Message boards :
Number crunching :
What's wrong with my 690 host
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
elec999 ![]() Send message Joined: 24 Nov 02 Posts: 375 Credit: 416,969,548 RAC: 141 ![]() ![]() |
What's me doing wrong with my 690x2 host. |
rob smith ![]() ![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 7 Mar 03 Posts: 22665 Credit: 416,307,556 RAC: 380 ![]() ![]() |
What have you changed recently? What are the symptoms (error messages, messages from BOINC etc)? Bob Smith Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society) Somewhere in the (un)known Universe? |
Ian&Steve C. ![]() Send message Joined: 28 Sep 99 Posts: 4267 Credit: 1,282,604,591 RAC: 6,640 ![]() ![]() |
What have you changed recently? +1 You’ll have to be more specific about what problem you think you’re having. Looks like it’s working fine based on a few WUs you’ve returned. Seti@Home classic workunits: 29,492 CPU time: 134,419 hours ![]() ![]() |
elec999 ![]() Send message Joined: 24 Nov 02 Posts: 375 Credit: 416,969,548 RAC: 141 ![]() ![]() |
It seems slow. Any recommendations for improvement in performance |
![]() ![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 29 Apr 01 Posts: 13164 Credit: 1,160,866,277 RAC: 1,873 ![]() ![]() |
It seems slow. Any recommendations for improvement in performance You are running stock parameters. I suggest using any the many posted alternate command lines for more aggressive tuning. Seti@Home classic workunits:20,676 CPU time:74,226 hours ![]() ![]() A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association) |
![]() Send message Joined: 28 Nov 02 Posts: 5126 Credit: 276,046,078 RAC: 462 ![]() |
It seems slow. Any recommendations for improvement in performance -sbs 1024 -period_iterations_num 10 -spike_fft_thresh 4096 -tune 1 64 1 4 -oclfft_tune_gr 256 -oclfft_tune_lr 16 -oclfft_tune_wg 256 -oclfft_tune_ls 512 -oclfft_tune_bn 64 -oclfft_tune_cw 64 Is something Wiggo posted for gtx 1060 3GB's. It would give you a starting point if you are feeling specifically clueless (Like I often am). Tom A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association). |
Grant (SSSF) Send message Joined: 19 Aug 99 Posts: 13884 Credit: 208,696,464 RAC: 304 ![]() ![]() |
-sbs 1024 -period_iterations_num 10 -spike_fft_thresh 4096 -tune 1 64 1 4 -oclfft_tune_gr 256 -oclfft_tune_lr 16 -oclfft_tune_wg 256 -oclfft_tune_ls 512 -oclfft_tune_bn 64 -oclfft_tune_cw 64 If this system is for crunching only you could probably get away with -period_iterations_num 1 and add - hp - high_perf which will give the best performance. I'd suggest trying -period_iterations_num 5 or 3 first to see just how it impacts on system responsiveness. Even if it is for crunching only, you don't want the system to be effectively non-responsive to keyboard or mouse input in case you need to do something with it. Grant Darwin NT |
rob smith ![]() ![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 7 Mar 03 Posts: 22665 Credit: 416,307,556 RAC: 380 ![]() ![]() |
Those settings may not be suited to the older generation GTX690 (which is a pair of GPU, each approximately the same as a GTX670 in terms of performance). Also free up four cores at least to give the beasts a chance to get fed properly. Bob Smith Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society) Somewhere in the (un)known Universe? |
Bruce Send message Joined: 15 Mar 02 Posts: 124 Credit: 124,955,234 RAC: 11 ![]() |
These settings are what I used after offline testing of my Titan-Z's. Those are newer versions of your GTX690's. -high_prec_timer -high_perf -tt 90 -period_iterations_num 20 -sbs 384 -pref_wg_size 128 -spike_fft_thresh 2048 -tune 1 64 1 4 -oclfft_tune_gr 256 -oclfft_tune_lr 16 -oclfft_tune_wg 256 -oclfft_tune_ls 512 -oclfft_tune_bn 64 -oclfft_tune_cw 64 The higher -sbs numbers work better with the newer cards. In my testing the -sbs 256 and the -sbs 384 tied and both ran quicker than the higher -sbs numbers. You might also consider rolling back your SoG app to the SoG-r3557, this might turn in quicker times than the SoG-r3602 that you are using. Hope this helps. Bruce |
![]() Send message Joined: 28 Nov 02 Posts: 5126 Credit: 276,046,078 RAC: 462 ![]() |
Those settings may not be suited to the older generation GTX690 (which is a pair of GPU, each approximately the same as a GTX670 in terms of performance). Also free up four cores at least to give the beasts a chance to get fed properly. +1 A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association). |
![]() Send message Joined: 28 Nov 02 Posts: 5126 Credit: 276,046,078 RAC: 462 ![]() |
It seems slow. Any recommendations for improvement in performance It sounds like at least the -sbs should be down at the 192/256 level based on the other responses. A minimal command line could be: -sbs 192 -period_iterations_num 5 -spike_fft_thresh 4096 -tune 1 64 1 4 -tt 1500 Tom A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association). |
©2025 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.