RE: Counting FLOPSs in a FLOPS – part 2
Did you use this example in your table?
No, just an example. I haven't saved links to WUs used in tables, so it would be difficult to find them again.
Also, is that how you compare the WU? i.e. Go to a WU, look at the tasks, and then extract information from there?
Yes
This brings up the bigger point that different WU, even from the same application, can require very different computational power
Yes, this is the case and the problem. And some explanation.
Regarding the amicable numbers example, how can we compare those WU? If a WU takes a different amount of time for each task even on the same GPU, how can we compare across GPUs? ....
I don't think the same WU X would take different times on a particular card and I have no possibility to test it. Also WU = task.
In the tables, each two consecutive lines are for the same WU. For example line 1 and 2 in Amicable, gtx 1060 and gtx 760 computed the same WU X. Line 3 and 4 gtx 1060 and RX 470 computed the same WU Y. I should have add another column with WU numbers to make it clear. As you see, the same gtx 1060 was used and works as a benchmark for relative comparisons. Single WU is probably enough for relative comparison. But only particular cards (computers) with confidence, not necessary card classes, as someone might have overheating problems or some system misconfiguration.
Using moving average over tasks would be better.
In some computer profiles you might see something like [3] NVIDIA GTX 1080 what means the rig has 3 cards installed, another might be 1070 or 750. Thus I used for comparisons computers with only one card.
Another problem - on 1080 you may run more than one task at once, depending how user will configure his BOINC client; as I don't own 1080 and couldn't research it in depth I've tried not to include such strong cards in the tables. Still, you can draw some conclusions if you compare RAC for a couple 1080s and times to complete tasks (WUs).
My mistake, I should have said application, not WU.
From that link you provided, it seems like every WU is comprised of two tasks, and both of those tasks are completed by different machines. Are those two tasks running the exact same computations? If not, I'm not sure it's accurate to compare them from that single data point.
I assumed it is the same task = WU run twice for verification purposes...
If there are two tasks being part of the same WU... I hope not!
Also, I've noticed other 1060s have almost exact times as mine running those WUs (when I had a chance to find a WU that was crunched by another 1060); so I hope WU = task, and not WU = task1 + task2.
P.S. some minor edits in my previous comment.
That seems likely, but verification is definitely needed. If that is the case though, that provides a very nice way of comparing hardwares directly.