---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Eric J Korpela <[email protected]> Date: Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 6:17 PM Subject: Re: [boinc_dev] credit goals To: Martin <[email protected]>
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 7:07 AM, Martin<[email protected]> wrote: > [email protected] wrote: >> A few thoughts: >> >> There is no guarantee that any two computation devices (general sense here) >> will be equally efficient at a particular computation. The CPU and GPU in >> a single box may very well have different efficiencies, and should be >> treated as separate computation devices for credit comparisons. >> Goal: The credit granted for all tasks for a single WU needs to be >> identical, no mater what computation devices it runs on. > > Sorry, disagree... What happens for the case where the CPU application > is highly optimised whereas the GPU application is brazenly wasteful of > the GPU resource? The GPU does more physical work and gains less credit > per unit of physical processing work done. As it should be. Some applications don't work well on a GPU and may even be slower on a GPU than a CPU. Such an application should not be ported to a GPU in the first place. > I consider a fairer scheme is that credit is granted for the resource > actually used. A resource wasted is different than a resource used. > If for example, the GPU application (wastefully) for a WU performs twice > as many calculations as the equivalent CPU application, then the GPU > processed WU should be awarded twice the credit of the CPU processed WU > (to reflect the additional resource used/squandered). Definitely not. The user should be encouraged (through lower credit) to use their GPU for a task that is more suited to it. _______________________________________________ boinc_dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
