Hello, this are questions for the graphics cards specialists.

Where does Ti stand for with the nVidia cards? Are they better/slower/faster than cards without this addition.

And secondly, lets assume that money is no issue (it is unfortunately) what card would be best for an i7, 940 with 12Gb RAM and a 770 Watt PS?
(that is now having the GTX285 and to slow for the current WU's).

Thanks for your input highly appreciated.

____________
Greetings from TJ

Thanks skgiven for your answers.

The Titan is out of reach with more than 1500 euro's.
But I have seen reasonable prices for the 660 and 650 here in the Netherlands, buying in Germany that means...cheaper there.
____________
Greetings from TJ

I haven't included the Titan because it's not yet capable or running WU's here (new app required). It's performance will probably eclipse the GTX680's, and sit somewhere between a 680 and a 690 (dual GPU). The soon to be released GTX780 (also a CC3.5 'big Kepler', launch date May 23rd, 2013) should also surpass the GTX680, and the GTX770 (basically just a GTX680 with slightly higher clocks, CC3.0 I guess, launch date May 30th, 2013) should also slightly outperform the GTX680.

I can see Titan there for ~900€. Not suggesting you buy one, but rather to use this nice price comparison portal :)

One more question. I see a good offer in the Netherlands for an EVGA GTX650Ti SSC 2GB. So that will be super super clocked. Is that the same as over clocking? If yes can I change it via settings?

Personally I like EVGA, have good experiences with it and have had all kinds of brands.
As always thanks for the input.
____________
Greetings from TJ

One more question. I see a good offer in the Netherlands for an EVGA GTX650Ti SSC 2GB. So that will be super super clocked. Is that the same as over clocking? If yes can I change it via settings?

My guess is the GTX460, but if we go back to CC1.1 cards, it was really hit and miss and I got stung several times.

The tests that the card makers use for binning the chips for overclocking are probably directed to graphics use, and not really distributed computing, which has much more stringent requirements and uses other parts of the GPU more heavily than are used for games. As the work units get harder and the temperature rises, you will probably see errors. Then, you will need to reduce the clock on the GPU chip yourself.

You will see all sorts of complaints for Noelias, SDOERR, etc. which I normally don't have a problem with using non-overclocked cards.

The tests that the card makers use for binning the chips for overclocking are probably directed to graphics use, and not really distributed computing, which has much more stringent requirements and uses other parts of the GPU more heavily than are used for games. As the work units get harder and the temperature rises, you will probably see errors. Then, you will need to reduce the clock on the GPU chip yourself.

The more overclocking, the greater the chance for problems. I was not referring to your specific 650 Ti, but a "super super clocked" card sounds like problems to me. And the overclocking does not need to produce high temperatures for the problems to appear; I have seen problems below 60 C. A high temperature just adds to the likelihood. The binning that the chip makers do (e.g., TSMC, though I don't know that they do for GPU chips) is far beyond the capabilities of the board makers, and exercises many more functions of the chip. That is because they have access to the chip before it is even packaged, and can afford the high cost of the test machines.

In fact, I expect that it is a misnomer to call what the card makers do "binning". It is really just qualification tests on random samples of a lot to ensure that the chips don't fail outright. That is better than nothing, but does not ensure trouble-free operation in distributed computing projects.

The more overclocking, the greater the chance for problems. ... a "super super clocked" card sounds like problems to me. ... A high temperature just adds to the likelihood. ... (e.g., TSMC, though I don't know that they do for GPU chips)

In fact, I expect that it is a misnomer to call what the card makers do "binning". It is really just qualification tests on random samples of a lot to ensure that the chips don't fail outright. That is better than nothing, but does not ensure trouble-free operation in distributed computing projects.

More conjecture. Do you know that EVGA and other board makers aren't using binning supplied by the foundry? Did you know that even chips from the same wafer can have very widely varying capabilities? My experience is that factory OCed cards work at their factory overclocks on DC projects, often significantly higher. My experience is also that DC projects are generally less demanding and do not stress GPUs as much as heavy gaming.

You are speculating; cite a source that says that Nvidia supplies binned chips, and what card makers are using them

One more question. I see a good offer in the Netherlands for an EVGA GTX650Ti SSC 2GB. So that will be super super clocked. Is that the same as over clocking? If yes can I change it via settings?

Is that the one clocked at 1071MHz? It should be a good card. My 3 MSI 650 Ti cards were factory OCed at 993MHz and they're all running fine at 1084MHz. Haven't had many EVGA GPUs, but the one's I've had have been very good. I still have an EVGA GTX 460 running and it's the best of the four 460 cards that I've owned. I'd recommend MSI Afterburner for controlling the GPU settings and fans. It pretty much handles any brand GPU (both NV and ATI/AMD), multiple varied GPUs, has fewer bugs than the other control apps and is updated regularly.

You are speculating; cite a source that says that Nvidia supplies binned chips, and what card makers are using them

Interesting reversal of "logic" or lack thereof. I was taking issue with your speculation. I said:

> Do you know that EVGA and other board makers aren't using binning supplied by the foundry?
> Did you know that even chips from the same wafer can have very widely varying capabilities?

So can you cite a source that says that Nvidia doesn't supply binned chips?

Yes that is the one. But I saw a GTX 660 for only little more money. Same 192bit bus but more stream processors. So I am still a bit in doubt.

Yes that is the one. But I saw a GTX 660 for only little more money. Same 192bit bus but more stream processors. So I am still a bit in doubt.

The GTX 660 is great. The 650Ti has a 128-bit bus (not 192), less L2 cache, and fewer ROPs, in addition to the reduction of stream processors. The 650TiBoost is a 660 in the other regards, but has the same number of stream processors as the 650Ti.

You are speculating; cite a source that says that Nvidia supplies binned chips, and what card makers are using them

Interesting reversal of "logic" or lack thereof. I was taking issue with your speculation. I said:

> Do you know that EVGA and other board makers aren't using binning supplied by the foundry?
> Did you know that even chips from the same wafer can have very widely varying capabilities?

So can you cite a source that says that Nvidia doesn't supply binned chips?

That is another way of saying that you have no evidence to prove the assertion that the chips are binned. But you may believe it if you want to.

You are speculating; cite a source that says that Nvidia supplies binned chips, and what card makers are using them

Interesting reversal of "logic" or lack thereof. I was taking issue with your speculation. I said:

> Do you know that EVGA and other board makers aren't using binning supplied by the foundry?
> Did you know that even chips from the same wafer can have very widely varying capabilities?

So can you cite a source that says that Nvidia doesn't supply binned chips?

That is another way of saying that you have no evidence to prove the assertion that the chips are binned. But you may believe it if you want to.

Do you really not understand how you turned this around, or are you just trying to be difficult? I hope you're trying to be difficult, it's easier to fix ;-)

Yes that is the one. But I saw a GTX 660 for only little more money. Same 192bit bus but more stream processors. So I am still a bit in doubt.

The GTX 660 is great. The 650Ti has a 128-bit bus (not 192), less L2 cache, and fewer ROPs, in addition to the reduction of stream processors. The 650TiBoost is a 660 in the other regards, but has the same number of stream processors as the 650Ti.

I agree, if the price is close, get the 660. Did you see skgiven's test and analysis of the 650 TI, 650 Ti Boost, 660 and 660 Ti a few days ago. Read it, it's good information. There's also companion information in the later posts of the same thread.

Edit: Here's a link to the thread:

http://www.gpugrid.net/forum_thread.php?id=3156&nowrap=true#29914

in a well designed chip and with proper error-detecting tests (not sure we have these for GPUs..) this is not a smooth transition, but rather almost a step function. For my GTX660Ti that's "1228 MHz still works at GPU-Grid, 1241 MHz won't".

I may have to adjust this down by 13 MHz in a year or two due to chip degradation..

@Beyond: this "only uses 2/3 of its shaders" was not a software error. It's a design choice nVidia makes, which turns out to be more or less helpful depending on the code. All chips after GF110 and GF110 use this scheme (so even Titan). MrS

I think the super-scalar cards are now preferentially favoured by the application. When the top GPU's were the GTX480 to GTX590's it made sense to favour these Compute Capable 2.0 architectures, for project optimization reasons. It now makes more sense to use an app that favours the CC3.0 GeForce 600 GPU's which are all super-scalar. This just happens to make the CC2.1 cards (superscalar GeForce 400 and 500 series GPUs) perform better than they did, and also makes my old GPU comparison tables (with the older apps) obsolete.

That's just my take on the situation. Only the researchers could tell you if that was the case, or how close it is to the situation.

There are many potential issues with having multiple apps (queues, resources, management), but the biggest may be that any research has to be performed on the same app (or one that is essentially the same for the purpose of analysis) for the research to be presentable/acceptable.

I'm just not seeing why it should be so difficult. Why not ask for help from some of the other projects, or if need be even hire one of them to set up the queues, etc?

I'm just not seeing why it should be so difficult. Why not ask for help from some of the other projects, or if need be even hire one of them to set up the queues, etc?

Personally I think that it is more important for the GPUGRID project to get the science right, as that will help cure some terrible diseases.

I'm just not seeing why it should be so difficult. Why not ask for help from some of the other projects, or if need be even hire one of them to set up the queues, etc?

Personally I think that it is more important for the GPUGRID project to get the science right, as that will help cure some terrible diseases.

You may be right. The other side of the coin though is that the work is going to done done much faster if more crunchers and GPUs are accommodated. That's assuming that the project needs the crunching capacity. Maybe it doesn't. How much work is lost and computing time wasted by apps that don't work correctly with many GPUs and WUs that aren't formatted correctly. I think we can see by our experience that a lot is lost. Trade-offs? I'd say there's always trade-offs. Seriously though, setting up new queues should be a simple matter in BOINC. There's more than one forum / e-mail list where developers can get help from others who have already climbed the mountain. One can't be too proud to ask though...

If I have understand correctly, the lower the result of TFlops times runtime, the more efficient the card?
Than would the 660Ti perform worst?
____________
Greetings from TJ

Going back a year to when the top GPU's were CC2.0, a GTX470 did 29% more work than a GTX560Ti.
Now, with newer apps, a GTX470 can only do 7% more work than a GTX560Ti.

With super-scaler cards you can never utilize all the shaders fully, ...

... but I think its went up from 66% to around 80%.

This advantage is less than it was with the CUDA3.1 apps (it was around 33%)
It's too bad from the cruncher's perspective that nVidia doesn't make non-super-scalar GPUs anymore, but (as kind of compensation) the good news is that the CUDA4.2 can better utilize the super-scalar architecture than the CUDA3.1.

This discussion is difficult, because we're talking about the performance of a system consisting many parts, all of these parts continuously changing over time, and this change could alter (like it did in the past) their order of significance:
1. I/a The GPU
2. I/b The code running on the GPU
3. II - The computer (also a system consisting many parts)
4. II/a The operating system of the computer
5. II/b The optimization of the BOINC client for the hardware it's running on
6. II/c The hardware components of the computer (beside the GPU)

This is the actual order.
Except for item 2, the participants can optimize this system.
But item 2 is the fundamental of this optimization:
I've changed my Core 2 Quad systems to Core i7 systems to achieve better overall performance by eliminating the PCIe bandwith bottleneck which reduced the performance of the CUDA3.1 client. The CUDA 4.2 client is better in regards of this issue also, so no such change (read it as investment) is needed now from the participants. But you still have to spare a CPU thread per GPU (item 5)

But you still have to spare a CPU thread per GPU (item 5)

Hello guys,

A quick question, I am installing my GTX660 currently.
Is it wise to update to the latest BOINC version 7.0.64?

I rad on other projects that this version has problems with Linux.

I run winVista ultimate x64 on the I7 with the new GTX660.

Thanks as always for the help!
____________
Greetings from TJ

I'm using 7.0.27 on Ubuntu 13.04, with 304.88 drivers. New-ish OS, but mature apps and drivers - Working fine.

I don't know what version of Boinc you are presently using and can't see your system, but generally speaking, if it works, leave it be. If you need 7.0.64/65 for some other project then have a go.

Is it wise to update to the latest BOINC version 7.0.64?
I run winVista ultimate x64 on the I7 with the new GTX660.

More questions

I have now installed the GTX660 it is running some Milkyway to test as they are fast (approx. 7 minutes).
BOINC 7.0.28, nVidia driver 314.22 CUDA version 5.0, compute capacity 3.0.

Have installed EVGA precision and set GPU clock and fan speed to auto.
GPU Clock is running at 1110MHz, at times less. Should I set this lower?

Now in the BOINC tasks everything is "flashing" and going to other windows, e.g. browser, taskmanger, gives sometimes a white screen for a second.
That was not the case with the GTX285. Things seem to go slower.
How can I change this?

I will update to latest BOINC if Rosetta WU's are ready.
____________
Greetings from TJ

[quote]I'm using 7.0.27 on Ubuntu 13.04, with 304.88 drivers. New-ish OS, but mature apps and drivers - Working fine.

That is also my idea "if it works leave it alone".
I Installed the new GTX660 and all the software from the CD.
BOINC has a message that an app will not work.
Probably due to the 305.xx version of the nVidia drivers.
I am updating these now to 314.xx and see if that works.
I will leave BOINC than on 7.0.28, that I'm using on that PC.

I whish I had listened to skgiven!
I am updating BOINC to 7.0.64 and get error message about a key, error 1402
that I don't have right for a key.
I don't know how to get the picture here I have it on the pc as a jpg.

But now is BOINC not working any more. New GTX660 and not to use.
Who can help me please to solve this?
____________
Greetings from TJ

I am updating BOINC to 7.0.64 and get error message about a key, error 1402
that I don't have right for a key.

I am updating BOINC to 7.0.64 and get error message about a key, error 1402
that I don't have right for a key.

Googled the error, seems you have a permissions problem. It has nothing to do with 7.0.64. Read this, follow the instructions:

http://boinc.berkeley.edu/dev/forum_thread.php?id=3248#20925

A NOELIA WU should take 12 or 13h on a GTX660, 78h is way too long!
Are you going by the % complete and time taken, or the inaccurate remaining time?
50% GPU load is too low and suggests that the Noelia WU needs more CPU access, even though you have 2 free CPU's (perhaps FF is using them and some plug in is eating up a thread). What's the CPU kernel usage like? Is there heavy disk I/O.
11min to boot isn't normal for a desktop system.

A NOELIA WU should take 12 or 13h on a GTX660, 78h is way too long!
Are you going by the % complete and time taken, or the inaccurate remaining time?
50% GPU load is too low and suggests that the Noelia WU needs more CPU access, even though you have 2 free CPU's (perhaps FF is using them and some plug in is eating up a thread). What's the CPU kernel usage like? Is there heavy disk I/O.
11min to boot isn't normal for a desktop system.

Thanks skgiven, but you have to help me with the CPU kernel usage.

Task Manager, View, Show Kernel Times.

Is that what the CPU is using? It's around 88%

88% would be total CPU usage. Kernel usage is less (shown in red), and I just wanted to know if it was high or low (roughly). You are using 6 CPU cores which is 75% of the CPU and running a NOELIA WU (which Should use around half of a CPU), totaling 81%. The system is probably using ~3%, so something(s) else is using ~4% of your overall CPU (32% of a thread). I suspect the Noelia WU might not be using ~50% of a CPU core, and something else is using more than 4%. Could you check this; Boinc Manager (advanced view), tasks, click on the NOELIA WU and then Properties (to the left). CPU time should be ~half of elapsed time.

According to process explorer I/O is very little, most of the time zero. From the 12GB mem, 4.5GB is used.
I don't know what is wrong with this system it is my only not Dell and having issues from the start.
NOELIA is 53% ready in 11:20 hours, estimated still 51:14 hours, but that is not right.

Go by the 53% in 11.2h, rather than the estimated time remaining. That means the WU should take just over 21h to complete. You might see the estimated remaining time depreciate faster than the wall clock.

The 660 is in the i7 with vista ultimate 64 bit and has varying GPU load of 5%, 43% up to 63% as I have seen as highest. GPU clock mostly at 1110MHz.

Not sure what you mean by 5%? 43% to 63% means there is a bottleneck somewhere. Perhaps the CPU, PCIE freq, another app (system or more likely Rosetta), or something else...

One thing I found is that last night there was 28GB free on my C-drive and now only 7.84 free. Don't know what happened yet??

Rosetta - look at a tasks properties in Boinc.

Closing FF and checking if it was indeed killed, kept the CPU usage at 88%.

Rules out FF, but not add ons (Java, downloaders, scripts...)

After yesterday's update to he GTX660, newer driver 314.22 and new BOINC 7.0.64 the system seems slower with building up the graphics. Blank screens for a second when switching and such. The remaining time in BOINC Manager is flickering all the time, not on my other 2 PC currently crunching.

A new driver might be in order, but I would start by suspending Rosetta work and see if the GPU usage rises. If that doesn't improve things, do a restart with Rosetta WU's still suspended (the mini WU's do checkpoint).

For crunching, we recommend that the HDD has 10GB free space, with no more than 80% used. Not sure what type you have, but if it's a standard hard disk drive (not a Solid State Drive) and you have little space on it, that could be a problem, especially if running Rosetta WU's.

Is it perhaps an idea to update the the latest nVidia driver 320.18?
Normally I don't use the latest from things, but in this case as my GTX660 is not perming as it should...

Thanks.
____________
Greetings from TJ

You could use GPUZ to see what PCIE speed the GPU is operating at. The PCIE performance impact isn't known for each WU type.

In this case I would suggest a move to the latest WHQL driver (320.18). I've had no problems with its Beta 320.14, and on Windows there doesn't seem to be any major issues.

I would not bother upgrading from Vista to Win7. I suggest you disable Aero, if it's running, and set the Windows Performance Options to Adjust for Best Performance, if they are not at that (computer properties, system properties, under performance click settings, adjust for best performance) [For me on W7 that frees up over 100MB GDDR]. Also do a restart, after suspending the CPU projects to see if it helps. I use CCleaner to control startup programs, to some effect. Might also be worth considering saying as it's taking 11min to start.

With not GPU task active, the system is very responsive, no blank pages and the lines in the BOINC Manager tray are not flickering.
So it must something having to do the the high use of the graphics card or some settings?
____________
Greetings from TJ

Aero is on I don't use it but cannot find to turn it off.

Aero is on I don't use it but cannot find to turn it off.

Right click "My Computer", left click "Advanced", click "Advanced System Settings", in the popup box under Performance click Settings, click adjust for best performance radio button.

How big is you're swap file?

The swap file size is 12578MB.

What did GPUZ say about the PCIE width?
What about other power options? Is anything set to reduce, especially the PCIE (Start, type Power, Power Options)?
Is Prefer Maximum Performance on, in NVidia Control Panel, Power Management Mode (Manage 3D settings).

I found the problem with not installing the drivers it was a right problem i deleted the Administer when I changed the rights to got BOINC installed.
I have also get to system to set to best performance.
But more questions:
1. Now the system is best performance I get see true windows, meaning that I can see the background picture, or lines in windows disappear. I have to make them go the the taskbar and backt to get the lines in?

2. Only BOINC and EVGA NZ is running and only one project. GPUGRID with a NATHAN. GPU load still not high, around 50%. Has done 10% in 1 hour. Is this normal for a NATHAN on a GTX660?

3. Can some tell me how I can isert a picture here like skgiven did in the threat below? I can show the EVGA screen so that you perhaps get an idea.

A NOELIA is running on this system with a GTX550Ti at constant 95-96 GPU load.

Thanks as always for the highly appreciated input and needful help.
____________
Greetings from TJ

Skgiven thanks for all your help that is very useful to me.

I have make my PC's visible so have a look.
I have also set the nVidia to maximum power, but that did not change a thing.
Something is making my system very slow (since the new GTX660, but that can't be it) and after booting there is 20GB more space on the C-drive. But when it runs a few minutes approx. 18 GB is "gone".
All I can think of is PCAngel, this seems to be a backup tool that is registering all changes on the pc. I will remove it, but have to boot and will wait until Rosie en Milkyway finished. There was no new work here so.

There is also no change in using FF, IE or none active. Rosetta on 5 cores or none and leave all 8 for GPU. Even now MilkyWay is only using 40-50% GPU.

Also best performance or with the aero on seems no difference in GPU and CPU load.
Also the times are flickering in the BOINC tray under both conditions.

If PCAngel removing has no result and I get no tips for setting the graphic card, I will do a complete new installation of the OS over the weekend.

Will try to get some pictures posted later today.

Edit: this is the first result of the new GTX660
6897606 4477493 136981 25 May 2013 | 21:28:26 UTC 26 May 2013 | 18:36:15 UTC Completed and validated 75,259.05 56,067.41 127,800.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v6.18 (cuda42)
____________
Greetings from TJ

PCAngel performs "real time backups"! Perhaps you can exclude everything Boinc, but I would still take it off. Such backup strategies are generally not needed, unless its a mission critical server. I bet you don't create hundreds of files every day. The most simple backup strategy for most users is to backup files to an external hard drive once every month or so. Anything more than that is an unnecessary chore.

One thin I forgot to mention: I have installed BOINC on the D-Drive with the data as a sub-directory, and did not thick any of the boxes in the installation process. I have this done always like this on all rigs. Not good?

The PCAngels is removed, it has deleted the recovery partition as well.
The rig is booting 6 minutes faster, and the approx. 22GB is still free on the C-drive. The system is performing quite well. I have now a NATHAN and 5 Rosetta WU's so I gues plenty of CPU free. But not, so have set Rosie to no new work.

I see the GPU load is still going from 4 % to 48%, not what others report with a GTX660. So what can I set with the card to get it run better?
If that is an easy bit then perhaps a new install of the OS is not needed and would safe a lot of time.
The rigs are visible and I will give the main information from BOINC.
Thanks again.

28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | No config file found - using defaults
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | Starting BOINC client version 7.0.64 for windows_x86_64
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | log flags: file_xfer, sched_ops, task
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | Libraries: libcurl/7.25.0 OpenSSL/1.0.1 zlib/1.2.6
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | Data directory: D:\Science\BOINC\DATA
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | Running under account TJ
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | Processor: 8 GenuineIntel Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz [Family 6 Model 26 Stepping 5]
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | Processor features: fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss htt tm pni ssse3 cx16 sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt syscall nx lm vmx tm2 pbe
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | OS: Microsoft Windows Vista: Ultimate x64 Edition, Service Pack 2, (06.00.6002.00)
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | Memory: 11.99 GB physical, 23.91 GB virtual
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | Disk: 831.51 GB total, 814.11 GB free
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | Local time is UTC +2 hours
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | CUDA: NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce GTX 660 (driver version 320.18, CUDA version 5.50, compute capability 3.0, 2048MB, 1889MB available, 2032 GFLOPS peak)
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | OpenCL: NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce GTX 660 (driver version 320.18, device version OpenCL 1.1 CUDA, 2048MB, 1889MB available, 2032 GFLOPS peak)
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | rosetta@home | URL http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/; Computer ID 1514311; resource share 100
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | fightmalaria@home | URL http://boinc.ucd.ie/fmah/; Computer ID 17196; resource share 100
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | Docking | URL http://docking.cis.udel.edu/; Computer ID 132258; resource share 100
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | Einstein@Home | URL http://einstein.phys.uwm.edu/; Computer ID 5987483; resource share 100
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | LHC@home 1.0 | URL http://lhcathomeclassic.cern.ch/sixtrack/; Computer ID 10010265; resource share 100
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | Milkyway@Home | URL http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/; Computer ID 109183; resource share 100
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | GPUGRID | URL http://www.gpugrid.net/; Computer ID 136981; resource share 100
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | Docking | General prefs: from Docking (last modified 14-Apr-2013 15:45:55)
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | Docking | Computer location: work
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | Docking | General prefs: no separate prefs for work; using your defaults
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | Reading preferences override file
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | Preferences:
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | max memory usage when active: 9822.61MB
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | max memory usage when idle: 11050.44MB
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | max disk usage: 300.00GB
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | max CPUs used: 5
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | suspend work if non-BOINC CPU load exceeds 25 %
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | (to change preferences, visit a project web site or select Preferences in the Manager)
28/05/2013 14:25:47 | | Not using a proxy
28/05/2013 14:29:31 | GPUGRID | project resumed by user
28/05/2013 14:29:32 | GPUGRID | Starting task I75R5-NATHAN_KIDc22_2-3-8-RND8519_1 using acemdlong version 618 (cuda42) in slot 0
28/05/2013 14:29:36 | GPUGRID | work fetch resumed by user
28/05/2013 14:33:04 | rosetta@home | work fetch resumed by user

____________
Greetings from TJ

two screen dumps:




What does it mean as in Windows task manager, the kernel (red) is almost the same as the CPU (green line)?
____________
Greetings from TJ

After reading the thread about Low GPU useage. Here is my two cents worth. Please forgive if this has already been covered or is not relevant.
After having the same issues with GPU levels I found that setting the CPU Time and Number of Processors to %100 in Boinc Manager under Computer Preferences fixed it for me, both my GPU's now run @ %85-%90.
Hope that helps..
[/img]