Closed tatarsky closed 8 years ago
+1, except I wouldn't use the format cudaXY
so as to avoid confusion with CUDA version X.Y (e.g. we're on CUDA 7.5 now). How about cudacomputeXY
or just cudaccXY
?
Ah valid point. How about cudaccXY
. Is "Compute Capability" the actual name of this concept?
Yep, "CUDA compute capability X.Y" is the right term. Sounds great!
I have added these properties. If you wish to validate you can use this rather ugly grep to make sure I've done what I said fairly readable or just review all the pbsnodes lines containing "properties" to make sure the cudaccXX properties match the card type property.
pbsnodes |egrep "^\w+|properties"
This has come up tangentially I believe in a few matters. We currently mark GPU system Torque properties by the type of card (
gtx680, gtxtitan, gtx780ti, gtx980, telsa, gtxtitanx
).It probably makes sense to also tag the property for the cards MAXIMUM CUDA compute level in some easy to use scheme.
Based on the data I'm grabbing from Nvidia but is nicely summarized here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CUDA#GPUs_supported
my proposed method would be for ALL cards add the following torque resource and I'm removing the "." because I don't want it confusing the resource parser.
cuda30
-> Supports up to compute capability 3.0 (all our cards I believe do)Then for all the cards EXCEPT the
gtx680
we would add this additional resource:cuda35
-> Supports up to compute capability 3.5And then for I believe the
gtx980
andgtxtitanx
by this scheme we would add:cuda52
-> Supports up to compute capability 5.2This is a lower priority matter which I am using to train local resources in Torque but if you comment I will take the comments and place them in the hpc-request ticket for that training.