Re: Windows Stream client doesnt like the normal client
"Lars Sahlmann" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.distributed-net.rc5 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
thanks for the information. Speed decrease roughly 5% on my i7 rig running together with ogr.I always thought the second card dropped my top speed. Anyway HT gives a nice additional boost on OGR computation. iirc 25% on that rig. -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > Datum: Thu, 13 May 2010 15:58:40 -0700 > Von: Gerald Richter <[email protected]> > An: "D.net Discussion" <[email protected]> > Betreff: Re: [RC5] Windows Stream client doesnt like the normal client > The stream and cuda clients both require 1 cpu thread free to feed them > in order to maintain top speed. I run the CPU client configured with > real CPU cores -1 parallel to the stream and cuda clients in my > environments. > > Jonathan Dixon wrote: > > I ran into the same problem running the CUDA client + normal client. I > > have a GeForce GTX260 and Core i7. I noticed that running the normal > > client would slow down the CUDA client enough that it wasn't worth > > running the normal client at all, but I hated to let a Core i7 sit > > virtually idle. I had tried to increase the priority of the GPU client, > > but it didn't seem to help any. The solution I came up with was to > > manually set the core count on the normal client to one less than the > > maximum number of threads on the computer. This prevented processes > > from moving from core to core, which slows them down a little, and also > > should prevent competition between the clients because there is always a > > free core to keep feeding the GPU. > > > > I also agree with Waldo on the hyper-threading. HT is great for single > > core CPUs and helps them multi-task better, but it has a negligible > > effect when the computer is already good at multi-tasking due to the > > number of cores. Given that a little efficiency is lost when the > > computer moves processes to and from a specific core, it is counter > > productive to run two jobs on the same core that accomplish the same > > task as does HT. HT is designed to reduce the effect, but if the > > computer is built to run RC5, it would be better just to not have the > > effect at all. If RC5 is set to auto-detect thread count and HT is > > enabled, it will automatically assign two processes to every core. Thus > > HT would seem to degrade performance by inducing exactly what it is > > supposed to solve. I don't think it is effective to leave HT running > > and manually set the cores to half because the the core time has already > > been split and you are deciding to only use half of it. Yes, I know. an > > 8 threaded computer just isn't as cool as a 16 threaded computer. > > -- GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT! Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01 _______________________________________________ rc5 mailing list [email protected] http://lists.distributed.net/mailman/listinfo/rc5