mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > Software

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2011-03-23, 16:45   #166
James Heinrich
 
James Heinrich's Avatar
 
"James Heinrich"
May 2004
ex-Northern Ontario

22·839 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prime95 View Post
Try putting "NumCPUs=4" and "NumCpuHypyerthreads=1" in local.txt.
I think that should be "CpuNumHyperthreads=1"
James Heinrich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-24, 03:13   #167
Prime95
P90 years forever!
 
Prime95's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL

3×5×499 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by clarke View Post
Prime95 26.5 on Celeron D340 2.9GHz (256k L2) throws error after passing 960k blend self-test:
Fixed in next release. To work around problem choose a Custom test with a minimum FFT length of 100K
Prime95 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-24, 04:08   #168
Prime95
P90 years forever!
 
Prime95's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL

3·5·499 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batalov View Post
worktodo.txt needs to be updated when temp p* files are written (e.g. if the interval is 15 minutes).
It seems to be out of date.
Did you set WellBehavedWork=1?? As far as I can see, this is the only reason worktodo.txt would not get updated immediately. That option tells prime95 to write worktodo.txt every half hour.
Prime95 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-24, 05:42   #169
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

9,419 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prime95 View Post
Did you set WellBehavedWork=1?? As far as I can see, this is the only reason worktodo.txt would not get updated immediately. That option tells prime95 to write worktodo.txt every half hour.
Yup. That, indeed, is totally correct (because of some older batch of work). I (silently) found it a day later (and reverted it) but forgot to report. I actually mentally gave you a >>50% chance to find it, - and I was not disappointed. Kudos! ;-)
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-27, 18:41   #170
Falkentyne
 
Mar 2011

1016 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prime95 View Post
Try putting "NumCPUs=4" and "CpuNumHyperthreads=1" in local.txt.
Thanks, but it didn't work.
I also re-enabled hyperthreading. Still didn't work.
It doesn't even load into memory when I click it.

I'm using a core i7 2600k
8 GB Ram
Gigabyte p67a-ud5 mainboard.

Everything is perfect on 26.4, though.
Falkentyne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-29, 20:35   #171
Prime95
P90 years forever!
 
Prime95's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL

3×5×499 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Falkentyne View Post
Still didn't work.
It doesn't even load into memory when I click it.
I'm using a core i7 2600k
Everything is perfect on 26.4, though.
I'm working on a new theory. 26.5 uses the xgetbv instruction
to see if AVX is supported. I'm guessing XP does not support
this instruction, resulting in this strange failure mode.

In 26.6, I've added some code to bypass xgetbv in your case.
I'll have a version ready for you to test once I can get some
Celeron benchmarks to work on a different bug.
Prime95 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 04:22   #172
clarke
 
Feb 2009

2810 Posts
Default

Can I help you with Celeron benchmarks? Some quite old Celeron Conroe-L 512k, Willamette-128, Northwood-128, Celeron D Prescott-256 s478/775, Tualatin-256, Coppermine-128 are still running around.
clarke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 05:45   #173
Falkentyne
 
Mar 2011

24 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prime95 View Post
I'm working on a new theory. 26.5 uses the xgetbv instruction
to see if AVX is supported. I'm guessing XP does not support
this instruction, resulting in this strange failure mode.

In 26.6, I've added some code to bypass xgetbv in your case.
I'll have a version ready for you to test once I can get some
Celeron benchmarks to work on a different bug.
Oh ok, thank you.
Falkentyne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-03-30, 15:21   #174
Prime95
P90 years forever!
 
Prime95's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL

748510 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by clarke View Post
Can I help you with Celeron benchmarks? Some quite old Celeron Conroe-L 512k, Willamette-128, Northwood-128, Celeron D Prescott-256 s478/775, Tualatin-256, Coppermine-128 are still running around.
Thanks. I could use the Conroe-L 512K benchmark. See this thread for details:
http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=15468
Prime95 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-04-02, 12:24   #175
Brain
 
Brain's Avatar
 
Dec 2009
Peine, Germany

331 Posts
Default Improvement suggestion

I often manually start/stop workers. With increasing number of CPU cores it would help to enhance the dialog labelled with "Worker number to start/stop".
Given the "all option" is not selected I suggest that instead of single numbers user can also enter intervals.
For example:
2,5-8 --> start/stop 2 and 5 to 8. Derived from print page selection. Label would become "Worker number(s) to start/stop"
Shouldn't be too much work...
Brain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2011-04-04, 22:35   #176
Rhyled
 
Rhyled's Avatar
 
May 2010

32·7 Posts
Default Minor bugs when using #workers < #cores

I ran into a couple of less than optimum issues when running 2 workers on my 4 core i7 920 processor. (My electric bill has sent me on a frugality hunt)

i7-920 @ 3.5 GHz w/ HT
Gigabyte Mobo GA-EX58-UD3R
3x 2GB 1333 MHz DDR3
Prime95 Windows 64-bit 26.5 build 5


Smart Assignment isn't so smart:
I noticed that my iteration times were slowing down by up to 10% on an otherwise untouched system, from 17 ms to 19ms on a LL-D in the 25M range. From the looks of my Task Manager performance graphs at high speed, the task was switching between cores. Not a disaster, but when changed the cpu assignments to a fixed core (5 & 7), the iterations dropped back to a consistent 17 ms. My guess is the L2 cache was getting dumped during core switches, slowing things down a touch.


CPUS are numbered differently in Worker Window and Status window:
When editing the Worker Window assignments, CPUs are numbered 1-8. In the status window, they are numbered 0-7. E.g. My worker #1 assigned to CPU #5 is described as affinity set to logical CPU #4 and #7 shows up as #6. No biggie, just slightly confusing.
Rhyled is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


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

All times are UTC. The time now is 03:42.

Sun May 9 03:42:43 UTC 2021 up 30 days, 22:23, 0 users, load averages: 2.22, 1.73, 1.65

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.