[QUOTE=kladner;323884]EDIT: [OT]PrimeNet still keeps sticking in 1 DC assignment (Worker #3) to 4 P-1s in P95. All the settings I can find, both online and in P95, are set to P-1. I have worked around this by moving all the assignments from the other 4 workers to Worker #3. This stops #3 from getting more assignments for now, and the other 4 then fill in with P-1s.[/OT][/QUOTE]

That's funny, it did that to me too on a new machine I started up a couple of days ago. The P-1 worker on initial startup up was given 4 P-1 assignments, then after finishing one it was assigned a DC.

[QUOTE=Chuck;323887]That's funny, it did that to me too on a new machine I started up a couple of days ago. The P-1 worker on initial startup up was given 4 P-1 assignments, then after finishing one it was assigned a DC.[/QUOTE]

It's been an ongoing thing for me if I run more than two workers, though that's in another thread.

EDIT: Ongoing work on the GTX 460 with 64 and 32 bit exe's. First result on the 570 with 64 and 32 bit exe's:

[CODE]64 bit exe

CUDA device info
name GeForce GTX 460
compute capability 2.1
maximum threads per block 1024
number of multiprocessors 7 (336 shader cores)
clock rate 1660MHz

Automatic parameters
threads per grid 917504

running a simple selftest...
Selftest statistics
number of tests 92
successfull tests 92

selftest PASSED!

got assignment: exp=64801397 bit_min=69 bit_max=73 (27.68 GHz-days)
Starting trial factoring M64801397 from 2^69 to 2^73 (27.68 GHz-days)
k_min = 4554653426400
k_max = 72874454895928
Using GPU kernel "barrett76_mul32_gs"
Date Time | class Pct | time ETA | GHz-d/day Sieve Wait
Jan 06 17:26 | 0 0.1% | 12.093 3h13m | 205.98 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 17:26 | 3 0.2% | 12.130 3h13m | 205.35 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 17:26 | 4 0.3% | 12.137 3h13m | 205.23 82485 n.a.%
--------------------------------
Jan 06 18:21 | 1312 28.5% | 12.095 2h18m | 205.94 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:21 | 1315 28.6% | 12.129 2h18m | 205.36 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:21 | 1320 28.8% | 12.140 2h18m | 205.18 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:21 | 1323 28.9% | 12.127 2h18m | 205.40 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:22 | 1327 29.0% | 12.140 2h17m | 205.18 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:22 | 1332 29.1% | 12.128 2h17m | 205.38 82485 n.a.%
received signal "SIGINT"

Date Time | class Pct | time ETA | GHz-d/day Sieve Wait
Jan 06 18:51 | 1339 29.3% | 12.079 2h16m | 206.21 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:52 | 1344 29.4% | 12.128 2h17m | 205.38 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:52 | 1348 29.5% | 12.121 2h16m | 205.50 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:52 | 1360 29.6% | 12.135 2h16m | 205.26 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:52 | 1363 29.7% | 12.149 2h16m | 205.03 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:52 | 1368 29.8% | 12.142 2h16m | 205.14 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:53 | 1372 29.9% | 12.145 2h16m | 205.09 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:53 | 1375 30.0% | 12.146 2h16m | 205.08 82485 n.a.%
received signal "SIGINT"

32 bit exe
Date Time | class Pct | time ETA | GHz-d/day Sieve Wait
Jan 06 18:55 | 1384 30.2% | 12.122 2h15m | 205.48 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:55 | 1392 30.3% | 12.123 2h15m | 205.47 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:55 | 1395 30.4% | 12.123 2h14m | 205.47 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:55 | 1399 30.5% | 12.119 2h14m | 205.53 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:56 | 1404 30.6% | 12.123 2h14m | 205.47 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:56 | 1407 30.7% | 12.112 2h14m | 205.65 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:56 | 1419 30.8% | 12.122 2h14m | 205.48 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:56 | 1420 30.9% | 12.122 2h13m | 205.48 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:56 | 1423 31.0% | 12.121 2h13m | 205.50 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:57 | 1428 31.1% | 12.121 2h13m | 205.50 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:57 | 1432 31.3% | 12.119 2h13m | 205.53 82485 n.a.%


GTX 570
64 bit exe

Jan 06 18:21 | 3760 81.6% | 5.954 17m34s | 418.34 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:21 | 3772 81.7% | 5.940 17m25s | 419.33 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:21 | 3777 81.8% | 5.983 17m27s | 416.31 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:21 | 3780 81.9% | 5.987 17m22s | 416.04 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:21 | 3781 82.0% | 6.002 17m18s | 415.00 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:21 | 3784 82.1% | 6.003 17m13s | 414.93 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:21 | 3789 82.2% | 6.005 17m07s | 414.79 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:21 | 3792 82.3% | 6.003 17m01s | 414.93 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:21 | 3796 82.4% | 5.982 16m51s | 416.38 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:22 | 3801 82.5% | 5.997 16m47s | 415.34 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:22 | 3805 82.6% | 6.000 16m42s | 415.13 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:22 | 3816 82.7% | 5.999 16m36s | 415.20 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:22 | 3817 82.8% | 5.973 16m26s | 417.01 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:22 | 3829 82.9% | 5.936 16m14s | 419.61 82485 n.a.%
received signal "SIGINT"
Date Time | class Pct | time ETA | GHz-d/day Sieve Wait
Jan 06 18:51 | 3892 84.5% | 6.003 14m54s | 414.93 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:51 | 3900 84.6% | 5.998 14m48s | 415.27 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:51 | 3901 84.7% | 5.903 14m28s | 421.96 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:51 | 3904 84.8% | 5.914 14m23s | 421.17 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:51 | 3912 84.9% | 6.000 14m30s | 415.13 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:51 | 3921 85.0% | 5.980 14m21s | 416.52 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:52 | 3924 85.1% | 5.985 14m16s | 416.17 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:52 | 3925 85.2% | 5.987 14m10s | 416.04 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:52 | 3936 85.3% | 5.984 14m04s | 416.24 82485 n.a.%


32 bit exe
Date Time | class Pct | time ETA | GHz-d/day Sieve Wait
Jan 06 18:54 | 3945 85.5% | 5.968 13m50s | 417.36 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:54 | 3949 85.6% | 5.980 13m45s | 416.52 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:54 | 3957 85.7% | 5.920 13m31s | 420.74 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:55 | 3960 85.8% | 5.910 13m24s | 421.46 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:55 | 3961 85.9% | 5.973 13m26s | 417.01 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:55 | 3964 86.0% | 5.972 13m20s | 417.08 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:55 | 3969 86.1% | 5.972 13m14s | 417.08 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:55 | 3976 86.3% | 5.972 13m08s | 417.08 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:55 | 3981 86.4% | 5.971 13m02s | 417.15 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:55 | 3984 86.5% | 5.973 12m56s | 417.01 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:55 | 3997 86.6% | 5.973 12m51s | 417.01 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:55 | 4005 86.7% | 5.966 12m44s | 417.50 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 18:55 | 4009 86.8% | 5.972 12m38s | 417.08 82485 n.a.%
------------------
Jan 06 19:08 | 4596 99.6% | 5.968 0m24s | 417.36 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 19:08 | 4597 99.7% | 5.959 0m18s | 417.99 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 19:08 | 4600 99.8% | 5.953 0m12s | 418.41 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 19:08 | 4605 99.9% | 5.973 0m06s | 417.01 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 19:08 | 4617 100.0% | 5.972 0m00s | 417.08 82485 n.a.%
no factor for M64802879 from 2^69 to 2^73 [mfaktc 0.20 barrett76_mul32_gs]
tf(): time spent since restart: 0h 13m 59.077s
estimated total time spent: 1h 35m 53.670s
[/CODE]

EDIT2: Second 570 result. Damn! This is fast!
[CODE]Jan 06 20:43 | 4569 99.1% | 5.912 0m53s | 421.51 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 20:43 | 4577 99.2% | 5.914 0m47s | 421.36 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 20:43 | 4580 99.3% | 5.913 0m41s | 421.43 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 20:43 | 4584 99.4% | 5.915 0m35s | 421.29 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 20:43 | 4589 99.5% | 5.914 0m30s | 421.36 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 20:43 | 4592 99.6% | 5.914 0m24s | 421.36 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 20:43 | 4604 99.7% | 5.914 0m18s | 421.36 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 20:43 | 4605 99.8% | 5.915 0m12s | 421.29 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 20:43 | 4613 99.9% | 5.914 0m06s | 421.36 82485 n.a.%
Jan 06 20:44 | 4617 100.0% | 5.914 0m00s | 421.36 82485 n.a.%
no factor for M64773187 from 2^69 to 2^73 [mfaktc 0.20 barrett76_mul32_gs]
tf(): total time spent: 1h 35m 24.141s[/CODE]

I've always avoided tf in the past because of the high cpu load. Now it looks like I'll be sharing gpu time between tf and dc. Thank you to everyone involved in making this new release. The code look pretty too. Maybe I can learn something from it.

@Oliver: Sir, you made my day! Outstanding. For you, for George, and all the people involved in developing and testing, [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5WygWnzj3w"]here you go[/URL]!

I've had the chance to complete some assignments using the version 0.20, and I can say it's about three times as fast as 0.19 on the GTX 555. Granted, I didn't let mfaktc reach its full potential because I run Prime95 on all of my cores, but it's nonetheless a remarkable improvement.

The new version does cause my computer to lag a little, but that's something I can stand. :smile:

[QUOTE=kladner;323884]Sieve is running 82,485 on both GPUs, with SievePrimesAdjust=1[/QUOTE]ini settings "SievePrimes" and "SievePrimesAdjust" only apply to CPU sieving. The GPU sieving settings are controlled by "SieveOnGPU", "GPUSievePrimes", "GPUSieveSize", "GPUSieveProcessSize". There is no mechanism for auto-adjusting GPUSievePrimes -- for the balance between CPU sieving and GPU crunching you can check whether GPU is waiting for CPU or vice-versa, but with GPU sieving the GPU is waiting for the GPU, so there's never any idle time, it's just a balance of how much effort is spent in the sieving portion. In my brief tests, (at least small changes to) the value of SievePrimes doesn't make much difference in overall throughput, so I'm content to leave it at the default 82485.

Now that everyone has access to v0.20, I'd like to ask for a new round of benchmarks from everyone so I can update my [url=http://www.mersenne.ca/mfaktc.php#benchmark]GPU-TF benchmark page[/url].

Please submit the results using the form on the benchmark page:
[url]http://www.mersenne.ca/mfaktc.php#benchmark[/url]

Please keep these requests in mind:[list][*]mfaktc v0.20[*]32-bit mfaktc is preferred, please mention 32/64 when submitting[*]GPU sieving enabled, GPUSievePrimes=82485 (default)[*]assignment something around 60-70M, to 2[sup]73[/sup] (whatever you're working on currently is probably fine, as long as it takes at least 30 minutes per assignment, preferably an hour or longer).[/list]

Hi James,

why not using a fixed exponent for the benchmark. The GHzd rating (at least the formulas I've seen so far) do not care about the exponent much. Those formulas take care about the number of FCs for the exponent but there are other (minor) effects, too.
Take a look here: [url]http://mersenne.org/various/math.php[/url][LIST][*]if the exponent has many 1 (in binary representation) than there are alot of additional "multiply by 2". OK, they are relative cheap but it is measureable.[*]bigger exponents need more iterations than smaller exponents. Again for current exponents the effect is not that big... but it is there.[/LIST]
Oliver

P.S. My personal benchmark exponent is 66362159 ;)

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;323923]ini settings "SievePrimes" and "SievePrimesAdjust" only apply to CPU sieving. The GPU sieving settings are controlled by "SieveOnGPU", "GPUSievePrimes", "GPUSieveSize", "GPUSieveProcessSize". There is no mechanism for auto-adjusting GPUSievePrimes -- for the balance between CPU sieving and GPU crunching you can check whether GPU is waiting for CPU or vice-versa, but with GPU sieving the GPU is waiting for the GPU, so there's never any idle time, it's just a balance of how much effort is spent in the sieving portion. In my brief tests, (at least small changes to) the value of SievePrimes doesn't make much difference in overall throughput, so I'm content to leave it at the default 82485.[/QUOTE]

Oh. Of course. :blush: I read through mfaktc.ini, but the new settings obviously did not stick with me. Thanks.

Time to make Uncwilly happy...

[QUOTE=LaurV;323933]Time to make Uncwilly happy...[/QUOTE]
:razz: