so...a 4.07 task has been running 11hrs and 24 minutes and has only 2 hrs 22 minutes cpu time.
BUT...it is only using 20.9% CPU usage, but what is weird is the cpu usage climbs each time BOINC tasks updates. So by the time you read this, it is using 30-31%.
Now a different 4.07 tasks is 9hrs elapsed time with 3:31 cpu time and 36% cpu usage.

The only consistant cpu to elapsed time task is a non Rosie task from both LHC and Einstein. Both are within 1hr of their cpu time.

So how do I get Rosie to act like those tasks?
Why are they using 94,98 and 107% and Rosie is only 20-40%?
All this is based on what BOINC tasks is reporting.

You said that you have 16 threads, but I see 18 running tasks. Why is that?

The reason that you see the cpu utilization slowly going up or down has to do with it being a long-term moving average. I showed how to turn that off.

You have poor cpu utilization for most of those tasks. The only task that looks really good is the Asteroids@home. Presumably there must be some resource contention going on between all of those. Perhaps you can use the windows task manager to get some insight into what's going on. I decided to put all my resources into one project so that I don't have complex resource contention issues.

So how do I get Rosie to act like those tasks?

Rosetta does not control the actual dispatch of CPU time. The operating system does this. But we know that the Rosetta application will demand as much CPU as it can get (based on the BOINC settings, and the resource availability in your machine). My guess would be that memory used by the other applications is less, and that R@h is often encountering the situation where the memory pages it requires to run are swapped out, and it has to wait for the operating system to bring them back in to physical memory before it can actually continue running.

---

Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense

So how do I get Rosie to act like those tasks?

Rosetta does not control the actual dispatch of CPU time. The operating system does this. But we know that the Rosetta application will demand as much CPU as it can get (based on the BOINC settings, and the resource availability in your machine). My guess would be that memory used by the other applications is less, and that R@h is often encountering the situation where the memory pages it requires to run are swapped out, and it has to wait for the operating system to bring them back in to physical memory before it can actually continue running.

So in short, I can run it the way it is or dump a project or two that use a lot of cpu time?

Note: I have taken one core away from LHC (they have the option to let you say how many cores you want to use), will see if that does anything. If not that, then I drop one of their applications that I see sucks up a ton of CPU time.

Hello,
A few things to try, as it were.

Try completely suspending - or at least asking for no new work from other projects apart from Rosetta and see if the CPU issue resolves itself.
Some projects from LHC ask for far more than 1 gb of memory per core and are also multithreaded. Add Virtual box to that equation and combine that with Rosetta, which in some instances can also hit 1 gb per core if not more. Windows might be hitting the virtual memory up. One other thing to consider is Ram speed, which can have an impact on Ryzen processors, though from what I can tell it shouldn't be bringing CPU usage per task down to that level of so called inefficiency. My 1800x is still running ddr4 2400 though I'll be replacing that with a little higher speed - maybe 2666 or 3000.

If not that, one more thing to try is using an app config to limit work from Rosetta to see if, at the very least, CPU usage per core picks back up. That will tell you if things are going into swap or not or at least something isn't able to keep up.

Thanks and hope that helps a little.

Hello,
A few things to try, as it were.

Try completely suspending - or at least asking for no new work from other projects apart from Rosetta and see if the CPU issue resolves itself.
Some projects from LHC ask for far more than 1 gb of memory per core and are also multithreaded. Add Virtual box to that equation and combine that with Rosetta, which in some instances can also hit 1 gb per core if not more. Windows might be hitting the virtual memory up. One other thing to consider is Ram speed, which can have an impact on Ryzen processors, though from what I can tell it shouldn't be bringing CPU usage per task down to that level of so called inefficiency. My 1800x is still running ddr4 2400 though I'll be replacing that with a little higher speed - maybe 2666 or 3000.

If not that, one more thing to try is using an app config to limit work from Rosetta to see if, at the very least, CPU usage per core picks back up. That will tell you if things are going into swap or not or at least something isn't able to keep up.

Thanks and hope that helps a little.

Well never thought about memory speed being an issue. Always figured it was the processor.
Memory speed is 1066mhz (but the CPU-Z says something about 2133 and when I look at MSI Command center DRAM it talks about 2133) and 24,526mb capacity. With all the stuff I have running including monitor programs I am using 91-94% of the memory. I don't know how to OC memory, I have always left that to the programs to control automatically when I crank up the CPU speed.

Well never thought about memory speed being an issue. Always figured it was the processor.
Memory speed is 1066mhz (but the CPU-Z says something about 2133 and when I look at MSI Command center DRAM it talks about 2133) and 24,526mb capacity. With all the stuff I have running including monitor programs I am using 91-94% of the memory. I don't know how to OC memory, I have always left that to the programs to control automatically when I crank up the CPU speed.

Faster memory would make the tasks go faster, but it wouldn't directly impact the % cpu utilization. The time spent waiting for slow DIMMs counts as cpu time.

"I am using 91-94% of the memory"

That is way too much. If I were you, I would try to cut that % in half, either by adding more RAM or by cutting down on memory-hungry tasks.

Well never thought about memory speed being an issue. Always figured it was the processor.
Memory speed is 1066mhz (but the CPU-Z says something about 2133 and when I look at MSI Command center DRAM it talks about 2133) and 24,526mb capacity. With all the stuff I have running including monitor programs I am using 91-94% of the memory. I don't know how to OC memory, I have always left that to the programs to control automatically when I crank up the CPU speed.

Faster memory would make the tasks go faster, but it wouldn't directly impact the % cpu utilization. The time spent waiting for slow DIMMs counts as cpu time.

"I am using 91-94% of the memory"

That is way too much. If I were you, I would try to cut that % in half, either by adding more RAM or by cutting down on memory-hungry tasks.

Not sure what was hogging the memory so much. I had BSOD for a bad driver and since fixing that I am down to 43%. I think ATLAS is the memory hog and for now Amicable numbers is the high scorer, but that is a GPU project. I'll see what ATLAS is up to later on tonight or tomorrow. I also had a bunch of Firefox tabs open last night. Give you an update later on tonight or tomorrow once the big stuff hits again. When I was writing last update it was the middle of the night here in Europe.

Well never thought about memory speed being an issue. Always figured it was the processor.
Memory speed is 1066mhz (but the CPU-Z says something about 2133 and when I look at MSI Command center DRAM it talks about 2133) and 24,526mb capacity. With all the stuff I have running including monitor programs I am using 91-94% of the memory. I don't know how to OC memory, I have always left that to the programs to control automatically when I crank up the CPU speed.

Faster memory would make the tasks go faster, but it wouldn't directly impact the % cpu utilization. The time spent waiting for slow DIMMs counts as cpu time.

"I am using 91-94% of the memory"

That is way too much. If I were you, I would try to cut that % in half, either by adding more RAM or by cutting down on memory-hungry tasks.

Not sure what was hogging the memory so much. I had BSOD for a bad driver and since fixing that I am down to 43%. I think ATLAS is the memory hog and for now Amicable numbers is the high scorer, but that is a GPU project. I'll see what ATLAS is up to later on tonight or tomorrow. I also had a bunch of Firefox tabs open last night. Give you an update later on tonight or tomorrow once the big stuff hits again. When I was writing last update it was the middle of the night here in Europe.

Since Amicable is multithreaded, it will rocket that ram consumption to around 10-13 GB or so. Atlas requires tons of babysitting since it is an absolute memory hog with the tasks requiring Virtual box (I think). My questions on that forum remain unanswered, so I haven't really delved too deeply into it.

...oh. I just read re: GPU. One tip for Amicable. It actually uses a ton of CPU to run the GPU - if you run primarily CPU you will most likely get higher throughput at this point.

Well never thought about memory speed being an issue. Always figured it was the processor.
Memory speed is 1066mhz (but the CPU-Z says something about 2133 and when I look at MSI Command center DRAM it talks about 2133) and 24,526mb capacity. With all the stuff I have running including monitor programs I am using 91-94% of the memory. I don't know how to OC memory, I have always left that to the programs to control automatically when I crank up the CPU speed.

Faster memory would make the tasks go faster, but it wouldn't directly impact the % cpu utilization. The time spent waiting for slow DIMMs counts as cpu time.

"I am using 91-94% of the memory"

That is way too much. If I were you, I would try to cut that % in half, either by adding more RAM or by cutting down on memory-hungry tasks.

Not sure what was hogging the memory so much. I had BSOD for a bad driver and since fixing that I am down to 43%. I think ATLAS is the memory hog and for now Amicable numbers is the high scorer, but that is a GPU project. I'll see what ATLAS is up to later on tonight or tomorrow. I also had a bunch of Firefox tabs open last night. Give you an update later on tonight or tomorrow once the big stuff hits again. When I was writing last update it was the middle of the night here in Europe.

Since Amicable is multithreaded, it will rocket that ram consumption to around 10-13 GB or so. Atlas requires tons of babysitting since it is an absolute memory hog with the tasks requiring Virtual box (I think). My questions on that forum remain unanswered, so I haven't really delved too deeply into it.

...oh. I just read re: GPU. One tip for Amicable. It actually uses a ton of CPU to run the GPU - if you run primarily CPU you will most likely get higher throughput at this point.

Amicable is being nice and using only 6% cpu on 11% GPU. I think FAH is the big CPU hog. 31% Amicable is a memory hog though. nearly a gig. FAH is less memory. Only 126. ATLAS likes 6hrs uninterupted and yeah its a memory hog in its own right. Amicable is running 1:1 on cpu time to elapsed time. I got a ROSIE 4.07 that isn't doing so well. 1 day 3hrs and only 5.5 hrs cpu time. But now that I look at it in BOINC tasks, I see its not due until the 11th. So no wonder it is taking so long. Other stuff is before it in due date time.

...now that I look at it in BOINC tasks, I see its not due until the 11th. So no wonder it is taking so long. Other stuff is before it in due date time.

Due date has no relation on % of CPU used by the task. Any time that Windows task manager shows less than 100%, there is something in the way. Now, it is normal that something is in the way... waiting for page faults, memory fetches, available CPU cores, etc. is all normal, so 100% is not likely to happen. However, you are seeing more like 25%. If task manager shows the same 25% or so, this is an indication that either higher priority (Windows priority, not BOINC priority) tasks are active, or memory to run the task is not available.

---

Rosetta Moderator: Mod.Sense

Thanks guys for the input.
With BOINC tasks I see what is going on now.
So I will just let the 4.07 stuff run its course.

Thanks guys for the input.
With BOINC tasks I see what is going on now.
So I will just let the 4.07 stuff run its course.

I'm glad I could be of assistance.