Catalyst 12.2 seems to work well
 

AMD released Catalyst version 12.2. I have it running on two W7-64 machines and the first tests went well. I'll do a few tests on Linux later, but I'd say, this time no new bugs interfere with mfakto.

Has anyone tried the new 12.3 catalyst version yet?

[QUOTE=bcp19;294892]Has anyone tried the new 12.3 catalyst version yet?[/QUOTE]

Not yet, but 12.2 caused blue screens for me.

[QUOTE=flashjh;294897]Not yet, but 12.2 caused blue screens for me.[/QUOTE]

Odd. 12.2 works perfectly for me on all boxes.

[QUOTE=KyleAskine;294915]Odd. 12.2 works perfectly for me on all boxes.[/QUOTE]

I never spent any time t/s'ing the problem, I've been too busy. It was easier to revert and key it go. Is 12.2/.3 faster for you?

Thanks for the help bdot, i was able to get the 2nd instances running.

Bdot, when running some tests using mfakto yesterday, I noticed that when I used the first half of the following in a batch file that the program only ran at about 2/3 the speed as when I ran the second half.

[code]c:
cd mfakto
cmd.exe /k "start /b /low /affinity 0x08 mfakto-x64.exe"

vs

c:
cd mfakto
mfakto-x64.exe[/code]

Any thoughts?

This can't really account for speed, but if you're launching it from a batch file, calling cmd.exe shouldn't be necessary. This is what I use (developed by kladner):
[code]C:
cd C:\Users\Bill\GPU-Prime95\mfaktc-0.17
start /low /affinity 8 mfaktc-win-64[/code]

Looking for data
 

I'd like to work up some charts for GPUs running mfakto to determine how well they work once the cores running them are factored in.

If you could PM me: CPU and GPU model (Q8200/5770), # cores running P95/mfakto (1/3, 2/2, 5/1), exp size and iter time on P95 cores (45381221/.059ms, 26202373/.035ms), exponent size, bit level and rough avg time for each mfakto instance (30311929/68-69/74m29s, 30363997/68-69/73m52s, 29499839/69-70/162m11s) it would be a great help. Thanks in advance for your help.

[QUOTE=bcp19;294968]Bdot, when running some tests using mfakto yesterday, I noticed that when I used the first half of the following in a batch file that the program only ran at about 2/3 the speed as when I ran the second half.[/QUOTE]

Just for grins, you might take out the /low, or replace it with /high. It might show if something else is stealing CPU cycles from mfakto. Since the second batch defaults to /normal, I guess that would be the best comparison. Affinity is the other variable, so that might make a difference, too.

[QUOTE=flashjh;294916]I never spent any time t/s'ing the problem, I've been too busy. It was easier to revert and key it go. Is 12.2/.3 faster for you?[/QUOTE]

Not really. About the same as 12.1