beta cuda app?

My System crash. The screen was crowded with white an black dot. Than the GPUGrid WU crashes. :( 16 WU dead. 24h no more WU. :(

Know I now Seti or GPUGrid.

---

Constant dripping wears away the stone. :)

DrNow,

you're still getting many errors and it does not seem to matter much if you run 1.8 or 1.7 GHz shader clock. Did you also downclock core and memory for this test? What's the temperature of your chip while crunching?

And an interesting side note: the error happens at different lines in the force.cu file, so I really don't think it's a software issue.

MrS

---

Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

you're still getting many errors and it does not seem to matter much if you run 1.8 or 1.7 GHz shader clock. Did you also downclock core and memory for this test? What's the temperature of your chip while crunching?

And an interesting side note: the error happens at different lines in the force.cu file, so I really don't think it's a software issue.

Hi ETA.

Well, as last said here I also think it maybe a hardware problem from my graphic card, but I have to stick with it for a while, I can't buy a new, bigger one as my current case isn't suitable for that (power supply is directly behind the card! ).

To the WUs:
The last "unspecified launch failure" is from 12-22-2008.
I don't know why this one later failed, it's no "ULF" as you can see.
And this from 23rd has another failure message, obviously a WU-error.

Besides that, I didn't had much time over the christmas days to continue the tests. Strangely enough, the shader clock went back to 1.8 GHz without any doings from my side some days ago. Maybe my changes from Windows to Linux and back did that without my knowledge.
(Under Linux I don't have configured BOINC for CUDA yet, but in the next days I guess I will try out, as openSuse 11 is now better supported)

To your questions:
I didn't change GPU or memory clock during my tests. And the temp while crunching lies at 70° to 75°C, a good value I think. Previous app versions did take my 9600GT up to 90 and 100 degrees.

---

Member of BOINC@Heidelberg and ATA!

And the temp while crunching lies at 70° to 75°C, a good value I think. Previous app versions did take my 9600GT up to 90 and 100 degrees.

Alas :(, the new application don't use the possible power of the graphic cards on a Windows system. I had to go back to 3+1 to avoid, that my card runs much longer (up to 30%) than before.

GPUGrid needs a lot of calculation power, so don't let us make the rules on the basis of the little graphic cards. On this speedway are too much big cars, so we can't make the rules on the basis of the infants tricycle ...

---

I didn't change GPU or memory clock during my tests.

You'd have to do that as well to get some meaningful results.

And the temp while crunching lies at 70° to 75°C, a good value I think. Previous app versions did take my 9600GT up to 90 and 100 degrees.

Yes, 70 - 75°C has to be fine. I could imagine one getting errors at 90 - 100°C if the chip is not very good, but at 70°C the card should be rather tolerant to higher clock speeds.

If I were you I'd lower shader/core/mem clock by 100/50/50 MHz and let it run for at least 10 WUs. If you don't get errors during this time we could be getting somewhere.

MrS

---

Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

If I were you I'd lower shader/core/mem clock by 100/50/50 MHz and let it run for at least 10 WUs. If you don't get errors during this time we could be getting somewhere.

Okay, with the next WU I will start another experiment and will that try out.

---

Member of BOINC@Heidelberg and ATA!

Nice sig-pic, btw ;)

MrS

---

Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

Thanx, ETA. :-)
Thought there was a change necessary because of the coming events. ;-)

And I've just finished my newest WU.
I've lowered clock/shader/mem now as you said and downloaded another WU. Let's see how far it brings me...

---

Member of BOINC@Heidelberg and ATA!

Well, still getting the ULF, no difference from my first test without adjusting memory and GPU clock.
Fortunately it happened very early in this WU.
I'm going down another 100/50/50 now...

---

Member of BOINC@Heidelberg and ATA!

Mhh, it seems like the time between failures got a bit longer.. but it's too uncertain. Well, certainly not the clear-cut situation I had hoped for.

MrS

---

Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

Wow, already 14 days ago... :-)
Looks like I found the right settings now for my 9600GT, didn't get the error again in the last 7 WUs.
Hope this thread now really can wander into the archive. ;-)

---

Member of BOINC@Heidelberg and ATA!

So it seems too high clock speed is really the cause for (some of) the unspecified launch failures. Let your card run a bit longer with these settings. And eventually you should increase the clocks again to the initial values and see, if the errors return -> double check. But don't hurry with that.

MrS

---

Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

I got this one. Neither the machine or graphics card are overclocked. It popped-up the "application error has occured" dialogue box asking if I wanted to send a report to Microsoft, as if they'd know what to do with it.

Running under XP, card hasn't had any errors previously. All my other errors are one's i've aborted (seeing as GPUgrid gives out too much work with such short deadlines). Driver is 180.48.

After that I shutdown BOINC, but being 6.5.0 it didn't terminate the science apps. I then rebooted the machine which produced a flurry of other compute errors for all the projects it was crunching when it shutdown (Einstein, Seti and GPUgrid).

In your case the WU failed with an unspecified launch failure after 1.3s and at a quite different file / line than in most other cases. I'd tend to say it's a similar symptom for a different cause.

And regarding "After that I shutdown BOINC, but being 6.5.0 it didn't terminate the science apps." .. if I remember correctly there has not been any feedback in the thread this was discussed. If I remember correctly I asked for the BOINC version which people were running who experienced this problem and posted that I don't see this behaviour with 6.5.0. So I'm not convinced 6.5.0 is to blamed for your current problems ;)
Just to make sure.. did you just shut down the BOINC manager or did you choose "advanced/shut down connected client"?

MrS

---

Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002