log in |
Message boards : Number crunching : sse2 vs avx
1 · 2 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
I recall a statement on the message boards that the server software tests your machine by running plain, sse2, and avx tasks and then sends you the task you machine does best. | |
ID: 1285 · ![]() | |
I recall a statement on the message boards that the server software tests your machine by running plain, sse2, and avx tasks and then sends you the task you machine does best. Can you please provide a link to the computer you are talking about? | |
ID: 1286 · ![]() | |
http://gene.disi.unitn.it/test/show_host_detail.php?hostid=13464 | |
ID: 1287 · ![]() | |
http://gene.disi.unitn.it/test/show_host_detail.php?hostid=13464 if you click on "Application details" you can see that: the sse2 version is more profitable for you (3,40 GFlops) against avx (2,83 GFlops) this is the reason why you recieve much more sse2 wus | |
ID: 1288 · ![]() | |
Thank you, nice to know how to see that. | |
ID: 1289 · ![]() | |
But why would the sse2 version be faster than avx? Is this just a quirk of the particular application? Or is there a problem with the avx implementation on this particular cpu? With this new app, avx seems to be faster than sse2... | |
ID: 1321 · ![]() | |
But why would the sse2 version be faster than avx? Is this just a quirk of the particular application? Or is there a problem with the avx implementation on this particular cpu? The new Windows app is just a recompilation of the original one with gcc 6.4.0, the source code was not modified. | |
ID: 1322 · ![]() | |
An issue on my end is a pretty high error rate on sse2 tasks with my ryzen pc. avx runs flawless now. | |
ID: 1323 · ![]() | |
An issue on my end is a pretty high error rate on sse2 tasks with my ryzen pc. avx runs flawless now. I noticed it, exceptions due to 'illegal instructions'... The strange thing (at least for me) is that I do not understand this behavior after such a long computational time (it would make much more sense if the exception were raised at the very beginning, after just some seconds) | |
ID: 1324 · ![]() | |
Greetings All | |
ID: 1361 · ![]() | |
I have a Ryzen 2700 that is only sent avx WUs. Everything is fine there. Recently I brought back my 2 Ryzen 1700 machines and after failing a few sse2 WUs I started aborting them. After a couple days they started getting only avx WUs (for a long time). Now all of a sudden they're being sent large numbers of sse2 WUs again. The sse2 WUs are unreliable and often fail after wasting a LOT of CPU time. | |
ID: 1392 · ![]() | |
By now, at 3am, the only idea I have is to use an appropriate app_info.xml. I will think more about it the next Monday. | |
ID: 1394 · ![]() | |
By now, at 3am, the only idea I have is to use an appropriate app_info.xml. I will think more about it the next Monday. The only 'official' way, that I know, for sending applications to hosts depending on some features, is the BOINC 'plan class' mechanism (https://boinc.berkeley.edu/trac/wiki/AppPlanSpec). I may try to use the "cpu_model_regex" feature for sending sse2 tasks only to NOT Ryzen hosts. I will further investigate. | |
ID: 1405 · ![]() | |
I have a Ryzen 2700 that is only sent avx WUs. Everything is fine there. Recently I brought back my 2 Ryzen 1700 machines and after failing a few sse2 WUs I started aborting them. After a couple days they started getting only avx WUs (for a long time). Now all of a sudden they're being sent large numbers of sse2 WUs again. The sse2 WUs are unreliable and often fail after wasting a LOT of CPU time. I see the same thing. My Ryzen 1700 fails on most of the SSE2, but my Ryzen 2700 runs them OK. Both machines are on Ubuntu 18.04. http://gene.disi.unitn.it/test/results.php?hostid=26765&offset=0&show_names=0&state=6&appid= http://gene.disi.unitn.it/test/results.php?hostid=41785&offset=0&show_names=0&state=4&appid= I did not know the Ryzen 1700 had an SSE2 problem, but this is the only SSE2 project I have. It runs everything else fine. I suppose the problem will correct itself after the selection is made, so it may not be worth fixing at this point. | |
ID: 1419 · ![]() | |
Hi, another user (Luigi R.) from our team Boinc Italy has done theese app_info.xml. Try it and let us know if they work | |
ID: 1422 · ![]() | |
Linux | |
ID: 1423 · ![]() | |
Just wanted to add that if you want/need to use the anonymous platform mechanism (app_info.xml) the safest way to proceed is: | |
ID: 1424 · ![]() | |
Thanks a lot. I substituted "fma" for "avx", and it is running fine on my Ryzen 1700, making it productive again. | |
ID: 1425 · ![]() | |
Thanks a lot. I substituted "fma" for "avx", and it is running fine on my Ryzen 1700, making it productive again. Is fma faster than avx on the Ryzen 1700? I've also been testing an app_info. So far it's running well: <app_info> <app> <name>gene_pcim</name> <user_friendly_name>gene@home v1.11</user_friendly_name> </app> <file> <name>gene_pcim_v1.11_win64__avx.exe</name> <executable/> </file> <app_version> <app_name>gene_pcim</app_name> <version_num>111</version_num> <platform>windows_x86_64</platform> <avg_ncpus>1.000000</avg_ncpus> <max_ncpus>1.000000</max_ncpus> <plan_class>avx</plan_class> <api_version>7.3.0</api_version> <file_ref> <file_name>gene_pcim_v1.11_win64__avx.exe</file_name> <main_program/> </file_ref> </app_version> </app_info> | |
ID: 1427 · ![]() | |
Is fma faster than avx on the Ryzen 1700? It seems to be just slightly, though they are so close that it would take longer-term testing to be sure. I think it would be easier for the project to find the best extension for a given processor type, and just use it. | |
ID: 1428 · ![]() | |
Message boards :
Number crunching :
sse2 vs avx