Posts by spingadus[MM]

\n studio-striking\n
1) Message boards : Number crunching : Credits (Message 2156)
Posted 8 Jan 2012 by spingadus[MM]
They're calling it a bubble.
2) Message boards : Number crunching : Any HD 6970 users out there? (Message 2141)
Posted 7 Jan 2012 by spingadus[MM]

I have an HIS Radeon HD 6970 IceQ Turbo 2 GB. I rotate it between Moo!, Collatz and Milkyway.

Prior to the xmas credit increase I believe I was getting about 300k/day.

I get about 200k/day at Collatz and Milkyway.

My card is loud as well, but I don't notice it much as I rarely go in that room.

Not sure how much power it uses, but the pc (i7 920) running all 8 threads of WCG and Moo! pulls 400Watts total as measured by my killawatt device.

Thinking of selling it and getting the new HD 7970 at some point.
3) Message boards : Number crunching : strange complete times being seen (Message 2139)
Posted 7 Jan 2012 by spingadus[MM]
I'd be interested to know - once all is settled down for you re the new box - how well behaved those WGC Projects you listed are on the 1090T in terms of effect on the Moo WU, if concurrently running with Moo, all six cores with those particular WGC Project WUs. Not run those yet, but will do at some point so would be nice to know the effect on 1090T/Moo.


Just thought I'd add my 2 cents here. I run both WCG HCMD2 and Moo! and I haven't noticed any change with all 8 threads running WCG or having a free thread. I didn't notice any time differences in my Moo! wu, so I just keep all 8 running. I did run the benchmark and set the fastest core as well. Of course I'm running a 2600k and not a 1090T so it's not exactly helpful :)
4) Message boards : Number crunching : Credits (Message 2138)
Posted 7 Jan 2012 by spingadus[MM]
Yup just checked my last wu:

798 stat units x 8 x 1.15 = 7341.60

Exactly what I received.
5) Message boards : Number crunching : Unbalanced credit awarded between AMD and Nvidia (Message 2035)
Posted 1 Jan 2012 by spingadus[MM]
Thanks for the explanations on this fine New Years Day :)

I definitely had some wrong assumptions as to how the credit was determined. Some projects appear to just give flat rates based on a per wu or per elapsed time basis and I had continued that thought here.

My intent is to spread my GPUs across the available projects efficiently, so I'll put my 590 somewhere else.

Maybe I'll get a 7970 when it comes out and see what it can do here. :)

Thanks and Happy 2012!
6) Message boards : Number crunching : Unbalanced credit awarded between AMD and Nvidia (Message 2024)
Posted 1 Jan 2012 by spingadus[MM]
Hey all, I'm trying to understand why I'm seeing such a huge difference in the credit rate awarded between my HD 6970 and my GTX 590.

Here are the links for comparison:

HD 6970

GTX 590

The following times and credits are relatively consistent:

Card / Run time(sec) / CPU time(sec) / Credit
HD 6970 / 2,232.75 / 13.04 / 13,173.48
GTX 590 / 963.40 / 963.40 / 3,763.20

Why would my GTX 590 receive only 25% of the credit of the HD 6970?

My GTX 590 finishes a task in less than 50% of the time, but receives 25% of the credit as my AMD card.

Please don't think this is a flame. I love the credits I get for my AMD card, but my more powerful GTX 590 isn't getting any love. Note that the GTX 590 is a dual GPU card and so the credit discrepancy seems even worse considering Moo! uses both GPUs per task.

Can someone explain how the credit works here?

Copyright © 2011-2021 Moo! Wrapper Project