FA@H errors?

[David_L6]

Anyone else getting errors with this project the last day or two or do I have some machines developing problems or just not quite stable enough? :confused:
Work units for other project are completing OK. Not sure what's happening.

[fallwind]

Nothing here and I run FA@H on a bunch of machines. Then again, I have a 2 day queue so it can take a while for newly sent results to work their way through.

[[XC] mysticmerlin]

iC nothing in my results that looks like a problem on the other accounts. I run HCC on all mine though so a small part of my access runs FA@H

[David_L6]

Thanks for the replies. I guess I better take a closer look at the stability of the culprits throwing errors.

[David_L6]

Looks like the problem is trying to run F@H GPU client along with WCG. Quit F@H - no WCG errors. Re-start F@H - WCG errors.

I'm going to experiment with this a little more as I'd really like to be able to use both my CPU and GPU for worthwhile causes.

Will update as I learn more.

[D_A]

YOu may need to set aside one CPU core to support the GPU folding client. It does use some CPU functions, just not for it's main processing. You could do this by setting up a WCG profile to use a max of one less CPU core than you have in that machine and seeing if you can set the F@H client to use that idle core.

[David_L6]

YOu may need to set aside one CPU core to support the GPU folding client. It does use some CPU functions, just not for it's main processing. You could do this by setting up a WCG profile to use a max of one less CPU core than you have in that machine and seeing if you can set the F@H client to use that idle core.

I think that you are most likely correct. :yepp: However, I just can't make myself pull any cores off of WCG. :shrug: I'll either get the F@H GPU client to co-operate with WCG running on all 4 cores of the CPU or I won't run F@H on the GPU. I un-checked the FAAH project and haven't had an error since, so I think that I may have it worked out. Will let it run a while longer as is and then I'll try FAAH again and see what happens.

[Movieman]

I think that you are most likely correct. :yepp: However, I just can't make myself pull any cores off of WCG. :shrug: I'll either get the F@H GPU client to co-operate with WCG running on all 4 cores of the CPU or I won't run F@H on the GPU. I un-checked the FAAH project and haven't had an error since, so I think that I may have it worked out. Will let it run a while longer as is and then I'll try FAAH again and see what happens.

DA was right, need to dedicate one core to F@H for the GPU client..
A shame but thats how it works..

[David_L6]

DA was right, need to dedicate one core to F@H for the GPU client..
A shame but thats how it works..

Can't do that! The GPU client better run on the GPU or it won't run at all. :eek:

Everything (WCG on CPU / F@H on GPU) seems to be working together OK as long as I don't run FAAH WCG work units. Those are the only ones throwing errors when I run the F@H GPU client. :shrug:

[[XC] mysticmerlin]

Can't do that! The GPU client better run on the GPU or it won't run at all. :eek:

Everything (WCG on CPU / F@H on GPU) seems to be working together OK as long as I don't run FAAH WCG work units. Those are the only ones throwing errors when I run the F@H GPU client. :shrug:

That is strange. I run only cancer though but do not have a problem running 2x F@H and WCG on the wolfdale @ 95% loaded. :idea:

[[486]]

Huh, Im running WCG with F@H on GPU2, I'll post if it shows problems later...

[D_A]

Can't do that! The GPU client better run on the GPU or it won't run at all. :eek:

Sorry. That's just how it works. The GPU does the digestion but it still needs some CPU to grind the data up and spoon feed it before wiping it's little tooshie when it makes poopies.

[Marvin_The_Martian]

Bunch of misinformation here which needs correction.

gpu2 clients do take cpu time, depending on architecture and os. Nvidia is less cpu hogging as Ati, and Vista is ALLOT less cpu hogging as XP.

Dave, you don't need to loose a wcg core to run a fah gpu, that's just plain wrong information. I ran wcg and fah gpu for a week with my quad, and there is no penalty involved. I don't really remember which units I ran, I'd have to ask v0dka about them. I know he switched my gf's c2d to HCC wu's 100%, but before that I think my quad just got everything available. I think I had some FAAH units as well.

Mystic Merlin will say the same I think, there is no penalty that big that you need to loose an entire core. Infact, my gpu2 fah client takes 3% on average of my quad. Now you wouldn't want to loose even 1% and I understand, but the scientific output given back by the gpu client far outweighs the 3% impact on wcg.

[D_A]

.. and Vista is ALLOT less cpu hogging as XP.

:ROTF:

Sorry, but credibility -10 That's just plain WRONG.

[[XC] riptide]

:ROTF:

Sorry, but credibility -10 That's just plain WRONG.

He means for the GPU F@H client. He's correct.

[Marvin_The_Martian]

Thanks Riptide ;)

D_A, have a lil more faith in the Martian ok :)

[D_A]

It isn't the Martian I have no faith in. ;) I'm just yet to see a single instance where vista performed better than xp on identical hardware is all.

[Marvin_The_Martian]

In this case, it's the driver model. The cpu activity isn't 100%, it's polling data from the gpu, but for that it just reads registers. There are no operations going on other then that, and it seems that XP thinks a cpu which is polling data can't do anything else, and Vista just disagrees and says, hey you're only reading some registers you lazy cpu, you aren't loaded up at all! So XP will not only give you higher utilization numbers for the gpu client, it will also prevent the cpu to do more then just polling that gpu. Vista on the other hand, 3% cpu usage isn't that bad now is it?

This is all personal experience, no real technological backing but the things I touch upon ( the polling and how it's being interpreted by the os ) have been discussed in length on the folding forums and in our fah section here. Vista just is better, if you're a programmer ( or techie in any related field ) and can offer a better explanantion then I just gave, feel free to chip in and explain it.

[D_A]

I can only speak from personal experience. I've read a lot of technical articles claiming vista was better at a lot of things for various reasons. Out in meat-space however, it always required 5x the hardware capacity to achieve 2x the performance. I don't know how many people I'd had ringing me to find out why their new fancy machine lags behind their old one in even routine office tasks. I don't run Folding@Home and I would eat a bullet before allowing Vista on my hardware, so I can't give you exact performance metrics, but my experience of it in personal and corporate IT support is NOT positive. To call Vista a "disappointment" is THE most G rated thing I can think of to describe it.

[Marvin_The_Martian]

That's a nice statement, one I heard before as well so I'm not going to say it's not valid, but it's irrelevant don't you think to a particular instance where the positive effects of vista are just as well known as that people tend to agree the sky is blue?

Vista > XP for gpu2 folding is just as certain a fact.

[D_A]

Like I said, I don't fold. So I can only speak from my own experience.

[Marvin_The_Martian]

Like I said, I don't fold. So I can only speak from my own experience.

I'm wondering why you commented then.. :confused:

[D_A]

Because your statement contradicts everything else that I HAVE experienced with Vista.


Don't stress yourself, I won't be commenting again.

[Marvin_The_Martian]

Don't worry I was starting to wonder where you where coming from that's all :up: Freedom of speech btw, don't let me stop you from commenting :toast:

[[XC] riptide]

Vista Sucks... so ya.

[Marvin_The_Martian]

I'm trying to get some work for my wcg install, currently can't get any it seems. But yeah Vista sucks donky balls, just not with gpu folding :rofl:

When I get work I'l post ss, any specific requests from anyone?

Edit: I was having this discussion in more then one thread in the wcg section, I posted the ss's and my conclusion in the Hey it's quiet in here tonight thread :up:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=171338&page=22