longer runtimes

Author	Message
rebirther Send message Joined: 7 Jul 07 Posts: 53 Credit: 3,048,781 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 7097 - Posted: 2 Mar 2009, 6:53:50 UTC I found out more and more of the last finished WUs that they have a timestep value of 80-100ms, 40000s-50000s with the same amount of credits, before it took around 20000s (GTX260). Changed something in newer WUs? ID: 7097 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

ignasi Send message Joined: 10 Apr 08 Posts: 254 Credit: 16,836,000 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 7099 - Posted: 2 Mar 2009, 9:33:44 UTC - in response to Message 7097. Could you link some examples please? thanks i ID: 7099 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

rebirther Send message Joined: 7 Jul 07 Posts: 53 Credit: 3,048,781 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 7100 - Posted: 2 Mar 2009, 10:14:26 UTC - in response to Message 7099. Could you link some examples please? thanks i http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=351803 http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=354339 ID: 7100 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

X1900AIW Send message Joined: 12 Sep 08 Posts: 74 Credit: 23,566,124 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 7107 - Posted: 2 Mar 2009, 18:31:15 UTC - in response to Message 7097. Last modified: 2 Mar 2009, 18:31:43 UTC I found out more and more of the last finished WUs that they have a timestep value of 80-100ms, 40000s-50000s with the same amount of credits, before it took around 20000s (GTX260). Changed something in newer WUs? I think some process does slowdown the GPU performance in your system, I see similar values with both GTX 260 (192 and 216 SP) downclocked to 2D (300/600/300, fixed to 1,06V): - http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=352480 216, WinXP/32 Bit, Q6600 @3,0 GHz - http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=349986 216 - http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=346088 216 - http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=338329 216 - http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=344662 192, Vista/64 Bit, Q6700 @2,6 GHz P.S.: This kind a downclocked GTX 260 reaches the niveau of my 9800GX2 @stock (600/1500/1000), but at half of the power consumption: - http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=328977 9800 GX2, Vista/64 Bit, Q6700 @2,6 GHz ID: 7107 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote

rebirther Send message Joined: 7 Jul 07 Posts: 53 Credit: 3,048,781 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 7111 - Posted: 2 Mar 2009, 19:24:13 UTC - in response to Message 7107. I found out more and more of the last finished WUs that they have a timestep value of 80-100ms, 40000s-50000s with the same amount of credits, before it took around 20000s (GTX260). Changed something in newer WUs? I think some process does slowdown the GPU performance in your system, I see similar values with both GTX 260 (192 and 216 SP) downclocked to 2D (300/600/300, fixed to 1,06V): - http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=352480 216, WinXP/32 Bit, Q6600 @3,0 GHz - http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=349986 216 - http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=346088 216 - http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=338329 216 - http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=344662 192, Vista/64 Bit, Q6700 @2,6 GHz P.S.: This kind a downclocked GTX 260 reaches the niveau of my 9800GX2 @stock (600/1500/1000), but at half of the power consumption: - http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=328977 9800 GX2, Vista/64 Bit, Q6700 @2,6 GHz 1-2 yes, the others are running normal ID: 7111 · Rating: 0 · rate: / Reply Quote