We are happy to present you another set of applications that will utilize those CPUs, which possess the FMA instruction set!

It was built to support both Linux and Windows OS with 64bit architecture.
What must be taken into account with these applications is that depending on the CPU architecture, generation, model, version, speed and number of utilized cores, in some cases the FMA applications may run slower than the corresponding AVX ones because of how those instructions are handled on different architectures, details that I'll not going further here as there is a lot of information on Internet. Also, there could be another case using even the same FMA application. For instance, there could be a situation where on the same particular system, having your preferences restrict the use of just a single core of, let's say, an Intel(R) Xeon(R) W Processor Xeon W-2195 of the Skylake-W Architecture, that single core will run much faster, close to processors' Turbo frequency of 4.3GHz, than if your configuration allows the client to utilize let's say 12 or more cores. In the second case those cores will run close to the processors' base frequency of 2.3GHz, depending on their actual number, which will result drastically in lowering of the application performance. Take a look at this article where under the "Per Core Turbo Data" chapter you will find explanation about how the Turbo ratio limits works.

Still, while the Boinc server is capable of finding the best performed application for every particular system, taking into account multiple factors, and after a while it will start sending the right one for every particular system. Which means that even if your CPU is equipped with the FMA engine it still might receive an AVX tasks and there is nothing to be concerned.

So happy crunching and thank you for your support!

Radim Vančo (FoxKyong)

Thank you for doing this

What is the advantage of the FMA tasks? Are they faster than avx? Or more accurate?

---

sorry, double posting

Depends on the cpu architecture and features set. Can be more efficient than AVX2.

---

A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association)

Hi all,

From this project home page:

Still, while the Boinc server is capable of finding the best performed application for every particular system, taking into account multiple factors, and after a while it will start sending the right one for every particular system. Which means that even if your CPU is equipped with the FMA engine it still might receive an AVX tasks and there is nothing to be concerned.

How long does it take for the server to take the CPU flags on the computing nodes into account ? I've been crunching for several weeks now and I have yet to run a single FMA task. CPU is some Ryzen 7 4800H (Zen 2), and I ran FMA tasks in the past for a different BOINC project (TN-Grid).

Cheers, Sam

Sorry double post

I'm also curious about the choosing of the instruction set, because I have a Ryzen 3700X, and the only app version I am getting is sse2. Shouldn't I be getting sse3 or fma?

---

my blog about raspberry pis and astrophotography

It has been discussed here already: https://asteroidsathome.net/boinc/forum_thread.php?id=793&postid=6541

---

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

...finding the best performed application for every particular system...
Radim Vančo (FoxKyong)

How do you actually define what's the best instruction set? I think it should be the most energy efficient. See, for example:
Thermal design power and vectorized instructions behavior, Amina Guermouche & Anne-Cécile Orgerie, CONCURRENCY & COMPUTATION: PRACTICE & EXPERIENCE, Feb 2021.
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03185821/document

---

It has been discussed here already: https://asteroidsathome.net/boinc/forum_thread.php?id=793&postid=6541

Says nothing about energy efficiency. Just a single WU race mentality. But then you're not paying for the electricity.

---

Depends on the cpu architecture and features set. Can be more efficient than AVX2.

Energy efficiency or race speed?

---