Just installed 190.38 Beta on Win. XP64 with 2 260s. Running good here. This has Cuda 2.3 also.

I wouldn't have thought so given they haven't rolled out 2.2 yet because of problems with some machines.
____________
Radio Caroline, the world's most famous offshore pirate radio station.
Great music since April 1964. Support Radio Caroline Team -
Radio Caroline

GPUs in an SLI group are now enumerated individually, so you can achieve multi-GPU performance even when SLI is enabled for graphics.

I`ve tested new drivers and I`m very satisfied - fast and fully stable (tested with other CUDA-software too). I wasn`t so satisfied since 178.24.

So at this moment I`d like to recommend 190.38 beta as best drivers for now.



It`s ofc my opinion and I just want to share it to the others. GL guys.
____________

I`d like to recommend 190.38 beta

already found a bug, my 32-bit windows xp SP3 "9400 GT PCI" pc was doing something funky with pogo games, i rolled back the driver(June) and it's now corrected, but i don't have the power to report the bug to nvidia... can one of the reg. developer please get word to them... it wasn't java... it was the driver.

Hi, one question: did you notice some changes in perfomance ?
Unfortunately, installation of new 190.38 CUDA 2,3 was unlucky for me - new version doesn't recognize my second GTX260, so, I was roll them back to the previous.

Are you guys actually installing the CUDA 2.3 or Previous version of CUDA, I've never done that. All I've ever done is install whatever NVIDIA Drivers I needed to and ran the WU's. I've always thought the actual CUDA Program & Tools was just for Developers and not needed to run the WU's which I'm doing ...

I did install the new 190.38 Drivers on 7 Win XP Pro 64-Bit Box's this morning with no problems & running fine so far ... :)

yea we install the toolkit...

Jet, Did you install the 190.38 drivers on the second card as well?
The best way to make sure the drivers are installed on both cards is to update drivers via device manager.

zpm, No need to install the toolkit unless your developing a GPU app.

Bob

Thanks for afvice, drivers was installed for both...

I had nothing but issues with 190.38 on an i7 920 running 2x 8800GSs and Vista 64 SP1---until I upgraded a couple of days ago from 6.6.36 to 6.6.37....then the issues went away. Yesterday I moved back to RT, forced the driver and 3D performance and everything seems fine as far as Gpugrid goes. The main issue I have now seems to have appeared when I moved up to firefox 3.5.1, but it's not affecting the grid.

Put 190.38 on a Q6600 2x gpu rig running Vista 64 SP1 and haven't had any problems. I just checked and it's still running 6.6.28! lol

Ok, so now the question is this: Is it better on GPU Grid to use SLI or not?

Has anyone tested this yet?

I just installed 190.38 on one system and started it up so I will see if t works at all ... (3 minutes in and so far so good). Though I am not sure if we are running the newer application or not.

after upggrading yesterday evening i had the first big fat blue one after months of crunching without issues.. :(

as i can hear from my team-mates, there are several boxes which went down..

I have 2 Box's out of 7 that have returned nothing but error's since Upgrading to the 190.38's, the other 5 Box's only show 1 error total which could have been from something else.

I checked the 2 Box's in question and didn't see anything wrong with them but backed off the Shaders 25 Points & will see if they run better. Neither one of the Box's was returning errors until the Driver Upgrade so I would suspect something is amiss with the Driver on some Box's.

I checked the Task Manger & it shows the 190.38 Driver installed on Both Cards in both Box's but if they keep getting the error will do a complete uninstall & reinstall of the Drivers on both cards again.

Am I correct in that Cuda 2.3 has to have the 190.. drivers but Cuda 2.2 "as we are going to" works with the 185..186.. series drivers? I dont believe 190 drivers are necessary for Cuda 2.2 only for Cuda 2.3..
According to Nvidia release highlights.

I know the Mod. said 190.. was necessary but I wonder if he was mistaken.

After installing the driver 190.38 I have some heavy screen lags while playing games on my GTX295 with and without SLI mode. I've not seen this behavior in the last months.
____________

Am I correct in that Cuda 2.3 has to have the 190.. drivers but Cuda 2.2 "as we are going to" works with the 185..186.. series drivers? I dont believe 190 drivers are necessary for Cuda 2.2 only for Cuda 2.3..
According to Nvidia release highlights.

I know the Mod. said 190.. was necessary but I wonder if he was mistaken.

Am I correct in that Cuda 2.3 has to have the 190.. drivers but Cuda 2.2 "as we are going to" works with the 185..186.. series drivers? I dont believe 190 drivers are necessary for Cuda 2.2 only for Cuda 2.3..
According to Nvidia release highlights.

Sure, you can install the CUDA2.2 drivers as well. They will work, that's the reason to release the new application as cuda2.2.
On the other hand, we have tested here 190.xx and they seem to work.

gdf

[When you refer to the CUDA2.2 Drivers & the 190.xx Drivers are you refering to different Drivers or the same thing. All I have installed is the NVIDIA Drivers but not CUDA2.2 Drivers. Do you think it would help to install the CUDA2.2 Drivers if they are different from the 190.xx Drivers ???

Has everyone tried upgrading to BOINC 6.6.37 so that we're all singing from the same hymn sheet?

This has a significant fix for CUDA apps especially the use of video ram. I am running it no problems for days now.

XP32

XP64
____________
Radio Caroline, the world's most famous offshore pirate radio station.
Great music since April 1964. Support Radio Caroline Team -
Radio Caroline

Has everyone tried upgrading to BOINC 6.6.37 so that we're all singing from the same hymn sheet?

This has a significant fix for CUDA apps especially the use of video ram. I am running it no problems for days now.

XP32

XP64

I'll give the 6.6.37 a try on those Box's in awhile, right now their useless to me to run the Grid Project so anythings worth a try.

I'll give the 6.6.37 a try on those Box's in awhile, right now their useless to me to run the Grid Project so anythings worth a try.

I would also recommend that anyone having trouble with the 190.xxx drivers uninstalls all Nvidia drivers including PhysX REBOOT and then installing the new drivers as a clean install ensuring you have anti virus turned off. I appologise to anyone who has already done this.

Hi, is that the dual-GTX295 box that has the 01 error ? I noticed that you still have them overclocked (Clock rate: 1476000 kilohertz). What I find strange with the nvidia drivers and the 'precision' tool from evga is that you can test a speed and it will say "*DRIVER* has passed speed check". This makes me suspicious of whether the *driver* is a serious bottleneck for overclocking. I would expect a message like "New speed accepted by *CARD*) or similar to make it clear that overclocking does not depend on a driver revision.

So... You might want to try the stock clocks and see how that works and clock up from there. Good luck.
____________
Join team Bletchley Park, the innovators.

ID: 17909 ... Thanks GDF, I'm going to set the clock back to default & see what happens, if that doesn't work I'll try each card seperatly. Usually it's just one of the Cards hats causing both of them to get errors or so thats what I've found in the past ...

Hi, is that the dual-GTX295 box that has the 01 error ? I noticed that you still have them overclocked (Clock rate: 1476000 kilohertz). What I find strange with the nvidia drivers and the 'precision' tool from evga is that you can test a speed and it will say "*DRIVER* has passed speed check". This makes me suspicious of whether the *driver* is a serious bottleneck for overclocking. I would expect a message like "New speed accepted by *CARD*) or similar to make it clear that overclocking does not depend on a driver revision.

So... You might want to try the stock clocks and see how that works and clock up from there. Good luck.

'precision' tool from evga is that you can test a speed and it will say "*DRIVER* has passed speed check"

@MrS: I would then presume that in those cases there were remains of the new drivers in there. I nowadays make ghost images of my system before I change anything major. It just takes too much time and hassle to revert in case of issues otherwise. Now at least I can play back the ghost onto the drive and go.

@popandbob: I realize it doesn't test actual stability, I was more putting the focus on the word DRIVER. It seems illogical to me to refer to testing a driver if in fact you are testing the GPU, unless one actually means to indicate that the driver was tested and not (only) the GPU. I can imagine that a driver has influence on the way the GPU can handle high command speeds (from my haydays of direct I/O assembly programming on ATI cards).
____________
Join team Bletchley Park, the innovators.

Hello Admin,
Would it be possible to do as Seti and have it to where the 2 DLL files for Cuda 2.3 could be " dropped " into the GPU folder and replace the 2.2 files?
This is possible on the Seti optimized apps. and works great.
For the people that 190.. drivers are running problem free this could give a small added boost.
I tried it one time and it would not work because the "file size " was incorrect and it errored out.
If the software did not look at the file size it would maybe work.
It may also help the developers get a jump on any issues with 2.3 also.

Just a question.
Thanks

Hello Admin,
Would it be possible to do as Seti and have it to where the 2 DLL files for Cuda 2.3 could be " dropped " into the GPU folder and replace the 2.2 files?
This is possible on the Seti optimized apps. and works great.
For the people that 190.. drivers are running problem free this could give a small added boost.
I tried it one time and it would not work because the "file size " was incorrect and it errored out.
If the software did not look at the file size it would maybe work.
It may also help the developers get a jump on any issues with 2.3 also.

Just a question.
Thanks

Gentlemen, I am new to gpugrid having folded for some months...May I ask...when you are talking of these errors since upgrading drivers ...are you getting the driver failed and recovered message??

some of us do but that has be deduced to problems with the driver itself and posted on nvidia...

were talking about app errors wit the app and boinc...

and some these are related to the fact that gpugrid is still built upon 2.1 cuda which is in the upgrade department right now.

Thanks for that info..would you then be interested in the fact that rolling back to 182.08 then 185.85,186's and 190's they all display the same behaviour
Forcing Riva and locking 3D has no impact nor does 6.6.36 to 6.6.37.(this on vista 64 and 2* gtx260 (192's) Cuda 2.1.

Perhaps the most annoying thing for me though is that errors can occur from just a few seconds out to almost 100% complete.

I think I may just try with xp again.

Mike

It worked on mine until it downloaded a new task and it errored out on the download " Cuda.dll Unexpected size " or something like that.

Hello Admin,
Would it be possible to do as Seti and have it to where the 2 DLL files for Cuda 2.3 could be " dropped " into the GPU folder and replace the 2.2 files?
This is possible on the Seti optimized apps. and works great.
For the people that 190.. drivers are running problem free this could give a small added boost.
I tried it one time and it would not work because the "file size " was incorrect and it errored out.
If the software did not look at the file size it would maybe work.
It may also help the developers get a jump on any issues with 2.3 also.

Just a question.
Thanks

That sounded like an interesting question, so I'm giving it a try on two hosts.

Preliminary observation - makes no difference at all, but both tasks are still below 10% - it'll be tomorrow morning (UTC) before I get a definitive answer. I'm running this on my two Q6600/9800GT hosts (XP SP3), if anyone wants to watch.

I can only presume that GPUGrid relies much less on Fourier Transforms than SETI - it was fft that made the difference at SETI.

http://boincfaq.mundayweb.com/index.php?language=1&view=91

Please check if you can convince BOINC with this option to ignore the incorrect size and proceed with 2.3 libs:

<dont_check_file_sizes>0|1</dont_check_file_sizes>

First task with 2.3 runtime DLLs (1041263) errored out after 14 hours with "Cuda error: Kernel [frc_sum_kernel_dihed] failed in file 'force.cu' in line 313 : unspecified launch failure."

Task on second machine, and replacement for this one, still running: but proceed with caution.

Would just adding this line into the CC_Config file work?

<dont_check_file_sizes>0|1</dont_check_file_sizes>

I can only presume that GPUGrid relies much less on Fourier Transforms than SETI - it was fft that made the difference at SETI.

You'd need to use an app_info file. That way you'd bypass BOINC checking the signatures on the files.

1040687 completed and validated using the 2.3 DLLs. Took slightly longer than previous tasks on that box, but got slightly more credit - must have been an tougher job. Hourly rate exactly the same. Conclusion? It's not worth the hassle. Reverting to stock so I can get the new compiles as they come out.

We had already optimized the FFT our selves, so no much speedup will be seen using 2.3.
By the way, we have updated the application to cuda 2.2.

gdf

We had already optimized the FFT our selves, so no much speedup will be seen using 2.3.

By the way, we have updated the application to cuda 2.2.

gdf

I tried the Grid Wu's again last night when I seen the Application went to CUDA 2.2 but I'm still getting error's on at least 2 Box's with the 190.38 Drivers & 6.6.36 Client, same 2 Box's that have given me the most trouble since Updating to the 190.38 Drivers that didn't have any trouble before Upgrading.

I tried the Grid Wu's again last night when I seen the Application went to CUDA 2.2 but I'm still getting error's on at least 2 Box's with the 190.38 Drivers & 6.6.36 Client, same 2 Box's that have given me the most trouble since Updating to the 190.38 Drivers that didn't have any trouble before Upgrading.

I tried the Grid Wu's again last night when I seen the Application went to CUDA 2.2 but I'm still getting error's on at least 2 Box's with the 190.38 Drivers & 6.6.36 Client, same 2 Box's that have given me the most trouble since Updating to the 190.38 Drivers that didn't have any trouble before Upgrading.

So which two boxes are they, and what graphics cards do they have installed?

Consensus seems to be settling down on 'G92-based cards run the new drivers OK, g200-based cards have problems'.

it does not seem that you have successfully downgraded to 185.xx:
http://www.gpugrid.net/show_host_detail.php?hostid=17909

Your are having problems with the CUDA FFT library, which also seem to suggest that you are using the wrong driver. Please check.

Do you have the toolkit installed, if yes uninstall it. I am not sure if Windows would choose system installed libs rather than the one we provide.

gdf

GDF, do you mean Downgrade to 185.xx Drivers or 186.xx Drivers, I think I tried the 186.18 Drivers but they didn't stop the Errors or the Cards from Dropping speed after just a few minutes of running sometimes, other times it took an hour or so before they dropped their speed.

PS: Crap, looks like something is wrong with one of the Box's already, 1 of the Wu's isn't Progressing according to BOINCView, will have to go out to the Garage & see what's up with it. Think I'll just go ahead and put the 185.xx Drivers in it & try them.

Looks like it did a Benchmark Test & upon Resuming the Wu's one of them erred out ... Host ID 17909 One Core & 300/Core & 400/Memory & One Core @ 650/Core & 1100/Memory ... Going to the 185.85 Drivers & see if they work or not ...

8/1/2009 8:14:24 AM Running CPU benchmarks
009 8:14:24 AM Suspending computation - running CPU benchmarks
8/1/2009 8:14:55 AM Benchmark results:
8/1/2009 8:14:55 AM Number of CPUs: 4
8/1/2009 8:14:55 AM 2275 floating point MIPS (Whetstone) per CPU
8/1/2009 8:14:55 AM 6944 integer MIPS (Dhrystone) per CPU
8/1/2009 8:14:56 AM Resuming computation
8/1/2009 8:29:00 AM AQUA@home Sending scheduler request: To fetch work.
8/1/2009 8:29:00 AM AQUA@home Requesting new tasks for CPU
8/1/2009 8:29:05 AM AQUA@home Scheduler request completed: got 0 new tasks
8/1/2009 8:29:05 AM AQUA@home Message from server: No work sent
8/1/2009 8:29:05 AM AQUA@home Message from server: (reached limit of 2 CPU tasks)
8/1/2009 9:10:05 AM GPUGRID Computation for task 93-KASHIF_HIVPR_twomons_ba2-14-100-RND4610_0 finished
8/1/2009 9:10:05 AM GPUGRID Output file 93-KASHIF_HIVPR_twomons_ba2-14-100-RND4610_0_1 for task 93-KASHIF_HIVPR_twomons_ba2-14-100-RND4610_0 absent
8/1/2009 9:10:05 AM GPUGRID Output file 93-KASHIF_HIVPR_twomons_ba2-14-100-RND4610_0_2 for task 93-KASHIF_HIVPR_twomons_ba2-14-100-RND4610_0 absent
8/1/2009 9:10:05 AM GPUGRID Output file 93-KASHIF_HIVPR_twomons_ba2-14-100-RND4610_0_3 for task 93-KASHIF_HIVPR_twomons_ba2-14-100-RND4610_0 absent
8/1/2009 9:10:06 AM Collatz Conjecture Restarting task collatz_1248745476_67361_1 using collatz version 110
8/1/2009 9:10:08 AM GPUGRID Started upload of 93-KASHIF_HIVPR_twomons_ba2-14-100-RND4610_0_0
8/1/2009 9:10:08 AM GPUGRID Started upload of 93-KASHIF_HIVPR_twomons_ba2-14-100-RND4610_0_4
8/1/2009 9:10:12 AM GPUGRID Finished upload of 93-KASHIF_HIVPR_twomons_ba2-14-100-RND4610_0_0
8/1/2009 9:11:37 AM GPUGRID Finished upload of 93-KASHIF_HIVPR_twomons_ba2-14-100-RND4610_0_4

PS: Have the 185'85 Drivers installed now, did find a couple of Odd Ball nv.dll's in the system 32 Directory, or at least i thought they were Odd Ball ones because the referred to an older Driver Version so I canned them before installing the 185.85 Drivers.

I also Aborted the running Grid Wu because I haven't had a Wu finish yet that was already running when one erred out, the remaining Wu would always error out eventually too so I figured 2 Fresh ones would be better. Am running both of them now with the 185.85 Drivers & 6.6.36 Client.

it does not seem that you have successfully downgraded to 185.xx:
http://www.gpugrid.net/show_host_detail.php?hostid=17909

Your are having problems with the CUDA FFT library, which also seem to suggest that you are using the wrong driver. Please check.

Do you have the toolkit installed, if yes uninstall it. I am not sure if Windows would choose system installed libs rather than the one we provide.

gdf

Hmmmmmm, but I tried that already (Downgrade to 185.18 I believe) & it din't work, I still got the errors, that and all my other Box's are running the 190.38 Drivers. I'll wait and see if they run okay now with the uninstall & reinstall I did with them an hour or so ago. If they still get the errors I'll try the 185.xx Drivers again.

No, I don't have the Toolkit installed on any of my Box's, did at first when I joined the Project but then un-installed them when I realized I didn't need them.

it does not seem that you have successfully downgraded to 185.xx:
http://www.gpugrid.net/show_host_detail.php?hostid=17909

Your are having problems with the CUDA FFT library, which also seem to suggest that you are using the wrong driver. Please check.

Do you have the toolkit installed, if yes uninstall it. I am not sure if Windows would choose system installed libs rather than the one we provide.

gdf

Hmmmmmm, but I tried that already (Downgrade to 185.18 I believe) & it din't work, I still got the errors, that and all my other Box's are running the 190.38 Drivers. I'll wait and see if they run okay now with the uninstall & reinstall I did with them an hour or so ago. If they still get the errors I'll try the 185.xx Drivers again.

No, I don't have the Toolkit installed on any of my Box's, did at first when I joined the Project but then un-installed them when I realized I didn't need them.

and people wonder why some of us install the toolkit....... here's your asnwer....

i install the toolkit each time it's updated... i rarely have an issue...

what i was trying to say PB; is that it can't hurt to have it installed(unless your just; no space available).


btw, if you think that post was meant for you as i hit the quote button on your post and didn't realize it... it wasn't meant for you, it was just meant to stat the fact that, some extra's tools in the box can't hurt...

what i was trying to say PB; is that it can't hurt to have it installed(unless your just; no space available).


btw, if you think that post was meant for you as i hit the quote button on your post and didn't realize it... it wasn't meant for you, it was just meant to stat the fact that, some extra's tools in the box can't hurt...

poorboy, i hate to say this but when i ran aqua cuda, my gpugrid wu's errored out until the cuda aqua was off my computer(boinc)... i doubt that collatz is affecting the gpugrid wu's but who knows.....

something else too look into...

if all else fails, detach, and reattach...

poorboy, i hate to say this but when i ran aqua cuda, my gpugrid wu's errored out until the cuda aqua was off my computer(boinc)... i doubt that collatz is affecting the gpugrid wu's but who knows.....

something else too look into...

if all else fails, detach, and reattach...

Both Box's have erred out their remaining Wu's using the 185.85 & 190.38 Drivers with & without the CUDA 2.2 & 2.3 Toolkit installed. About the only thing left to those to Box's is pull each card individually & see if it will run the Wu's or not on it's own. if it will then that particular Card probably good but if it won't then the Card is bad I would suspect.

I'll try to RMA them then if that's the case, I would think BFG's gonna get tired sooner or later of RMA'ing Video Cards just because they won't run the CUDA Applications here & will refuse to RMA them at some point.

unless they bluescreen and die on you, the cards are ok....

what cards are they.... i'm sure your not the only one with a bunch of cards throwing you errors...

best thing to do, is to go to nvidia forums for cuda and see if any person with same card and all is having a problem doing the same things..

PoorBoy,
your error is quite odd. It always fails in the fft calls.
Try to look in the system for cufft.dll. You should have only the one distributed by gpugrid.

gdf

best i can say, if nothing else works... revert to 186.38.... and wait until next month...

best i can say, if nothing else works... revert to 186.38.... and wait until next month...

Tried the 190.40 BETA Drivers over night on just 1 of the Dual GTX 260 Box's, the good news is after about 7+ hours of running neither Wu had erred out, the bad news is one of the Wu quit progressing some time during the night around 43% completion while the other Wu was @ 83% completion.

Both 260 Cores still showed full speed with GPU-Z, stopping & restarting BOINC got the stalled Wu running again but I could tell @ only 1/2 speed or less. Checking the Cores again showed 1 Core to be @ the all to familiar 300/Core & 400/Memory Speeds. So I rebooted the Box & when BOINC started again both Cores were at full speed again.

I'll let them run & see what happens with them from here. I also started up the other Box that's been trouble with the 190.40 BETA Drivers to see what it's going to do with them.

Well 3 of the 4 Wu's on the 2 Box's ended up with error's, 1 of them was within a few % Points of finishing when it erred out. So I'm done for awhile running the Grid Wu's until somebody comes up with a fix. The Riva Fix may work on some Box's but it doesn't work on any of mine so thats out.

I found 1 Wu on my Dual 275 Box this Morning that had been running for 18+ hr's according to BOINC Manager's CPU Time so it probably has been runing much longer than that. It was at 34% done, 1 Core was at the dreaded 300/Core 400/Memory, I just aborted it and set the box to NNW.

I made a Post over at the NVIDIA CUDA Forum, maybe somebody has a fix or suggestions over there I can try ...

All WUs exiting with "output file ... is null" error. BOINC 6.6.38, 190.38 nVidia driver, Win 7 Ultimate x64.
____________
From Siberia with love!

I have talked to BFG & they are in agreement something is wrong with the Cards if they Reset themselves to a lower clock speed. They are willing to RMA all of my Cards that do that too, I have nothing but good stuff to say about BFG, they have RMA'ed several Cards for me already without any Questions, even sent me a Pre-Paid Shipping Label on the last one. The BFG Cards may cost a little more but to me their well worth it for their Warranty Service.

BFG is also going to forward my E-Mail to them to NVIDIA & see if they can't get NVIDIA to include Windows XP with the Prefer Maximum Performance Setting in the NVIDIA Control Panel Settings that Vista & on up got with the Recent releases. Maybe PoorBoy with BFG's help can move a Giant Company to do something for him & all fellow XP users that run NVIDIA Cards ... One can hope anyway ... B)

that is good news glad to read some thing good from you i was having the same problems i got one XFX gtx 260 that went back last Tuesday i couldn't get that card to work i did all the things you did. good luck and i hope you get things going as soon as possible.

that is good news glad to read some thing good from you i was having the same problems i got one XFX gtx 260 that went back last Tuesday i couldn't get that card to work i did all the things you did. good luck and i hope you get things going as soon as possible.