Overclock.net banner

1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,808 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
December Projects of the Month

[email protected]

Start: 22 - Goal: 21 - End: 22 | It has been more than three years since we had LHC as a POTM.

SRBase

Start: 36 - Goal: 30 - End: 26 | It is a bit of feast or famine for tasks, but if the queues are kept full we can probably move up a number of spots.
:thumb:


[email protected]

Start: 22 - Goal: 21 - End: 22 | Will be a heck of a month if we can move up to 21, but we can give it a go.
:D


A bit of a different mix for the last month of the year.
:)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,808 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I have been having issues with Einstein. Not sure what the deal is, but I am getting driver crashes on my 290s and my 1070s. No issues on my 480 which is running the same OS and drivers as my 290s and 1070s.
:headscrat


After killing the stuck tasks, they go into uninterruptable sleep and I have to shutdown and reboot in order to clear the stuck tasks. I haven't had time to see what is going on, but hopefully I can get it sorted out over the weekend.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,808 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Quote:
Originally Posted by emoga View Post

Looks like my Ryzen 1800X has terrible performance compared to my slower intel 2670 v0 processors when crunching SRBase.
thinking.gif


I scanned through the top computers and the first Ryzen that appears is at #190 place...
There is really no way that a 2670 should be 20% faster than an 1800X. The only thing I could find was a post from April where rebirther said that it is not optimized for Ryzen yet.

I just loaded it up in Linux to see if it is a Windows issue, or if Ryzen is just knee-capped on this project

*Edit* I show the same results in Linux. My R7 1700 is about 30% slower than my 2670v2

You might try and start a thread in the forums, since rebirther is active and is obviously optimizing the project with the use of AVX, AVX2, and FMA3.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,985 Posts
All I've gotten the past few weeks have been Atlas. There was a post about it somewhere on their forums. Got 4 threads of 1950x (ends up utilizing about 2.5-3) and about 1 threads worth of a 3570k. 9.8gb of memory usage on the 1950x and 5.3gb on 3570k.

Finished my Moo tasks and moved over the RX 580 to [email protected]
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,808 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Just fired up six 4-core Atlas tasks on my 2P. Running six 4-core tasks uses roughly 35GB of memory on my 2P. I did have to use an app_config with a much higher memory allocation than anything I saw on the forums, in order for the tasks to truly use 4 cores per task.

Maybe they just take a while to start and I could have left the memory set at a lower value, but for the first thirty minutes each of the six tasks I was running were only using a single thread. Once I upped the memory to 40GB in the app_config, the tasks immediately started using 4 threads each.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,985 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by tictoc View Post

Just fired up six 4-core Atlas tasks on my 2P. Running six 4-core tasks uses roughly 35GB of memory on my 2P. I did have to use an app_config with a much higher memory allocation than anything I saw on the forums, in order for the tasks to truly use 4 cores per task.

Maybe they just take a while to start and I could have left the memory set at a lower value, but for the first thirty minutes each of the six tasks I was running were only using a single thread. Once I upped the memory to 40GB in the app_config, the tasks immediately started using 4 threads each.
They either take awhile to get up to higher CPU usage or it takes awhile to write nearly 10gb of data. They go from less than 1 core of CPU time to something like 2.5 cores for me when set to 4. I run a couple of CPU tasks on my 2nd client for GPUs to keep the CPU busy at all times.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,808 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
I saw the same thing when I was digging around to try and find out why each of the tasks I was running were only using about 20% of a thread, instead of the 400% I expected to see.

@mmonnin is correct, and it is just a matter of waiting for the tasks to ramp up to full usage. Screenshot below is six 4-thread tasks running. One of the tasks had only been running for about 10 minutes. It is not using any CPU, while the other 5 tasks are using 400+%.



*Edit* After waiting a few more minutes, the new task is now at full usage.
:D
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,985 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
594 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,808 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmonnin View Post

Anyone know if its just some pre-calculations, VM setup, loading the large dataset to mem or something? Like wheres the bottleneck to get to full cores. I just have an el cheapo 120gb SSD on mine that might take a bit to load 9.8gb.
I haven't had a chance to log what's going in and out of the VM when the ATLAS tasks start, but according to this post it is downloading the dataset for the task. https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/forum_thread.php?id=4440&postid=32442

Once that is complete then the WU launches with a single process

Quote:
The slides also explain the large initialisation time - running a single process for as long as possible in order to share as much memory as possible between the processes.
Link to post on ATLAS forums: https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/forum_thread.php?id=4165&postid=29433

After reading through all of that and a bunch of other posts regarding ATLAS efficiency, I am probably going to change my settings to run 12*2-core tasks, rather than the 6*4-core tasks I am currently running. Memory usage is not an issue on my 2P, but I'm not sure how it will affect disk usage. Running 6*4-core tasks, ATLAS is using 18GB of space on my hard drive, so even if that doubles, I should have plenty of available space.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,808 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
POTM Update

[email protected]

Start: 22 - Currently: 23 - End: | CERN was only doing about 45k per day when I set the goal, so I didn't see them being able to catch us.
:)
We are only a few days away from passing our original target the Dutch Power Cows.
:thumb:


SRBase

Start: 36 - Currently: 30 - End: | Goal achieved.
:thumbsups
We also have a shot at moving into the top 25 before the end of the month.

[email protected]

Start: 22 - Currently: 22 - End: | We are creeping up on Team Russia, and with the boost from @lanofsong the gap is getting narrower.

Great start to the month.
:cheers:
 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Top