Installation and running of mkfactc

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by daxmick

Honestly I think it was #2 that did the trick. Prior to rebooting I issued the command 'nvidia-smi' and got an error. After reboot that command started working again.

Extreme coolness.

Some of us a little afraid of running "shutdown -r now". Sometimes it doesn't go so well....

[kladner]

Originally Posted by daxmick

Am I getting too excited over this? I've never done anything "GPU computing" related before.

A HUGE thank you to all of you who helped me work through my woes.

No. It is a big thrill. I was blown away watching my first GPU (GTX 460) rip through assignments with one of the earliest versions of mfaktc. Finding the first factor was another WOOHOO kind of moment.

[kruoli]

GPUs are such a huge factor in parallel processing such that I always have to remind me of the consequences. Simple TF is really nice parallilazable, but some other things are not that easy to do, e. g. LL and all other FFT things.

[Mark Rose]

The first TF I did was on a GeForce 210, about four years ago. At only 4.8 GHz-d/day, it wasn't worth it.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by kruoli

GPUs are such a huge a factor in parallel processing such that I always have to remind me of the consequences. Simple TF is really nice parallilazable, but some other things are not that easy to do, e. g. LL and all other FFT things.

I'm always amused by people who enter conversations like this.

Have you ever run a GPU doing TF?

[kruoli]

Originally Posted by chalsall

I'm always amused by people who enter conversations like this.

Have you ever run a GPU doing TF?

Yes! On different GPUs, on mfaktc I tried 1080Ti, in mfakto I tried R9 290 and AMD 5770.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by kruoli

Yes! On different GPUs, on mfaktc I tried 1080Ti, in mfakto I tried R9 290 and AMD 5770.

Care to share any results?

[daxmick]

Originally Posted by chalsall

Extreme coolness.

Some of us a little afraid of running "shutdown -r now". Sometimes it doesn't go so well....

It should be noted that the "new" way to shutdown/reboot your computer is:

systemctl reboot

or

 systemctl poweroff

.

I think the "shutdown -r now" still works, for now, but in the new "systemd" world these are the new commands.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by daxmick

I think the "shutdown -r now" still works, for now, but in the new "systemd" world these are the new commands.

Or, just pulling the power cord out of the machine also usually works....

[kruoli]

Originally Posted by chalsall

Care to share any results?

What kind of results? Obviously there are no factors of M50; what exactly do you search for?

[daxmick]

I've been running mfaktc for about 2 hours now. Here is a snapshot of the work as it progresses:

Date    Time | class   Pct |   time     ETA | GHz-d/day    Sieve     Wait
Jan 05 16:44 | 3852  83.4% |  8.257  21m53s |    217.72    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:44 | 3853  83.5% |  8.337  21m57s |    215.63    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:44 | 3856  83.6% |  8.164  21m22s |    220.20    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:44 | 3873  83.8% |  8.211  21m21s |    218.94    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:44 | 3877  83.9% |  8.585  22m11s |    209.40    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:44 | 3880  84.0% |  8.234  21m08s |    218.33    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:44 | 3885  84.1% |  8.152  20m47s |    220.53    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:45 | 3888  84.2% |  8.248  20m54s |    217.96    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:45 | 3892  84.3% |  8.263  20m48s |    217.56    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:45 | 3897  84.4% |  8.238  20m36s |    218.22    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:45 | 3900  84.5% |  8.245  20m29s |    218.04    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:45 | 3901  84.6% |  8.133  20m04s |    221.04    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:45 | 3912  84.7% |  8.187  20m03s |    219.58    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:45 | 3913  84.8% |  8.140  19m48s |    220.85    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:46 | 3916  84.9% |  8.165  19m44s |    220.17    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:46 | 3921  85.0% |  8.198  19m41s |    219.29    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:46 | 3925  85.1% |  8.277  19m44s |    217.20    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:46 | 3928  85.2% |  8.144  19m16s |    220.74    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:46 | 3933  85.3% |  8.153  19m10s |    220.50    82485    n.a.%
Jan 05 16:46 | 3936  85.4% |  8.150  19m01s |    220.58    82485    n.a.%

It appears to be working but I don't know if it is running efficiently. My GPU is at 99% and it appears I'm getting approx 220Ghz-d/day. Does that sound about right for a GeForce GTX 950?