I haven't checked in 32bit, I don't think. It worked in 64bit. I'll try it the next time I boot into XP-32.

I am running CUDALucas.cuda4.0.sm_13.WIN64.
and
CUDALucas.1.2.Win32

Again, weird. When I run it just with the -c flag, I get outputs of the following form:

Iteration 10000 2:52 real M( 53---xxx )C, 0xxxx----xxxx----, n = 4194304, CUDALucas v1.2

indicating there were 2 minuts 52 seconds from the previous output

Running precompiled Win7 64 bit

I get no timing without the -t flag but I'm using version 1.2b while you are using 1.2. Links to 1.2b and the 2 dll-files are in the pdf guide.

[QUOTE=ATH;274944]I get no timing without the -t flag but I'm using version 1.2b while you are using 1.2. Links to 1.2b and the 2 dll-files are in the pdf guide.[/QUOTE]

Doesn't the 1.2b version need to be compiled? The 1.2 I downloaded was precompiled as I am not that computer savvy. Also, the 1.2b link on the PDF has a 64 bit executable in it, which won't run on a 32 bit machine.

[QUOTE=ET_;274858]That's a bit of useful information! :smile:

Luigi[/QUOTE]

Too bad that on CUDALucas v1.2 Linux 64 bit doesn't work...

Luigi

How does it not work? For me, (after numerous issues getting it to compile at all, or even to start,) now it throws some error about device count.

Hey, Garo, while we are on the subject, CUDALucas does require compute capability 2.0 or so. That means I can't put my low-end GT220 to work with CUDALucas....not that I'm upset, but it's worth noting that minimum requirement.

[QUOTE=Christenson;275144]Hey, Garo, while we are on the subject, CUDALucas does require compute capability 2.0 or so. That means I can't put my low-end GT220 to work with CUDALucas....not that I'm upset, but it's worth noting that minimum requirement.[/QUOTE]

Computer capability 1.3.
I'm running CUDALucas with a GTX 275.

Luigi

So, my GTS 250 with compute capability 1.1 cannot be used with CUDALucas at all?

[QUOTE=Wizzard;277366]So, my GTS 250 with compute capability 1.1 cannot be used with CUDALucas at all?[/QUOTE]
correct!

Oliver

[QUOTE=kladner;274778]The brief batch file example is actually in [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=15545"]Best 4XX series GPU .[/URL]

But I'll reprise here. <snip>

EXAMPLE:
cd \CUDA\CUDALucas.1.2b (changes to CL directory.)
CUDALucas_cuda3-2_sm_13_WIN64.exe -c10000 5318xxxx
pause

The third line has [program name] (a space followed by)

-c[#######] (which sets the number of iterations between screen outputs. I used 10000 because it was in the sample command line in Brain's FAQ.) (a space followed by)
[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the small tutorial. [URL="http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=277670&postcount=706"]My babe[/URL] came on last Saturday and I spent the weekend installing stuff on it. I will definitely go for CudaLucas on DC exponents for a while, until I am convinced that all residues match, then I will switch to some other jobs, like LL-front or so-much-debated-TF-front. That is my choice for now, so I don't want to hear any argument.

So, CudaLucas installed and running. So far so good. I use 64 bit version, on Win7. Just as a small observation, -c[xxx] switch does not work, no matter what I put there, it will still output every 10k iterations on screen (did someone tried with other value except the default one?). This is a minor problem, and it is just FYI, of course I can live with it.

[B]My biggest problem is that I don't know how to convince CudaLucas (or a second/third, etc. copy of it) to run on the second GPU. Can anyone help?[/B] I have carefully read all the 36 pages of the GPU-thread on the forum (an related) but did not find too much.

If I start one copy of CudaLucas, about 75-80% of the first GPU is busy, and I get like 3.5ms per iteration (~25-30M range). If I start a second copy, then the same first GPU goes to 99%, and the time decrease per each CL process to about 4.5ms per iteration. Still reasonable. If I continue to launch copies of CL, they will all fight for the same GPU (and the time per iteration decreasing accordingly). The other one is plain empty.

Tried also CL 64 with 4.0, same result. Also, -t switch does not seems to work for any of them. Cuda capability is 2.0. Any switch I am missing for CL?