Anyone running CUDALucas on a 570?
 

Well really, anyone besides me. I am curious if this malfunction is unique to my card.

EDIT: The only other thing I can think to try is to put the 570 into my partner's i7 920 and see if the same stuff happens. Unfortunately, that machine is running XP 32bit, so not all would be the same for comparison.

EDIT2: It just finished the long self-test (-st2) in mfaktc without error. Sigh.

Preliminary tests of the new build: it works fine for me, and the lock problem is gone. As I promised some time ago, I re-done the tuning for the new build and got the same scores as for the older. I will copy here the list of FFTs which are the best for GTX580, in increasing order, in k (1k=1024). All the other FFTs smaller or larger get a lower performance.

[CODE]
32
40
48
54
56
60
80
96
128
144
162
196
200
256
288
324
384
400
512
576
640
648
672
784
864
896
1024
1152
1296
1440
1568
1600
1728
2048
2160
2304
2592
2646
2800
2880
2916
3024
3136
3150
3200
3240
3456
3600
3888
4032
4096
4320
4608
5120
[/CODE]

For example, instead of using the default 160k, you get a 3% performance increase with 162k. Instead of using the default 768k, you can get about 5% faster with 784k. Using 1568k instead if 1536k, you get about 6%-8% faster. With 2592k instead of (default) 2560k there is about 14% performance increase! etc.

I don't guarantee that other cards are the same, and even for gtx580 your mileage may vary. Someone could test these values on linux.

@klander: my money are on a bad card (memory) or wrong drivers. Comparing with mfaktc is irrelevant: mfaktc does not use the card's memory at all. Didn't test new version (no gtx570 on hand just now) but the old 2.04 worked well on 570 (except the file lock problem, whatever, but it did not get the things is showing on your screen)

[QUOTE=LaurV;310137]@klander: my money are on a bad card (memory) or wrong drivers. Comparing with mfaktc is irrelevant: mfaktc does not use the card's memory at all. Didn't test new version (no gtx570 on hand just now) but the old 2.04 worked well on 570 (except the file lock problem, whatever, but it did not get the things is showing on your screen)[/QUOTE]

I fear that it is boiling down to a hardware problem. I am still puzzled that memtestG80 finds no problems, but maybe it does not run enough different combinations of bit patterns.

Is the latest build you mention on the Source Forge page?

[QUOTE=kladner;310139]Is the latest build you mention on the Source Forge page?[/QUOTE]

It should be, yes.

@LaurV: Given that cufft is written by nVidia, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that OS doesn't really matter (though what card/architecture might matter). In either case, I'm a bit too lazy to run through all the tests. Thanks for the list. (At some point in the future we'll need to extend it past 5M, but I think this covers the leading edge LLs for now.)

yes, I was meaning "the new 2.04 beta built Aug 28" which is on sourceforge, and "the old 2.04 beta" the one with the lock bug which I was using it until few hours ago (which was on sourceforge before the new build from Aug 28 be done). The names are a bit confusing.

edit @ Dubslow crosspost: I also think the os does not matter. Maybe the card does not matter too (I did not use features of gtx580 like 512/more threads, I let everything on default). The only thing which matter should be cufft library and how nvidia/msft (our msft, not the company :D) do the butterflies when squaring the numbers.

CUDALucas-2.04 Beta-4.1-sm_21-x64 -r work with my 560 (see attached)

CUDALucas-2.04 Beta-4.2-sm_30-x64 -r fail (I have the right dll)
[code]
CUDALucas.cu(159) : cufftSafeCall() CUFFT error 6: CUFFT_EXEC_FAILED
[/code]

At this point I have to agree that your card is bad as all the signs point to that. Especially since your 460 works fine and the 570 consistently fails the self test.

I'll try to get the CUDA GPU memtest compiled.

It is certainly worth a shot to try it in another system [I]OR [/I]you could try a clean install of Windows.

(One note, I have not compiled a 32-bit version; if you need it for testing, let me know so I can attempt it, but no promises since it's been a while.)

Who is the manufacturer? You may be able to RMA the card.

[QUOTE=firejuggler;310142]
CUDALucas-2.04 Beta-4.2-sm_30-x64 -r fail (I have the right dll)
[code]
CUDALucas.cu(159) : cufftSafeCall() CUFFT error 6: CUFFT_EXEC_FAILED
[/code][/QUOTE]

A 3.0 binary shouldn't and doesn't work on a 2.1 card.

so, whatever happen, i should only get a sm_2.1 verssion?

[QUOTE=firejuggler;310145]so, whatever happen, i should only get a sm_2.1 verssion?[/QUOTE]

Most people have found that 1.3 is fastest, even for 2.x cards. But yes, sm_21 or lower.