mersenneforum.org

mersenneforum.org (https://www.mersenneforum.org/index.php)
-   GPU Computing (https://www.mersenneforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=92)
-   -   mfakto: an OpenCL program for Mersenne prefactoring (https://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=15646)

kriesel 2020-12-10 15:13

[QUOTE=axn;559745]He's using standard Primenet conversion 1Gd/d = 2GFLOPS[/QUOTE]
Hmm, wouldn't that be based on Core2Duo instruction set and performance? By definition? [url]https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=533167&postcount=4[/url]

It might be considered standard, but it seems to me far from valid for application to a gpu with a completely different architecture and instruction set and its own performance constraints.

axn 2020-12-10 18:15

[QUOTE=kriesel;565865]It might be considered standard, but it seems to me far from valid for application to a gpu with a completely different architecture and instruction set and its own performance constraints.[/QUOTE]
As long as the algorithm used is same-ish (i.e. IBDWT), the architectural differences are irrelevant.

Given that the algorithm is same, 1 iteration at a given FFT size takes x floating point operations, snd will get you y GHzD credit. This won't change because of the processor. Only thing that is affected by the processor is the time to complete that iteration; the faster a processor completes an iteration, the higher its GHzD/d rating, but also its GFLOPS rating. But the conversion factor between these two doesn't change and will remain independent of the processor.

kriesel 2020-12-10 19:16

Mfakto is performing TF, by a variety of kernels, not FFT multiplication by IBDWT.
FFT almost always uses DP. TF kernels may use SP or int. Different hardware designs have different ratios among them. Gpus have vastly different DP/SP or I think DP/int32 ratios than cpus.

VBCurtis 2020-12-10 19:40

So what?
Each TF bit takes some specific amount of work. You're complaining about how we measure work done, but not suggesting some alternative.

axn 2020-12-11 02:45

[QUOTE=kriesel;565888]Mfakto is performing TF, by a variety of kernels, not FFT multiplication by IBDWT.
FFT almost always uses DP. TF kernels may use SP or int. Different hardware designs have different ratios among them. Gpus have vastly different DP/SP or I think DP/int32 ratios than cpus.[/QUOTE]

Well, whoops. I guess I don't remember the context of posts from two months ago that well :-(

All good points; you can inform OP to take those into consideration and adjust their calculations.

DrobinsonPE 2020-12-20 16:54

GB-BRi5H-8250, i508250U, UHD 620, 16GB DDR-4, SSD, Windows 10.

mfakto 0.15pre7

[CODE]C:\Users\user\mfakto\015pre7>mfakto -st

Selftest statistics
number of tests 34026
successful tests 33288
no factor found 738

selftest FAILED![/CODE]

I need to find what exponent levels it is failing on and see if there is just a range to avoid.

[CODE]C:\Users\user\mfakto\015pre7>mfakto
mfakto 0.15pre7-MGW (64bit build)
OpenCL device info
name Intel(R) UHD Graphics 620 (Intel(R) Corporation)
device (driver) version OpenCL 2.1 NEO (27.20.100.8681)
maximum threads per block 256
maximum threads per grid 16777216
number of multiprocessors 24 (24 compute elements)
clock rate 1100 MHz
Automatic parameters
threads per grid 0
optimizing kernels for INTEL
selftest PASSED!
got assignment: exp=115746439 bit_min=73 bit_max=74 (16.53 GHz-days)
Starting trial factoring M115746439 from 2^73 to 2^74 (16.53 GHz-days)
Using GPU kernel "cl_barrett32_76_gs_2"
Date Time | class Pct | time ETA | GHz-d/day Sieve Wait
Dec 20 08:18 | 0 0.1% | 60.505 16h07m | 24.58 81206 0.00%
Dec 20 08:19 | 5 0.2% | 60.985 16h13m | 24.39 81206 0.00%
Dec 20 08:20 | 9 0.3% | 61.054 16h13m | 24.36 81206 0.00%
Dec 20 08:21 | 12 0.4% | 61.219 16h15m | 24.30 81206 0.00%
Dec 20 08:22 | 17 0.5% | 61.204 16h14m | 24.30 81206 0.00%[/CODE]

DrobinsonPE 2020-12-22 15:34

[QUOTE=DrobinsonPE;566771]GB-BRi5H-8250, i508250U, UHD 620, 16GB DDR-4, SSD, Windows 10.

mfakto 0.15pre7

[CODE]C:\Users\user\mfakto\015pre7>mfakto -st

Selftest statistics
number of tests 34026
successful tests 33288
no factor found 738

selftest FAILED![/CODE]

I need to find what exponent levels it is failing on and see if there is just a range to avoid.
[/QUOTE]

All 738 -st errors are in the 61-62, 62-63, and 63-64 ranges.

DrobinsonPE 2020-12-22 15:38

I5-4570T with HD4600 Graphics

mfakto 0.15pre7

[CODE]C:\Users\user\mfakto>mfakto
mfakto 0.15pre7-MGW (64bit build)
Starting trial factoring M115801657 from 2^73 to 2^74 (16.52 GHz-days)
Using GPU kernel "cl_barrett32_76_gs_2"
Date Time | class Pct | time ETA | GHz-d/day Sieve Wait
Dec 22 06:48 | 12 0.4% | 89.923 23h52m | 16.53 81206 0.00%[/CODE]

birtwistlecaleb 2021-06-30 18:17

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;531269]Perhaps this one?
[url]https://download.mersenne.ca/mfakto/mfakto-0.12-hd4000[/url]

edit: Although based on what Ken says below, you're likely fine with the normal latest-version (0.15-pre6):
[url]https://download.mersenne.ca/mfakto/mfakto-0.15pre6[/url][/QUOTE]
They both do not have a worktodo.txt, and it seems like they are broken because of that.

James Heinrich 2021-06-30 18:25

[QUOTE=birtwistlecaleb;582324]They both do not have a worktodo.txt, and it seems like they are broken because of that.[/QUOTE]What do you mean? No program will come with [c]worktodo.txt[/c], that's what you supply with the assignments you're working on.
What error message(s) do you see when you run whichever version it is you're running?

birtwistlecaleb 2021-06-30 19:49

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;582326]What do you mean? No program will come with [c]worktodo.txt[/c], that's what you supply with the assignments you're working on.
What error message(s) do you see when you run whichever version it is you're running?[/QUOTE]
They both instantly close when they find that, so I can't see that. Am I supposed to manually add the file?


All times are UTC. The time now is 13:05.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.