log in |
Message boards : News : New TF multiGPU apps deployed (issues fixed)
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
The 7 minutes I said was from Boinc, which seems to race ahead with the % complete. In 15 minutes according to stderr.txt, it will be complete. We'll see if it validates. Or perhaps you can run that same task on a known good card of your own. I'd hate to think it's giving tasks back which validate but are wrong. since it's generating no heat and has 0% usage in MSI Afterburner, it's definitely not doing calculations. And there's no CPU usage for that task either (in Boinc or Windows Task Manager). | |
ID: 9624 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
The 7 minutes I said was from Boinc, which seems to race ahead with the % complete. In 15 minutes according to stderr.txt, it will be complete. We'll see if it validates. Or perhaps you can run that same task on a known good card of your own. I'd hate to think it's giving tasks back which validate but are wrong. I dont have a good card. A standalone test is the best option to test both cards and track down the issue. | |
ID: 9625 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
Can you make them both run the same task?The 7 minutes I said was from Boinc, which seems to race ahead with the % complete. In 15 minutes according to stderr.txt, it will be complete. We'll see if it validates. Or perhaps you can run that same task on a known good card of your own. I'd hate to think it's giving tasks back which validate but are wrong. | |
ID: 9626 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
Can you make them both run the same task?The 7 minutes I said was from Boinc, which seems to race ahead with the % complete. In 15 minutes according to stderr.txt, it will be complete. We'll see if it validates. Or perhaps you can run that same task on a known good card of your own. I'd hate to think it's giving tasks back which validate but are wrong. yes but not recommended. The GPU use 99% and CPU is nearly unused. Only a test can help. | |
ID: 9627 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
Can you make them both run the same task?The 7 minutes I said was from Boinc, which seems to race ahead with the % complete. In 15 minutes according to stderr.txt, it will be complete. We'll see if it validates. Or perhaps you can run that same task on a known good card of your own. I'd hate to think it's giving tasks back which validate but are wrong. I don't understand what you mean. I wanted to run the same task on both GPUs at once. If the dodgy one gives a different result, there's something up. This is the finished task, which the server claims passed, but it can't have done if it didn't do calculations: https://srbase.my-firewall.org/sr5/result.php?resultid=141051715 Let me know how to run this test. | |
ID: 9628 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
This could be a severe problem if there's "valid" tasks coming back which aren't. If this was happening before this update, on any machines with more than one card, can you track down suspect results and re-run them? | |
ID: 9629 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
This could be a severe problem if there's "valid" tasks coming back which aren't. If this was happening before this update, on any machines with more than one card, can you track down suspect results and re-run them? The result was good. no factor for M590297503 from 2^74 to 2^75 [mfakto 0.15pre7-MGW cl_barrett15_82_gs_2] | |
ID: 9630 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
Can you make them both run the same task?The 7 minutes I said was from Boinc, which seems to race ahead with the % complete. In 15 minutes according to stderr.txt, it will be complete. We'll see if it validates. Or perhaps you can run that same task on a known good card of your own. I'd hate to think it's giving tasks back which validate but are wrong. I will create a test later today. | |
ID: 9631 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
This could be a severe problem if there's "valid" tasks coming back which aren't. If this was happening before this update, on any machines with more than one card, can you track down suspect results and re-run them? It can't have been if the card was idle. It's claiming it didn't find a factor, but it could have been sat doing nothing and lying. | |
ID: 9632 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
I also have the same problem with my 2 Radeon RX 7900 GRE, and my Radeon PRO Duo (On another config) | |
ID: 9633 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
I've figured it out. | |
ID: 9634 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
wrapper test - standalone-windows (AMD only) | |
ID: 9635 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
I opened the file twice together, it works like under BOINC: GPU0 is at 100% and GPU1 is at 0 | |
ID: 9636 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
I opened the file twice together, it works like under BOINC: GPU0 is at 100% and GPU1 is at 0 hmm, any output. I have updated the zip file due a change, whats the input of job.xml? | |
ID: 9637 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
<job_desc> | |
ID: 9638 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
[quote]<job_desc>
<task>
<application>mfakto.exe</application>
<command_line>-d 1</command_line>
</task>
<unzip_input>
<zipfilename>mfakto-win-v7.zip</zipfilename>
</unzip_input>
</job_desc>[/quote] this was wrong, was changed in the new zipfile from -d 1 to --device 1, the same for --device 0 | |
ID: 9640 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
When I put --device 0 and --device 1 in GPU1 and GPU2 respectively, it doesn't open. | |
ID: 9642 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
In my opinion, on BOINC, the 2nd GPU works for 2 WU. Your software does not seem to entrust a WU to 2 GPUs, but to entrust 2 WUs to a GPU. | |
ID: 9643 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
When I put --device 0 and --device 1 in GPU1 and GPU2 respectively, it doesn't open. Whats the content of job.xml now? | |
ID: 9644 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
<job_desc> | |
ID: 9645 · Rating: 0 · rate:
![]() ![]() ![]() | |
Message boards :
News :
New TF multiGPU apps deployed (issues fixed)