Prime95 version 27.7 / 27.9 - Page 21

2013-02-28, 12:20

I have a wishlist type of question.
Could you make the program change the taskbar icon's colour from green to red when either of the active workers stop due to an error? I use Prime95 for stress testing only, but usually keep working with the PC while CPU is being mutilated in the background, and often realize there has been an error fairly long after it happens.

Also, it might be better to have the inactive state displayed by other than red colour, which generally makes you jump up with "ha! something's wrong!". I'd propose something more neutral, like yellow or something.

edit: it might be system tray icon that's changing colours, but same idea applies. Of course, taskbar icon colour change is much better (not only because systray icons get hidden by default unless you manually change each of them).

kevindd992002 · 2013-03-09, 04:25

So it is always better to run 27.9 compared to 27.7? Are there problems with running 27.9 now? I use Prime95 for Torture testing my CPU OC.

When torture testing, is it recommended to enable sum (inputs) error checking and round off error checking under advanced menu and set priority to 10?

LaurV · 2013-03-09, 18:53

Hm... grrrr... anyone ever met this? The worker is stuck in this since the date shown, does no progress but it consumes CPU resources like a good faith guy...

Click image for larger version

Name: Capture.JPG
Views: 238
Size: 138.2 KB
ID: 9485

After taking the screenshot I restarted the worker and it immediately did stage 1 GCD (it took 64 seconds) and now is patiently doing stage 2 which is in good progress already ... No idea what it was... But it lost me 2 days...

edit: no idea if the test result is valid anymore, too...

ET_ · 2013-03-10, 17:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaurV

Hm... grrrr... anyone ever met this? The worker is stuck in this since the date shown, does no progress but it consumes CPU resources like a good faith guy...
Attachment 9485
After taking the screenshot I restarted the worker and it immediately did stage 1 GCD (it took 64 seconds) and now is patiently doing stage 2 which is in good progress already ... No idea what it was... But it lost me 2 days...

edit: no idea if the test result is valid anymore, too...

I have seen something similar not long ago.

Supposing you are using the last version of Prime95, which hardware is it working on?

Luigi

Batalov · 2013-03-10, 17:57

This is a known, multi-year old bug/feature, but it is purely cosmetic.
(The progress X% is wrong after some restarts.)
The result will be valid.

LaurV · 2013-03-11, 06:32

Ok. Thanks.

Can this have anything to do with the fact that I "artificially" increase B1/B2 limits? Usually, every time I get new P-1 assignments (I am not a P-1 heavy producer, I only do this occasionally, taking manual assignments, when I have free cores), I will modify the last digit on the "pfactor" lines (number of LL tests saved if a factor is found), from 1 or 2, to 3, 5, etc. This is to trick P95 into increasing the B1/B2 limits. If he believes I save a lot of work by finding a factor, then he will increase the limits, therefore increasing the chance to find a factor, like from 3% to 10% or so. Of course, this increases the running time too, like from 20 hours to 3 days, but I am totally ok with it.

I even don't need to use my old batch to increase the saved LL numbers, because James' site is giving me the right Pfactor lines already. It may be that when I got this assignment I increased that value too much, like 10, or 8, etc, then after I started the test I found out that the test will take too long time, longer then I expected to have free cores, and I manually reduced the value (like to 6, or 5, or 3). After such adventures, I usually delete the P95 temporary files (because he is using the limits from the file, if the file exists, and you can't change the limits, but this is not always happen, sometime your new limits are considered, I don't know which criteria is used). It may be that this time I forgot to delete the temp files...

I am just telling this story in case it may help to identify the bug. Most probably I can't reconstitute it, as it is very rare (I only have seen it now for the first time, in years of using P95 P-1 this style).

Bdot · 2013-03-15, 11:54

I have a strange effect with Linux64,Prime95,v27.7,build 2 and PauseWhileRunning

my prime.txt contains

PauseWhileRunning=*[3] during 1-5/7:45-17:10

working well normally. However, when I add work using worktodo.add during "working hours" (after 17:10), then the go-to-sleep the next morning (ff.) will be ignored.

OK, worktodo.add is unsupported, but I thought I'd report it anyway

dts350z · 2013-04-19, 21:46

27.9 on 64bit linux.

I have a dual socket sandybridge server. 2 E5-2670s. HT is off. 27.9 thinks this is an 8 core machine with HT on.

I care because I am trying to compare the benchmark with a single socket i7-3960x (overclocked) and trying to understand the speedups due to AVX and due to the overclocking.

With the HT confusion I can't tell what's going on. I need to compare 1 thread per physical core to one thread per physical core on the i7-3960x.

sdbardwick · 2013-04-20, 03:21

From undoc.txt:

Code:

The program automatically computes the number of CPUs, hyperthreading, and speed.
This information is used to calculate how much work to get.
If the program did not correctly figure out your CPU information,
you can override the info in local.txt:
	NumCPUs=n
	CpuNumHyperthreads=1 or 2
	CpuSpeed=s
Where n is the number of physical CPUs or cores, not logical CPUs created by
hyperthreading. Choose 1 for non-hyperthreaded and 2 for hyperthreaded. Finally,
s is the speed in MHz.

As an alternative to the above, one can set NumPhysicalCores=n in local.txt.
This is useful on machines that are somtimes booted with hyperthreading enabled
and sometimes without.  Normally, the program can detect this situation, but one
notable problem case is a dual-CPU hyperthreaded machine,  For example, take a
dual-CPU quad-core hyperthreaded machine.  When booted with hyperthreading enabled
this is properly detected as an 8-core hyperthreaded machine.  When booted
with hyperthreading disabled, this is improperly detected as a 4-core hyperthreaded
machine.  If you set NumPhysicalCores=8, then the program will set the 
hyperthreading state properly no matter how the machine is booted.

Prime95 · 2013-04-20, 03:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by dts350z

27.9 thinks this is an 8 core machine with HT on.

See undoc.txt. You can add entries to local.txt that override prime95's CPU detection.

pepi37 · 2013-05-16, 01:01

I noticed that Prime95 when start job start every core with 5 seconds of delay. In that time it set cpu affinity.
Can you tell me how you manage that Prime95 lock cpu usage to 100 on every core.
If I manually set affinity on four llr.exe process I dont got that "perfect" high core usage, it is around 99-100 % but on Prime 95 it is always 100%.
Thanks for reply!

2013-02-28, 12:20	#221
Octopuss 3147₁₀ Posts	I have a wishlist type of question. Could you make the program change the taskbar icon's colour from green to red when either of the active workers stop due to an error? I use Prime95 for stress testing only, but usually keep working with the PC while CPU is being mutilated in the background, and often realize there has been an error fairly long after it happens. Also, it might be better to have the inactive state displayed by other than red colour, which generally makes you jump up with "ha! something's wrong!". I'd propose something more neutral, like yellow or something. edit: it might be system tray icon that's changing colours, but same idea applies. Of course, taskbar icon colour change is much better (not only because systray icons get hidden by default unless you manually change each of them). Last fiddled with by Octopuss on 2013-02-28 at 12:22

2013-03-09, 18:53	#223
LaurV Romulan Interpreter Jun 2011 Thailand 10010110110101₂ Posts	Hm... grrrr... anyone ever met this? The worker is stuck in this since the date shown, does no progress but it consumes CPU resources like a good faith guy... After taking the screenshot I restarted the worker and it immediately did stage 1 GCD (it took 64 seconds) and now is patiently doing stage 2 which is in good progress already ... No idea what it was... But it lost me 2 days... edit: no idea if the test result is valid anymore, too... Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2013-03-09 at 18:54

2013-03-15, 11:54	#227
Bdot Nov 2010 Germany 3·199 Posts	PauseWhileRunning vs. worktodo.add I have a strange effect with Linux64,Prime95,v27.7,build 2 and PauseWhileRunning my prime.txt contains PauseWhileRunning=*[3] during 1-5/7:45-17:10 working well normally. However, when I add work using worktodo.add during "working hours" (after 17:10), then the go-to-sleep the next morning (ff.) will be ignored. OK, worktodo.add is unsupported, but I thought I'd report it anyway

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Prime95 version 27.3	Prime95	Software	148	2012-03-18 19:24
Prime95 version 26.3	Prime95	Software	76	2010-12-11 00:11
Prime95 version 25.5	Prime95	PrimeNet	369	2008-02-26 05:21
Prime95 version 25.4	Prime95	PrimeNet	143	2007-09-24 21:01
When the next prime95 version ?	pacionet	Software	74	2006-12-07 20:30

2013-03-09, 04:25	#222
kevindd992002 Mar 2013 2² Posts	So it is always better to run 27.9 compared to 27.7? Are there problems with running 27.9 now? I use Prime95 for Torture testing my CPU OC. When torture testing, is it recommended to enable sum (inputs) error checking and round off error checking under advanced menu and set priority to 10?

2013-03-10, 17:57	#225
Batalov "Serge" Mar 2008 Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2 2×47×101 Posts	This is a known, multi-year old bug/feature, but it is purely cosmetic. (The progress X% is wrong after some restarts.) The result will be valid.

2013-03-11, 06:32	#226
LaurV Romulan Interpreter Jun 2011 Thailand 7²·197 Posts	Ok. Thanks. Can this have anything to do with the fact that I "artificially" increase B1/B2 limits? Usually, every time I get new P-1 assignments (I am not a P-1 heavy producer, I only do this occasionally, taking manual assignments, when I have free cores), I will modify the last digit on the "pfactor" lines (number of LL tests saved if a factor is found), from 1 or 2, to 3, 5, etc. This is to trick P95 into increasing the B1/B2 limits. If he believes I save a lot of work by finding a factor, then he will increase the limits, therefore increasing the chance to find a factor, like from 3% to 10% or so. Of course, this increases the running time too, like from 20 hours to 3 days, but I am totally ok with it. I even don't need to use my old batch to increase the saved LL numbers, because James' site is giving me the right Pfactor lines already. It may be that when I got this assignment I increased that value too much, like 10, or 8, etc, then after I started the test I found out that the test will take too long time, longer then I expected to have free cores, and I manually reduced the value (like to 6, or 5, or 3). After such adventures, I usually delete the P95 temporary files (because he is using the limits from the file, if the file exists, and you can't change the limits, but this is not always happen, sometime your new limits are considered, I don't know which criteria is used). It may be that this time I forgot to delete the temp files... I am just telling this story in case it may help to identify the bug. Most probably I can't reconstitute it, as it is very rare (I only have seen it now for the first time, in years of using P95 P-1 this style).

2013-04-19, 21:46	#228
dts350z Apr 2013 1 Posts	27.9 on 64bit linux. I have a dual socket sandybridge server. 2 E5-2670s. HT is off. 27.9 thinks this is an 8 core machine with HT on. I care because I am trying to compare the benchmark with a single socket i7-3960x (overclocked) and trying to understand the speedups due to AVX and due to the overclocking. With the HT confusion I can't tell what's going on. I need to compare 1 thread per physical core to one thread per physical core on the i7-3960x.

2013-05-16, 01:01	#231
pepi37 Dec 2011 After milion nines:) 1451₁₀ Posts	I noticed that Prime95 when start job start every core with 5 seconds of delay. In that time it set cpu affinity. Can you tell me how you manage that Prime95 lock cpu usage to 100 on every core. If I manually set affinity on four llr.exe process I dont got that "perfect" high core usage, it is around 99-100 % but on Prime 95 it is always 100%. Thanks for reply!