mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > Hardware > GPU Computing

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2015-02-17, 23:17   #2498
Mark Rose
 
Mark Rose's Avatar
 
"/X\(‘-‘)/X\"
Jan 2013

1011011100012 Posts
Default

Got a 1% boost on a GT 430, too.

I tried tweaking the GPU* configuration parameters to see if their optimal values changed but they seem to be the same.

Also, I noticed this is still in the mfaktc.ini file at least in the Linux source download:

# GPU sieving is supported on GPUs with compute capability 2.0 or higher.
# (e.g. Geforce 400 series or newer)
Mark Rose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2015-02-17, 23:21   #2499
MatWur-S530113
 
MatWur-S530113's Avatar
 
Apr 2007
Spessart/Germany

16210 Posts
Default

Thank you!
Installed on win7-64 bit with GTX760
both selftest were passed
~2% more output (from 266 -> 271)
(I changed 2 settings in the ini-file: GPUSieveSize to max 128
and GPUSieveProcessSize to min 8,
~10% more performance with my GTX760)

greetings

Matthias
MatWur-S530113 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2015-02-17, 23:26   #2500
flashjh
 
flashjh's Avatar
 
"Jerry"
Nov 2011
Vancouver, WA

100011000112 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJudger View Post
Special thanks goes to Jerry Hallett who spent a lot time on building and testing Windows binaries as well as some hints for Windows compability. Thank you Jerry!
You are welcome, my pleasure!

Awesome work Oliver!

Last fiddled with by flashjh on 2015-02-17 at 23:28
flashjh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2015-02-17, 23:51   #2501
Mark Rose
 
Mark Rose's Avatar
 
"/X\(‘-‘)/X\"
Jan 2013

29×101 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MatWur-S530113 View Post
Thank you!
Installed on win7-64 bit with GTX760
both selftest were passed
~2% more output (from 266 -> 271)
(I changed 2 settings in the ini-file: GPUSieveSize to max 128
and GPUSieveProcessSize to min 8,
~10% more performance with my GTX760)

greetings

Matthias
I've found that my GTX 760 also benefits from a slightly higher GPUSievePrimes value than default. I have mine set to 100000.
Mark Rose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2015-02-18, 01:16   #2502
MatWur-S530113
 
MatWur-S530113's Avatar
 
Apr 2007
Spessart/Germany

2×34 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rose View Post
I've found that my GTX 760 also benefits from a slightly higher GPUSievePrimes value than default. I have mine set to 100000.

I quickly testet some values for GPUSievePrimes (k*10000 for k=5..13, only a few classes per test),
but it seems that for my card the default-value of 82486 is indeed the best,
Between 70000 and 100000 no measurable difference, larger differences to the default-value
are resulting in a worse performance (but still not remarkable, maybe 1%)
Very large and very low values for GPUSievePrimes slow down my card up to 50%.
MatWur-S530113 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2015-02-18, 02:27   #2503
Mark Rose
 
Mark Rose's Avatar
 
"/X\(‘-‘)/X\"
Jan 2013

292910 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MatWur-S530113 View Post
I quickly testet some values for GPUSievePrimes (k*10000 for k=5..13, only a few classes per test),
but it seems that for my card the default-value of 82486 is indeed the best,
Between 70000 and 100000 no measurable difference, larger differences to the default-value
are resulting in a worse performance (but still not remarkable, maybe 1%)
Very large and very low values for GPUSievePrimes slow down my card up to 50%.
I'll fiddle with mine again to verify it's better than the default.
Mark Rose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2015-02-18, 02:46   #2504
TheMawn
 
TheMawn's Avatar
 
May 2013
East. Always East.

11×157 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rose View Post
I've found that my GTX 760 also benefits from a slightly higher GPUSievePrimes value than default. I have mine set to 100000.
I've never really fiddled with the options but I believe you've done a bit more.

Which options do I want to be messing around with to try to increase throughput?
TheMawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2015-02-18, 02:56   #2505
Mark Rose
 
Mark Rose's Avatar
 
"/X\(‘-‘)/X\"
Jan 2013

55618 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMawn View Post
I've never really fiddled with the options but I believe you've done a bit more.

Which options do I want to be messing around with to try to increase throughput?
GPUSieveProcessSize
GPUSieveSize
GPUSievePrimes

I would do them in that order.
Mark Rose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2015-02-18, 06:16   #2506
TheMawn
 
TheMawn's Avatar
 
May 2013
East. Always East.

6BF16 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rose View Post
GPUSieveProcessSize
GPUSieveSize
GPUSievePrimes

I would do them in that order.
Do they need to be bigger or smaller, or does it tend to be a bit of both?
TheMawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2015-02-18, 13:14   #2507
Mark Rose
 
Mark Rose's Avatar
 
"/X\(‘-‘)/X\"
Jan 2013

29×101 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMawn View Post
Do they need to be bigger or smaller, or does it tend to be a bit of both?
Depends on the card.
Mark Rose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2015-02-18, 13:17   #2508
Mini-Geek
Account Deleted
 
Mini-Geek's Avatar
 
"Tim Sorbera"
Aug 2006
San Antonio, TX USA

17·251 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMawn View Post
Do they need to be bigger or smaller, or does it tend to be a bit of both?
(for maximum performance, in my experience)

GPUSieveProcessSize: (probably) bigger
GPUSieveSize: (probably) bigger
GPUSievePrimes: just right

Experiment to find the best values for your GPU, Mersenne number size, and bit depth. If you use your GPU to drive a display, responsiveness becomes a concern, too, and dialing back the first two values may be necessary. I use a tool I wrote to automatically switch the GPUSieveSize between a few values to trade off responsiveness and speed, based on what I'm doing (when idle, 128; common usage, 32; most games, 8; some games, stopped).

Last fiddled with by Mini-Geek on 2015-02-18 at 13:18
Mini-Geek is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
mfakto: an OpenCL program for Mersenne prefactoring Bdot GPU Computing 1668 2020-12-22 15:38
The P-1 factoring CUDA program firejuggler GPU Computing 753 2020-12-12 18:07
gr-mfaktc: a CUDA program for generalized repunits prefactoring MrRepunit GPU Computing 32 2020-11-11 19:56
mfaktc 0.21 - CUDA runtime wrong keisentraut Software 2 2020-08-18 07:03
World's second-dumbest CUDA program fivemack Programming 112 2015-02-12 22:51

All times are UTC. The time now is 11:55.

Thu Mar 4 11:55:13 UTC 2021 up 91 days, 8:06, 1 user, load averages: 2.17, 1.71, 1.79

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.