Nathan's took a lot of time to complete on my old GTX285, but they did mostly without error or making the system in-responsive.

Now the last week I get Noelia's and that are realy long ones. Between 130000 and 156000 seconds. I just got one (my system went down when typing this) with a BOINC estimate of 46.33 hours (167400 seconds).
I hope my systems keeps running while I sleep...
____________
Greetings from TJ

Today I found a new one:

e9s2_e7s22f278-GIANNI_lig3-0-1-RND8462_0 6447447 155969 19 Apr 2014 | 9:56:32 UTC 20 Apr 2014 | 7:21:34 UTC Completed and validated 73,494.64 70,408.88 217,500.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v8.15 (cuda55)

It took more then 20 hours to complete on my 660.
Now I have a second one running on the 780Ti, 49% done in 4h53m, but with steady GPU load of 87% on Win7, driver 331.82
____________
Greetings from TJ

I have two GIANNI tasks running: over 23h run time at about 80% done on my 650Ti GPUs.

Too long....


e12s130_e10s3f209-GIANNI_lig3-0-1-RND2338
application Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card)
created 20 Apr 2014 | 11:08:49 UTC

e12s12_e10s3f100-GIANNI_lig3-0-1-RND0090
application Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card)
created 20 Apr 2014 | 11:08:45 UTC
minimum quorum 1

Good to see some bigger WU's in calculation time.

Name e12s105_e8s78f139-GIANNI_lig3-0-1-RND4498_0
Run time 41,158.44 (11.4 hours on a GTX680)
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=9207233

Name e12s121_e8s78f200-GIANNI_lig3-0-1-RND5565_0
Run time 27,154.78 (7.5 hours on a GTX780Ti)
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=9207254


Also, the NATHAN_RPS1 and SDOERR_BARNA WU's have been nice to see.

Hope all these WU's are giving you some fun and interesting data to work with. Keep them coming. :)

These "really long runs" are the ones the long queue is made for.
They live up to the term "Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card)"
As the fastest card is the GTX 780Ti at the present time, and these workunits take ~7 hours to process on a GTX 780Ti this isn't abnormal at all.
I welcome that the project adapts the running time of the workunits to the latest GPUs. This could mean either larger molecules, longer simulation timeframe, or both at the same time.

Good to see some bigger WU's in calculation time.

Name e12s121_e8s78f200-GIANNI_lig3-0-1-RND5565_0
Run time 27,154.78 (7.5 hours on a GTX780Ti)
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=9207254

At present this only applies to the GIANNI_lig3 WU's. Also discussed in the 'GIANNI ligand3-0-1 bad batch?' thread.
The other 'Long' WU's are actually much shorter, but I guess it's better to put them into the Long queue than the short queue.

Good to see some bigger WU's in calculation time.

Name e12s121_e8s78f200-GIANNI_lig3-0-1-RND5565_0
Run time 27,154.78 (7.5 hours on a GTX780Ti)
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=9207254

Amazing Jeremy, we have the same OS, same GPU but yours is about 1.5 hours faster then mine. I have it now running with all settings from manufacturer, so not at piece of alternation software running (AfterBurner, GPUTweak etc). Even with 69°C it will not boost the clock, however it can if I use AfterBurner to tweak.

I don't mind these long runs, as long as the project can do its work I am happy. Just what I saw on the 660, means that card is almost to slow for these "long runs". Good on the 780Ti though.

Good to see some bigger WU's in calculation time.

Name e12s121_e8s78f200-GIANNI_lig3-0-1-RND5565_0
Run time 27,154.78 (7.5 hours on a GTX780Ti)
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=9207254

Amazing Jeremy, we have the same OS, same GPU but yours is about 1.5 hours faster then mine. I have it now running with all settings from manufacturer, so not at piece of alternation software running (AfterBurner, GPUTweak etc). Even with 69°C it will not boost the clock, however it can if I use AfterBurner to tweak.

I don't mind these long runs, as long as the project can do its work I am happy. Just what I saw on the 660, means that card is almost to slow for these "long runs". Good on the 780Ti though.

Jeremy's GTX 780Ti under Win7 is almost as fast as my slower GTX 780Ti (PCIe 2.0@4x, 2700MHz RAM clock) under WinXPx64.
I think his Core i7-4770K is overclocked to 4GHz or more, and maybe he has some faster RAM modules.
However, TJ, your Core i7-4771 is slightly slower than mine. Are you using the iGPU?

TJ,

This post was where I had ended up with my current configuration for the 780Ti (well until last night having to change the driver to avoid the errors with 8.40).

http://www.gpugrid.net/forum_thread.php?id=3634&nowrap=true#35730

This was winter time when this post was done. Now with warmer days and the {NATHAN_RPS1, SDOERR_BARNA, GIANNI_lig3} WU's, the boost is getting throttled down (~1125) with the 72 temp limit I have on there. These WU's are now getting 87-90% utilization. Yeah!

As Zoltan noted, the CPU is running 4+ (flickers between 4.1-4.2). CPU speed dependency was a bit of a surprise to me. I seem to recall a post that some DP calculations were pushed off to the CPU so I guess that would be part of the reason.

What are your top boost speeds? There is definitely a dependency on clock speed. http://www.gpugrid.net/forum_thread.php?id=1150&nowrap=true#33133

Regards,
Jeremy

Thanks for your answer Jeremy.
The highest I have seen was 1067MHz, but it is mainly running at 875.7MHz, even when temperature goes to 68°C it does not boost. I can use AfterBurner to let it boost, but when WU's switch from researcher, it goes to 875MHz again.

Well I am happy with the performance as it uses about 67% TDP, but I must admit I am jealous when seeing your times with the same OS. But your CPU is quite a bit faster as indeed explained by Zoltan.
____________
Greetings from TJ

Thanks for your answer Jeremy.
The highest I have seen was 1067MHz, but it is mainly running at 875.7MHz, even when temperature goes to 68°C it does not boost. I can use AfterBurner to let it boost, but when WU's switch from researcher, it goes to 875MHz again.

Well I am happy with the performance as it uses about 67% TDP, but I must admit I am jealous when seeing your times with the same OS. But your CPU is quite a bit faster as indeed explained by Zoltan.

Thanks for your answer Jeremy.
The highest I have seen was 1067MHz, but it is mainly running at 875.7MHz, even when temperature goes to 68°C it does not boost. I can use AfterBurner to let it boost, but when WU's switch from researcher, it goes to 875MHz again.

Well I am happy with the performance as it uses about 67% TDP, but I must admit I am jealous when seeing your times with the same OS. But your CPU is quite a bit faster as indeed explained by Zoltan.

Force Max Boost, and be done with it.
http://www.gpugrid.net/forum_thread.php?id=3647&nowrap=true#36320

Set a custom fan curve in Precision-X such that the fan goes to Max fan, 1 degree before thermal limiting might happen. For me, that means 80% (Max Fan for a GTX 660 Ti) at 69*C (sine 70*C is the start of thermal limiting for a 600-series GPU). The yellow dotted line shows you Min/Max fan, and for your GPU the thermal limiting might not start until 80*C.

Yes, the 780Ti does not seem to throttle itself until it reaches 80C. It's been warm here the last few days and even with maxed out fans my cards have been running at 75C while staying at full boost when I have the temp target set that high. I like to keep them a bit cooler, though, so I usually set the temp target for 72C with 100% fan speed at 71C.

A bit off-topic, but I don't think that the 780Ti will not boast has anything to do with the driver. I have 331.82 and saw it running at more than 1000MHz a few times before.
But I was about going to try the latest beta drivers and I set BOINC to not accept new work. Eventually Rosetta on 5 CPU threads where gone and the GPUGRID WU on the 770 was ready too. So only one WU (Gianny ligand) is still running on the 780Ti and at 1102MHz at 70°C. Max boost is 1131HMz per nVidia Inspector.

When I let some Milkyway WU's run on the 770, the clock from the 780Ti went gradually down to 940MHz at the moment (927.9MHz while typing this post, oh and up to 940.9 again)). While temperature is still constantly at 70°C.
My 770 does run at Max Boast almost all the time despite temp. is going to 70-74°C.
____________
Greetings from TJ

The best way to determine Max Boost, in my opinion, is to run GPU-Z, click the question mark at the middle right, and start the render test, then click Sensors and look at the GPU Core Clock value.

Any "pre-reported" boost value, is just a "typical boost" value, not a "Max boost" value.

For reference, for my GTX 660 Ti, on the first tab of GPU-Z, it says my card has rated GPU Clock of 1046 Mhz, with a Default Boost clock of 1124 Mhz, yet I know from testing that my Max Boost is 1241 Mhz.

So, I set for Max Boost, and it works wonderfully, even when the drivers would otherwise stupidly downclock due to supposed low utilization. Forcing Max Boost works wonders.
http://www.gpugrid.net/forum_thread.php?id=3647&nowrap=true#36320

yes I know Jacob and I certainly will test your work-around. But I was just sharing the information I see on my system.

The 780Ti runs at 1045.3MHz at the moment still with 70°C and no other jobs on the CPU or the 770. To me that is a bit strange, then when the second GPU starts to work and the CPU start to do 5 tasks and the temperature is not changing the core clock of the first (primary) GPU is falling. But that could be easily be lack of knowledge on my side.
____________
Greetings from TJ

The behavior I have seen, even with the latest drivers, is that, without my "Force Max Boost" workaround, then even when a GPUGrid unit is being crunched at a sub-70*C temp, GPU-Z will show the clock being downclocked, for PerfCap reason "Util". Basically, the drivers don't think the GPU is being worked hard enough to warrant Max Boost. The behavior may become more prominent as more CPU tasks "eat into" the CPU time needed by the acemd process, thus lowering GPU Usage %.

skgiven believes it is a driver bug. I believe it is just silly driver design by NVIDIA. I've privately reported it to them, but my inclination is that the behavior won't be changed.

Thus, I Force Max Boost. To hell with their stupid design. :)

Today I found a new one:

e9s2_e7s22f278-GIANNI_lig3-0-1-RND8462_0 6447447 155969 19 Apr 2014 | 9:56:32 UTC 20 Apr 2014 | 7:21:34 UTC Completed and validated 73,494.64 70,408.88 217,500.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v8.15 (cuda55)

It took more then 20 hours to complete on my 660.
Now I have a second one running on the 780Ti, 49% done in 4h53m, but with steady GPU load of 87% on Win7, driver 331.82

Thank you for the extended explanation ETA.
Nice to read. I thought more or less the same, after watching all reading of GPU-Z and changing settings. I see that with the latest driver it is indeed a bit faster, thus skgiven is right about that. But I see higher temperature of the 780Ti. I have no set the target temp. at 72°C and power target to 88%. Temperature of the card is 74°C though and the clock is 875.7MHz thus its base clock. GPU load is 84% I can increase that but then the temperature goes up as well.

With the older driver 331.82 I saw also the clock at 875.7MHz and a temp. of 68-71°C and GPU load of 86-91% (depending on the WU type).

Could be a hasty conclusion but the 331.82 driver seems better for my card, with lower temp. and higher usage.

Edit: I know that AMD are better for Milkyway but I use it for testing with nVidia as there WU's run fast. All nVidia cards I have that are capable for GPUGRID do only GPUGRID.
____________
Greetings from TJ

These are the first WUs I've seen that won't make the 24 hour bonus limit on 650 Ti cards. Is the 650 Ti reaching EOL for GPUGrid? Hope not.

There's no reason for the 650 Ti EOL.
I was lucky, since the fan on my 650 Ti died, so I RMA'd it and was hoping that there won't be a replacement possible ;-) And indeed, there wasn't, so I got a new 750 Ti in exchange :-) I like that card, it's really low power, low temperature and very nice performance for such a piece.

I still have an eVGA GTX 460 OC, happily crunching GPUGrid tasks, including "Long-run" tasks which occasionally give me a "Really long run". Despite being an older card, it is still providing useful results.

Just because a GPU now takes longer than 24 hours to return a GPUGrid result, does NOT mean it is EOL or useless...

Even my GTS 240 is working away on other projects, where it is not useless.

Mumak, ET & Jacob: saying the 650Ti was EOL was my attempt at a bit of hyperbole. However if WUs such as these GIANNI_lig become the norm the 650Ti will be at a significant disadvantage (but as you say still quite usable). I'd certainly opt for the 750Ti at this point.

According to my Kill-a-Watt, swapping in a 750Ti for a GTX 460 or 560 resulted in a 100 watt lowering of power use. Since electricity here is $0.09/KW and the boxes run 24/7, that's ~ $79.00/year savings if my calculations are correct.

The 750 Ti (EVGA SC) yielded more or less a 35% WU speedup compared to the 650Ti (the 650Ti is a bit faster than the 560 and a lot faster than the 460). On low GPU usage WUs (only the GERARD_A2ARNUL and ISBA_MULTISCALELAB_GERARD at this point AFAIK) the speed advantage here is somewhere around 25% compared to the 650Ti. It will be interesting to see what the efficiency of the 20nm Maxwells will be.

I was "annoyed" at first to see the estimated time of the first GIANNI_lig3 I got (~29 hours) on my 650Ti, but the resultant credit of >180K wasn't bad at all! In total, I got two of these:

9758880 6976288 171276 30 Apr 2014 | 2:35:29 UTC 1 May 2014 | 9:42:45 UTC Completed and validated 105,987.00 5,605.40 181,250.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v8.21 (cuda60)
9597193 6817200 171276 28 Apr 2014 | 21:06:43 UTC 30 Apr 2014 | 3:52:02 UTC Completed and validated 105,999.30 5,594.61 181,250.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v8.21 (cuda60)

I am happy to see Vagelis' opinion of the 650Ti. I have two of them processing GPUGrid projects and cannot afford to replace them. They are a little slow compared to others but they work.

I was "annoyed" at first to see the estimated time of the first GIANNI_lig3 I got (~29 hours) on my 650Ti, but the resultant credit of >180K wasn't bad at all! In total, I got two of these:

9758880 6976288 171276 30 Apr 2014 | 2:35:29 UTC 1 May 2014 | 9:42:45 UTC Completed and validated 105,987.00 5,605.40 181,250.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v8.21 (cuda60)
9597193 6817200 171276 28 Apr 2014 | 21:06:43 UTC 30 Apr 2014 | 3:52:02 UTC Completed and validated 105,999.30 5,594.61 181,250.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v8.21 (cuda60)

I may be missing the full credit bonus, but the half-bonus (25%?) isn't half bad either! Hey, 180K is about my average credit!

So, my feeling is, the 650Ti is not reaching EOL or becoming redundant just yet, it still has some juice! :)

That said, I am tempted to pair it in my box with a 750Ti, it's a sweet little card! I would be at ~80% of the Titan with a laughable comparable cost!