[QUOTE=Dubslow;293126]You mean with no mfaktc running? Because with one instance you already were at 12 ms.[/QUOTE]

Good catch. I got confused. Thanks!

I took out the -t per LaurV's suggestion, but CL is still reporting "v1.66 err = 0.02091". Is this normal? Is it checking less often?

Even without -t, I believe it does check every 10,000 (??) iterations (as does P95), just not every single iteration.

Thanks!:smile:

Further testing shows that -aggressive starves even a single mfaktc. SP was at almost 90K and climbing, with Wait at 36%, Time at 45 sec and dropping. But I don't think it would have made it back to the 18-19s it was doing with "polite" CL.

In the course of the last couple of days I have been coming up against the first really warm conditions this spring. These have caused GPU temp to spike to 70C, and CPU to 54C. In both cases the changes are about +7C. The room is only about 28C, or about 82F. I know that some folks are not bothered by temps like these, but I have my doubts. All my fans are running pretty much flat out, so there's no headroom left, and I'm not ready to resort to air conditioning, yet.

Consequently, I've turned down the 460 GTX to 830MHz, and the 1090T to 3.4GHz; 20 and 100MHz, respectively. This has kept things within my personal tolerances, at least so far.

EDIT:
Another thing is that having gotten CUDALucas running, I'm going to put it aside for a while. I have a fairly full plate with TF in two instances and feel that I should take care of a reasonable number of those before I divert GPU power to other purposes.

1.66 success:

Switched to 1.66 from 1.65. Used -aggressive and no -t:
[CODE]e:\cuda2\cuda166 -d 1 -threads 512 -c 10000 -aggressive 26191799[/CODE]

[CODE]Processing result: M( 26191799 )C, 0x96485313ce97b91f, n = 1572864, CUDALucas v1.66
LL test successfully completes double-check of M26191799[/CODE]

tutorial -f option
 

[code]
CUFFT_Z2Z size= 1474560 time=3.070644 msec
CUFFT_Z2Z size= 1490944 time=4.516933 msec
CUFFT_Z2Z size= 1507328 time=4.897517 msec
CUFFT_Z2Z size= 1523712 time=5.199020 msec
CUFFT_Z2Z size= 1540096 time=5.449145 msec
CUFFT_Z2Z size= 1556480 time=4.972541 msec
CUFFT_Z2Z size= 1572864 time=3.496826 msec
[/code]
choose fast fft length.
[code]
$ ./CUDALucas -f 1474560 26963099
DEVICE:0------------------------
name GeForce GTX 550 Ti
~~~
start M26963099 fft length = 1474560
Iteration 10000 M( 26963099 )C, 0x8c15f65348aef031, n = 1474560, CUDALucas v1.66 err = 0.2138 (1:24 real, 8.3918 ms/iter, ETA 62:49:19)
Iteration 20000 M( 26963099 )C, 0x6f319a4dd6b32f62, n = 1474560, CUDALucas v1.66 err = 0.2138 (1:24 real, 8.3752 ms/iter, ETA 62:40:27)
[/code]
Try.

Mismatch for 26068439, 0x5e31c1705440----, not yet reported, I hate increasing my number of "proved bad" residues... I saved partial residues, so I restarted a triple check and let's compare them. ETA 23 hours.

edit: 26247811 - one hour to go.

Match for 26247811 - and I was so firking happy, I didn't see I am not logged in, and I reported it as anonymous, grrr :D

edit: and restarted 26068439 without -t and with -f 1474560 (=32768*45, default 1572864=32768*48), so only 17 hours to go (2.4 ms/iter with factory clock!! and only 0.09 error, it seems like lower values get longer time, I think it also matters how "composite" is the fft, not only how long it is, for example 32768*43 and *47 resulted in longer times, and *49=1605632 resulted in shorter time comparing with the default "*48" - this does makes sense when he is doing the butterflies, doesn't it? I am a bit confused here).

The first 1 million residue is a match (using -c 100k, so first 10 checkpoints are matching).

If you want, I can run the expo in P95. I could get it done in... (5 days/2.3GHz=x/3.8Ghz) a bit over two days. (Actually probably a bit more due to memory bandwidth, say three.) That's a standing offer, so whenever you guys get a mismatch, don't turn in the result, keep the expo reserved, and I can run it for you.
(The idea is that you don't need to rerun it on the GPUs, when that won't complete the expo.)

[QUOTE=Dubslow;293221]If you want, I can run the expo in P95. I could get it done in... (5 days/2.3GHz=x/3.8Ghz) a bit over two days. (Actually probably a bit more due to memory bandwidth, say three.) That's a standing offer, so whenever you guys get a mismatch, don't turn in the result, keep the expo reserved, and I can run it for you.[/QUOTE]

Remember, there's a good chance your result is correct...

Even if it is correct, PrimeNet will still require a matching P95 run to complete it. That will happen eventually, but I'm offering my comp so that you guys know in at most 3 days if in fact it is correct or not, without wasting more GPU time.