Very good, my first WU was a 6.62 already. :D

Seems to run very well on my 9600GT. The system isn't that sluggish anymore and it is indeed CPU-recuded, after 1,5% it only has 25 seconds CPU-time. :-)
Temperature of the GPU-core is about 75°C for me, that's okay.

Thank you!
____________
Member of BOINC@Heidelberg and ATA!

Positive here too...
CPU-usage in taskmgr under 2% (AMD X2 4200/9600GT) 3 Tasks running as expected.

Roll them bad boys out!!! :)

I have one on deck and will report if there are problems...

We are now testing 6.62 which should reduce substantially CPU usage. Only few WUs will have the new app for testing. If it works we will extend it. Windows XP users please report if it works, as last time we had problems.

gdf

Looks great! Only 2% CPU usage, can now handle one more free core for cpu project :)

........... Good stuff GDF - have not returned a result as of yet; but watching them work is a pleasure - 3-5% CPU utilisation on a Quad & i7.
Have an early night - go home via the pub!

P.

Have not started one on the i7 though I have two queued ... the Q9300 is 12% done with only 1:14 CPU time ... and that is with the task started at about noon (well, 19:39 UTC) sure that UCT is for this post, but that will be the delta...

{edit}

As I calculate it it is less than 2 hours ...

What seems interesting to me is that at this rate of progress the task looks to be done faster too ...

Then again, is this a different type of task that will take a different run time?
____________

Ok, just started the first 6.62 task on the i7 and it is acting the same as the task on the Q9300, mostly 0 CPU, with occasional flashes to 1% ... very tolerable ...

This is the way it is supposed to work ... now, to wait till the tasks complete to see if they validate ... :)

The one on the Q9300 does look like it will run for about the same amount of time as the prior versions, as in, there does not seem to be a performance penalty for the new 6.62 version. Obviously we won't know for sure until I can get a couple done. The good news is that if past is prologue, I should have one done in 4-5 hours and the second one shortly after that ... and the third not far behind that ...
____________

Why are we still getting only v6.61 WUs? Irritating, the CPU usage is obscene...

Why are we still getting only v6.61 WUs? Irritating, the CPU usage is obscene...

It's really strange now... I got some 6.62 tasks but one 6.61 on the same PC is still running...and...one of the new 6.62 task shows running but CPU and the task itself remains idle and NO computation is done for hours. I've tried to abort it, but with the next downloaded the problem remains, so from the 3 possible units (I have installed 1X9600 GT and 1X9800GX2) on quad core at the moment there are only 2 actually running.....

Maybe it's because there is still 6.61 unit running on the same machine..? With the 6.61 there were always 3 tasks running simultaneously..

I have aborted the pending 6.62 tasks.....and...

Ha...now I've got again one 6.61 task and at the moment with two 6.61's and one 6.62 I have 3 tasks running...

As GDF said:

Only few WUs will have the new app for testing. If it works we will extend it.

OK the 6.62 unit itself runs OK...GPU time seems the same, low CPU usage, not like the 6.61 ones, but when mixed with the 6.61 there is some incompatibility..

I didn't have the chance to crunch three simultaneous 6.62 units on my machine

Hmmm, not my experience at all...

I had two 6.62 and one 6.61 in flight and now have the opposite ... of course I have the odd situation of a 295 and 280 card in the machine so have 3 tasks in flight ... might be a different story with two 295 cards ... which is what I dreamed about during my nap ...

My second 6.62 task should complete before midnight and then I am back in 6.61 hades ... sigh ... just one glimpse of the promised land ... sigh ...
____________

As GDF said:

Only few WUs will have the new app for testing. If it works we will extend it.

I hope people with xp machines will report a go for launch! I dont like going back 6.61.

BTW, does app_info.xml works here?

GDF - works and validates very well for me; so I'd be happy to continue with 6.62 WUs - actually, it is a disappointing to be starting a new 6.61 WU this morning now the test pool has gone!

I just got problems with a 9800 GX2 on Server 2003 x64 with drivers 180.48.
Two WU on errors after 10-15 minutes.

But i can't updated to the drivers 1810.20 or 181.22, because after the update i got a BSOD, and the problem seems to be also with XP x64.
SO i have to wait for new drivers.
But right now i have only 6.61 app.

Maybe i am the only one.

Jim PROFIT

I just got problems with a 9800 GX2 on Server 2003 x64 with drivers 180.48.
Two WU on errors after 10-15 minutes.

But i can't updated to the drivers 1810.20 or 181.22, because after the update i got a BSOD, and the problem seems to be also with XP x64.
SO i have to wait for new drivers.
But right now i have only 6.61 app.

Maybe i am the only one.

Jim PROFIT

I just got problems with a 9800 GX2 on Server 2003 x64 with drivers 180.48.
Two WU on errors after 10-15 minutes.

But i can't updated to the drivers 1810.20 or 181.22, because after the update i got a BSOD, and the problem seems to be also with XP x64.
SO i have to wait for new drivers.
But right now i have only 6.61 app.

Maybe i am the only one.

Jim PROFIT

With the first runs it seems to be 17% slower. On Linux the performance seems to be better. More WUs out.

gdf

From my perspective, I think that 17% loss on the GPU side is an Ok cost ... lower heat among other things ... not sure about system responsiveness as I did not have three at one time to really see what it does on the i7 ... sadly I am down now to only 6.61 tasks ... Can you tell us what made such a *POSITIVE* change?

Is there any recommended driver for XP64, one which surely works?

MrS

I just got problems with a 9800 GX2 on Server 2003 x64 with drivers 180.48.
Two WU on errors after 10-15 minutes.

But i can't updated to the drivers 1810.20 or 181.22, because after the update i got a BSOD, and the problem seems to be also with XP x64.
SO i have to wait for new drivers.
But right now i have only 6.61 app.

Maybe i am the only one.

Jim PROFIT

Hi.
Did you try 180.84 drivers (note .84, not .48)?
BR,

From my perspective, I think that 17% loss on the GPU side is an Ok cost ... lower heat among other things ... not sure about system responsiveness as I did not have three at one time to really see what it does on the i7 ... sadly I am down now to only 6.61 tasks ... Can you tell us what made such a *POSITIVE* change?

What are you Smoking this morning Paul, how can you say that 17% slower is better for the same amount of Credit & that it's a Positive thing, not in my book it isn't. We already have had our Credits slashed here and now it looks like with a longer run time for the same Credit we will have it slashed again.

No go here also. XPpro 64, GTX260 6.5.0/180.84

http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=255873
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=254948


Fish

No go here also. XPpro 64, GTX260 6.5.0/180.84

http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=255873
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=254948


Fish

Because I am interesting in total system performance ... not GPU Grid performance over all of my other projects. So, for me the loss of 17% performance on GPU Grid is more than paid back with 21% improved performance on the i7 cores ...

First 6.62-WU finished (257219), unusual slow 47,7 ms (GTX 260/216), but maybe GPU usage overlapped with crunching a WU for folding@home.

Windows XP users please report if it works, as last time we had problems.

gdf

Because I am interesting in total system performance ... not GPU Grid performance over all of my other projects. So, for me the loss of 17% performance on GPU Grid is more than paid back with 21% improved performance on the i7 cores ...

Maybe GDF can slow them down another 88% & that would give you 88% more Performance for your Precious i7 ... :P ... The Option is already there if you want more Performance for your GPU WU's or the Regular WU's, just run 3 & 1 for GPU Performance or 4 & 1 for Regular WU Performance so there's no need or reason to make them run longer just so they use less CPU% ...

On another note I had a weird screen come up and it is unclear if it is my LCD dying or the GPUs going out to lunch, or something completely unrelated ... scary though ...
____________

I feel that a 21% CPU load is too high and the exchange of 21% drop in CPU load for a 17% drop in GPU performance is a good trade-off for *ME* because I now have only a 1% CPU load per core on both my systems instead of a complete waste of 21% for 3 cores on the i7 to support 3 GPU cores and 22% on the Q9300 to support only one core.

I am having a weird problem when running 6.62 apps- the other project running as 4+1 will not fetch new work until the very last of it's WU's has completed... then it fetches the max number possible and then runs them all down to zero and repeats...this happens on all quads (XP Home)... as soon as a 6.61 WU runs the other project fetches work normally... I run the same preferences on all machines- network connection set to '0' and .5 day cache...

The *IDEA* of GPU processing is that it would be in parallel with CPU processing with minimal impact on normal system processing.

No go here also. XPpro 64, GTX260 6.5.0/180.84

http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=255873
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=254948


Fish

Try the 181.22 if they will install for you, I have Two 6.62's running @over 50% done now. The 181.22's installed on 9 XP Pro 64-Bit Box's of mine with no problems at all so they should for you too ...

some shredded 6.62 WUs here:

http://www.ps3grid.net/result.php?resultid=258055

http://www.ps3grid.net/result.php?resultid=258049

http://www.ps3grid.net/result.php?resultid=257563

XP x64 with 180.84 beta drivers, made no changes to system, suddenly produced this errors

Paul, any chance you can reduce the size of your sig? It's a PITA when trying to read threads cause you post it every time.

Paul, any chance you can reduce the size of your sig? It's a PITA when trying to read threads cause you post it every time.

Please report timing here from 6.61 to 6.62 possible on same WU name. So that we can better estimate performance.
Also, let us know if any Win Xp driver works.
gdf

Got 1 error.

OS:Vista x64
Driver: 180.48

<core_client_version>6.6.0</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<message>
Incorrect function. (0x1) - exit code 1 (0x1)
</message>
<stderr_txt>
# Using CUDA device 0
# Device 0: "GeForce GTX 260"
# Clock rate: 1515000 kilohertz
# Total amount of global memory: 939524096 bytes
# Number of multiprocessors: 27
# Number of cores: 216
MDIO ERROR: cannot open file "restart.coor"
Cuda error: Kernel [reduce4_kernel] failed in file 'reduction.cu' in line 171 : unknown error.

</stderr_txt>
]]>

Ohh, 6.62 is so sweet thing! Thanks to all developers!! 4-6% load on one core! At last we can crunch with pleasure! Even while gaming...
____________
From Siberia with love!

Ohh, 6.62 is so sweet thing! Thanks to all developers!! 4-6% load on one core! At last we can crunch with pleasure! Even while gaming...

Just go into your Account/Message boards and private messages/Hide signatures & put a check there and you won't see Signatures ...

Please report timing here from 6.61 to 6.62 possible on same WU name. So that we can better estimate performance.
Also, let us know if any Win Xp driver works.
gdf

Ah... much better. PoorBoy: thank you.

Please report timing here from 6.61 to 6.62 possible on same WU name. So that we can better estimate performance.
Also, let us know if any Win Xp driver works.
gdf

No go here also. XPpro 64, GTX260 6.5.0/180.84

http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=255873
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=254948


Fish

Try the 181.22 if they will install for you, I have Two 6.62's running @over 50% done now. The 181.22's installed on 9 XP Pro 64-Bit Box's of mine with no problems at all so they should for you too ...

Run in Linux then & you don't get any Performance loss, Oh thats right you don't do Linux :P hahahaha J/K ... ;)

Well, my first 6.62 has just completed 3 minutes quicker than I had calculated when I posted earlier in this thread.

Compare the CPU times, elapsed times and credits for this

my last 6.61 WU

and this

my first 6.62 WU.

Remember this 6.62 WU was running the whole 6 hours 45 minutes in 1 plus 4 mode whilst the 6.6.1 was running for its 6 hours 36 minutes in 1 plus 3 mode.

Question to the developers: What was the 6.61 code doing to use 5.5 times more CPU time for the same job type????

Phoneman1

Question to the developers: What was the 6.61 code doing to use 5.5 times more CPU time for the same job type????

Phoneman1

Question to the developers: What was the 6.61 code doing to use 5.5 times more CPU time for the same job type?

The polling loop, actively asking the GPU "are you finished yet?", like almost every other previous client.

The more interesting question would be "How is 6.62 doing it?"

MrS

On one of my XP machines (my first 6.62 WU):

App 6.61:
J15721-SH2_US_3-4-40-SH2_US_31980000_0
Time per step: 77.946 ms
Approximate elapsed time for entire WU: 58459.452 s
Granted credit: 3718.47800925926

App 6.62:
VS20854-SH2_US_3-1-40-SH2_US_3640000_2
Time per step: 80.904 ms
Approximate elapsed time for entire WU: 60677.902 s
Granted credit: 3718.47800925926

Both were run with Realtime priority (set manually). App 6.61 used ~40% CPU (dual core), app 6.62 used between 0 to 2%. The 4% penalty is well worth the drastic reduction in CPU usage for me!

Well, one of 6.62 WUs has been finished already...

For 6.61 app there was Time per step: 43.362 ms (45-50 on average), but now - 69.198 ms.

Athlon x2 5200+, WinXP x64, 181.22, BOINC 6.5.0...

What does it mean - WU processing is 1.5 times slowly than before? Or what?


____________
From Siberia with love!

Running 6.62 on a Q9550 w/ 2xGTX 260 Core 216's superclocked, WIN XP Pro 32bit, Nvidia drivers 180.48 successfully and getting CPU times +/- 3-4 mins per WU. Since upgrading to BOINC 6.6.3 earlier this evening I've been monitoring this box with taskmgr and the CPU utilization barely registers on these WU's. The WCC tasks are humming along nicely at 24-25% each... Amazing.

Time per GPU Grid WU step is approx. mid 30's.

-----------------------------------------

On a second box at home, Q6600 G0 @ 3.3Ghz w/ 8800GT and Nvidia 185.20 beta driver, Win XP Pro 32 Bit and BOINC 6.6.3 still chunking through 6.61 WU's is working fine.
____________
Crunching for the benefit of humanity and in memory of my dad and other family members.

No go here also. XPpro 64, GTX260 6.5.0/180.84

http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=255873
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=254948


Fish

Try the 181.22 if they will install for you, I have Two 6.62's running @over 50% done now. The 181.22's installed on 9 XP Pro 64-Bit Box's of mine with no problems at all so they should for you too ...

That did the trick, seems to work fine with seti also. Thanks PoorBoy


Fish

Good to hear, a Teammate of mine posted in our Teams Forum about error's with the 6.62 with 64 Bit Windows right on top of a Post I made about Updating their Video Drivers to 181.22, I'll let him figure it out on his own if he can't read whats Posted ... ;)

I am not sure that I am really seeing a decrease in productivity. Looking at 14 tasks run on my computer W2 which have been run on my GTX 295 and GTX 280 ... all the tasks seem to be of the same type.

After 6.61 I was about to hang up on GPUGRID but with the 6.62 I'm back on board full force.
6.62 is definitely on the right track.
Keep up the good work!
____________
Proud Member of Team [H]ard|OCP and the [H]ard DC Commandos

Excellent results here on the first 6.62 WU. Has made my system much more responsive for the additional Boinc clients I run.

System:XPPro SP2 x86, Boinc 6.4.2 (running 4+1) 9600GSO 575/1540/850 Driver 177.84

Results: WU M13486-SH2_US_3-8-40-SH2_US_31000000_0
6.61: CPU Time - 61773.92, Elapsed Time - 73545.438, MS/Step - 98.061
6.62: CPU Time - 1247.219, Elapsed Time - 75388.047, MS/Step - 100.517

Old CPU efficiency (as reported via Boincview) with 6.61 for 4x CPU clients averaged 67%

CPU efficiency with 6.62 for 4x CPU clients back to their normal 98%

Overall 6.62 has provided a 4.6% increase in CPU efficiency for a 2.4% decrease in GPU production. Great work on this client. I have 1 more 6.62 currently running with 2 more in queue. I'll followup if there is any notable change.

Sorry, have not the same WU name.

First 6.62-WU with WinXP/32, nVidia 181.22: 241966 - 2478 credits
- GTX 260/192 @666/1512/1150
- CPU time: 366.7031 (3+1 configuration)
- Time per step: 43.210 ms
- Approximate elapsed time for entire WU: 21605.234 s

"Old" 6.61-WU with WinXP/32, nVidia 181.20 (think so): 243068 - 2478 credits
- GTX 260/192 @666/1512/1150
- CPU time: 9720.516 (3+1 configuration)
- Time per step: 35.068 ms
- Approximate elapsed time for entire WU: 17534.094 s

v6.62 is actually a bit faster here:

I confirm 6.62 working fine on XP 32-bit with 8800GT. CPU usage usually below 2% on a Athlon64x2 4400+. I'm happy!

No edit button?
Anyway, just wanted to add: Great work, GDF! Thank you very much!

No edit button?
Anyway, just wanted to add: Great work, GDF! Thank you very much!

Here my values for the 6.62 on Vista 64:
For my GTX280 the 6.62 needs 4 to 5% CPU-Power of one core on a Phenom 9950 BE (2,6 GHz), for my GTX260² is one core needed with 2 to 3% on a Phenom II 940 (3,0 GHz) and for my 8800GT needs one core of a Phenom 9850 BE 2 to 3% CPU power.

The Linux version 6.59 needs on my Intel Q9550 (3,2 GHz) for a GTX260 4 bis 7% of a core, the Windows version is now better than the Linux version here.
____________

Finished one on on 6.62 XP64 bit, 181.22 Nvidia driver. All good.

Finished one on on 6.62 XP64 bit, 181.22 Nvidia driver. All good.

v6.62 is actually a bit faster here:

v6.62 is actually a bit faster here:

I think I'm finding the same thing. I don't see things slowing down. I compared several of my 6.62 "appx elapsed times" and see they dropped about 1500-2000 seconds.

Just small info:

Also, let us know if any Win Xp driver works.
gdf

Have anybody seen a difference of WU-time from 19000s - 30000s on a GTX260 with the same credit rate (4+1)? Normally Iam loosing around 2000s but this is mystic.

All are run in 4+1 mode. I'm seeing fairly consistent times and an average of 70.13 ms/step with 6.62 versus 68.08 ms/step with 6.61. That's a performance loss of 3%, or 2.2% if the 71.756 ms value from 6.62 is omitted (may have been playing Civ 4).

System responsiveness ahs not been terrible before and is not great now, but it's certainly improved. Overall I appreciate the new client.. for me a 3% loss on the GPU is more than made up for by the benefits of the new client

Another one with doubled time + same credits, I cant explain me why ^^
http://www.ps3grid.net/result.php?resultid=264367

6.62 application fails on my 9600GT :(
I have updated drivers, CUDA, BOINC...rebooted, project reset....nothing helps

BOINC recognizes the card, assigns task that starts and then stays at 0% done and 0 time computing....

Please advice what to try to make it run...I had no such problem with 6.61 version

Here are 2 of the tasks I have aborted due to the above reason:


http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=267985

http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=267405


BOINC recognizes the 9800GX2 card separately and runs only it...9600 stays idle..


01/31/09 15:24:33||Starting BOINC client version 6.5.0 for windows_x86_64
01/31/09 15:24:33||This a development version of BOINC and may not function properly
01/31/09 15:24:33||log flags: task, file_xfer, sched_ops
01/31/09 15:24:33||Libraries: libcurl/7.19.2 OpenSSL/0.9.8i zlib/1.2.3
01/31/09 15:24:33||Data directory: E:\BOINC\DATA
01/31/09 15:24:33||Running under account Administrator
01/31/09 15:24:34||Processor: 4 GenuineIntel Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q9550 @ 2.83GHz [EM64T Family 6 Model 23 Stepping 7]
01/31/09 15:24:34||Processor features: fpu tsc pae nx sse sse2
01/31/09 15:24:34||OS: Microsoft Windows XP: Professional x64 Editon, Service Pack 2, (05.02.3790.00)
01/31/09 15:24:34||Memory: 6.00 GB physical, 17.83 GB virtual
01/31/09 15:24:34||Disk: 48.83 GB total, 34.98 GB free
01/31/09 15:24:34||Local time is UTC +2 hours
01/31/09 15:24:34||Not using a proxy
01/31/09 15:24:34||CUDA devices: GeForce 9800 GX2, GeForce 9600 GT, GeForce 9800 GX2
01/31/09 15:24:34||Version change (6.4.5 -> 6.5.0)

Another one with doubled time + same credits, I cant explain me why ^^
http://www.ps3grid.net/result.php?resultid=264367

I noticed this wu hung for 12hrs or so last night at around 61.2%. A stop and start of boinc got it going again. Can't give any more info than that.

I noticed this wu hung for 12hrs or so last night at around 61.2%. A stop and start of boinc got it going again. Can't give any more info than that.

WOW! look at the reduction in CPU time here! Running stably on Boinc 6.6.3 and Win App 6.62...... And for the first time for days it's reliably running in 2+1 mode not 1+1, fingers crossed it continues.....

Task ID 261187
Name ui13927-SH2_US-26-40-SH2_US1130000_0
Workunit 194661
CPU time 683.3438
<core_client_version>6.6.3</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<stderr_txt>
# Using CUDA device 0
# Device 0: "GeForce 8600 GT"
Time per step: 285.804 ms
# Approximate elapsed time for entire WU: 142902.216 s
Validate state Valid
Claimed credit 2478.98611111111
Granted credit 2478.98611111111
application version 6.62


Task ID 253378
Name LR12278-SH2_US-26-40-SH2_US670000_0
Workunit 189149
CPU time 136292.1
<core_client_version>6.4.5</core_client_version>
<![CDATA[
<stderr_txt>
# Using CUDA device 0
# Device 0: "GeForce 8600 GT"
# Time per step: 283.640 ms
# Approximate elapsed time for entire WU: 141820.074 s
Claimed credit 2478.98611111111
Granted credit 2478.98611111111
application version 6.61

I've seen a similar drop in CPU times.
For same work type work units the CPU times dropped from about 40.0k sec to 1.4k sec. ms/step went up 2-3.

Not bad.

I lost my database the end of last year and can't do any more anaylsis. When that happened I stopped recording new results and have not had time to rewrite my spreadsheet which did those.

I noticed this wu hung for 12hrs or so last night at around 61.2%. A stop and start of boinc got it going again. Can't give any more info than that.

NICE improvement

2478 credit wu's used to use 55,000 cpu seconds prompting me to reserve an entire core to feeding the GPU. Now they take less than 1000.

Elapsed times from the task details are in the same range (60-63k seconds)

NICE improvement

2478 credit wu's used to use 55,000 cpu seconds prompting me to reserve an entire core to feeding the GPU. Now they take less than 1000.

Elapsed times from the task details are in the same range (60-63k seconds)

Running stably on Boinc 6.6.3 and Win App 6.62...... And for the first time for days it's reliably running in 2+1 mode not 1+1, fingers crossed it continues.....

My problems started with 6.62 wu's. Now my computer is running in 1+1 mode all the time as earlier I was mostly able to get it to 2+1. My boinc version is 6.4.5 though

Try 6.5.0.

My problems started with 6.62 wu's. Now my computer is running in 1+1 mode all the time as earlier I was mostly able to get it to 2+1. My boinc version is 6.4.5 though

Try 6.5.0.

I noticed this wu hung for 12hrs or so last night at around 61.2%. A stop and start of boinc got it going again. Can't give any more info than that.

I also had a 6.62 WU hanging and restarting BOINC solved the problem. Didn't have anything like that before. (which may be coincidence)

IIA2000 wrote:

BOINC recognizes the card, assigns task that starts and then stays at 0% done and 0 time computing....

IIA2000 wrote:

Ok, but this WU after the hang on and restart finished generating valid result...mine are giving only errors :(

do they error out or are they stuck and you abort them? How long have you let them run to see if they're really stuck? With 6.62 you won't see the cpu time count up, so you can not readily tell if anything is running. Looking at the GPU temperature would tell you, though. Or waiting >10 min should also make sure that you see progress, even on the slowest of cards.
And which driver are you running, 181.22? Older ones are causing problems / errors on XP64.

MrS