![]() |
![]() |
#56 |
"Oliver"
Sep 2017
Porta Westfalica, DE
1101100112 Posts |
![]()
You are sincerly welcome!
The machine is an AMD Threadripper 1950X. In the moment, I am running two threads per worker. Previously, with all memory slots populated, I had this: Code:
Timings for 480K FFT length (16 cores, 1 worker): 0.60 ms. Throughput: 1661.77 iter/sec. Timings for 480K FFT length (16 cores, 2 workers): 0.63, 0.56 ms. Throughput: 3369.52 iter/sec. Timings for 480K FFT length (16 cores, 4 workers): 0.96, 0.88, 0.94, 1.01 ms. Throughput: 4239.61 iter/sec. Timings for 480K FFT length (16 cores, 8 workers): 1.70, 1.71, 1.89, 1.89, 1.90, 1.90, 1.77, 1.70 ms. Throughput: 4438.59 iter/sec. Timings for 480K FFT length (16 cores, 16 workers): 3.40, 3.42, 3.44, 3.45, 3.36, 3.40, 3.42, 3.43, 3.46, 3.52, 3.43, 3.47, 3.43, 3.51, 3.48, 3.43 ms. Throughput: 4651.21 iter/sec. Now, with only two memory modules, I have (attention, slightly bigger FFT size!): Code:
Timings for 512K FFT length (16 cores, 1 worker): 0.65 ms. Throughput: 1528.24 iter/sec. Timings for 512K FFT length (16 cores, 2 workers): 0.52, 0.55 ms. Throughput: 3724.46 iter/sec. Timings for 512K FFT length (16 cores, 4 workers): 0.88, 0.90, 0.91, 0.93 ms. Throughput: 4419.46 iter/sec. Timings for 512K FFT length (16 cores, 8 workers): 1.76, 1.77, 1.76, 1.82, 1.75, 1.77, 1.81, 1.85 ms. Throughput: 4480.33 iter/sec. Timings for 512K FFT length (16 cores, 16 workers): 6.58, 6.58, 6.65, 6.74, 6.57, 6.56, 6.56, 6.86, 6.72, 6.70, 6.65, 6.84, 6.98, 6.58, 6.56, 6.70 ms. Throughput: 2397.05 iter/sec. In contrast, on an AMD Ryzen 3800X, I got this (with larger FFTs, again): Code:
Timings for 560K FFT length (8 cores, 1 worker): 0.35 ms. Throughput: 2826.81 iter/sec. Timings for 560K FFT length (8 cores, 2 workers): 0.51, 0.50 ms. Throughput: 3991.92 iter/sec. Timings for 560K FFT length (8 cores, 4 workers): 0.92, 0.94, 0.94, 0.93 ms. Throughput: 4279.59 iter/sec. Timings for 560K FFT length (8 cores, 8 workers): 2.09, 2.08, 2.07, 2.04, 2.07, 2.17, 2.06, 2.06 ms. Throughput: 3847.43 iter/sec. Timings for 560K FFT length (8 cores hyperthreaded, 1 worker): 0.36 ms. Throughput: 2758.59 iter/sec. Timings for 560K FFT length (8 cores hyperthreaded, 2 workers): 0.48, 0.48 ms. Throughput: 4141.37 iter/sec. Timings for 560K FFT length (8 cores hyperthreaded, 4 workers): 0.93, 0.88, 0.90, 0.91 ms. Throughput: 4430.35 iter/sec. Timings for 560K FFT length (8 cores hyperthreaded, 8 workers): 2.18, 2.28, 2.13, 2.12, 2.09, 2.21, 2.29, 2.26 ms. Throughput: 3647.35 iter/sec. Last fiddled with by kruoli on 2021-01-02 at 15:44 Reason: Spelling. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#57 |
6809 > 6502
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts
23×7×167 Posts |
![]()
Fancy graphic to gawk at.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#58 |
Romulan Interpreter
Jun 2011
Thailand
23·19·61 Posts |
![]()
They'll finish faster (when red reached the point where green was when we began, and not where red will intersect green, that's because new prps don't need dc anymore - maybe sometime towards the end of February?)
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#59 |
6809 > 6502
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts
23×7×167 Posts |
![]()
There are/were still (I think) some of the first time CF-PRP's being turned in that are not being done by v29. The rate of change will accelerate quickly once we do get close to those that were turned in shortly after v30 came out.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#60 |
"Oliver"
Sep 2017
Porta Westfalica, DE
3×5×29 Posts |
![]()
Currently, in the range from 9M to 11M, there are 2,049 PRP-CF-DCs assigned. In total, there are 26,114 exponents to go.
That means, we have a progress of around 485 exponents per day, so ETA with our current speed is around 54 days. PS: What will happen, when we run out of PRP-CF-DC work? Will Prime95 fetch PRP-CF instead? Last fiddled with by kruoli on 2021-01-08 at 15:54 Reason: Clarified intentions. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#61 |
6809 > 6502
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts
23·7·167 Posts |
![]()
I believe that it would roll over to FT PRP-CF.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#62 |
6809 > 6502
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts
23×7×167 Posts |
![]()
I have a 6 core machine that I am using to do LL-DC and PRP-CF-DC (3 cores to each task.) I had the 3 cores for PRP-CF-DC as 1 worker. After seeing your post I shifted to 3 workers 1 core each for a while. It turns out I get better throughput by having a single worker. Once we get caught up to the PRP-CF-FTC the worker will be reverted to LL-DC work.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#63 |
"Oliver"
Sep 2017
Porta Westfalica, DE
3·5·29 Posts |
![]()
The wavefront will likely hit 10M today!
![]() Currently, in the range from 9M to 11M, there are 1,544 PRP-CF-DCs assigned. In total, there are 22,497 exponents to go. That means, we have a progress of around 517 exponents per day, so ETA with our current speed is around 44 days. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#65 |
"Oliver"
Sep 2017
Porta Westfalica, DE
3·5·29 Posts |
![]()
Sorry, bad phrasing:
I wanted to say that we will likely hit 10M in the assigment wavefront today (when using the time zone of this forum). Last fiddled with by kruoli on 2021-01-15 at 19:20 Reason: Interpunctation. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#66 |
Romulan Interpreter
Jun 2011
Thailand
220708 Posts |
![]()
Which matches well my initial approximation above, for end of February. Looking to my status page (which shows the number of people doing each kind of work, each one with his own, but the number of participants is the same if you access yours) I see new people "jumping in" daily, so the given time is quite realistic.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Finish started assignments but don't get new? | jas | Software | 5 | 2020-02-06 04:06 |
Need a way to finish exponent and have it automatically quit. | jasong | Software | 4 | 2007-02-21 23:13 |
where do TF go when they finish? | markr | Data | 5 | 2005-03-09 05:19 |
How to finish? | 1997rj7 | Lone Mersenne Hunters | 2 | 2003-10-19 05:33 |
Resetting projected finish dates | Kevin | Software | 5 | 2003-07-07 13:42 |