Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Inaccurate GPU utilization display with ROCm on AMD GPUs #220

Open
1 task done
MUZYOU opened this issue Apr 29, 2024 · 4 comments
Open
1 task done

Inaccurate GPU utilization display with ROCm on AMD GPUs #220

MUZYOU opened this issue Apr 29, 2024 · 4 comments
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@MUZYOU
Copy link

MUZYOU commented Apr 29, 2024

Is there an existing issue for this?

  • I searched the existing issues and did not find anything similar.

Current Behavior

When monitoring system resources during training sessions with ROCm on AMD GPUs, I've noticed an inconsistency in GPU utilization rates between the rocm-smi tool and the Software. While rocm-smi reports GPU utilization above 90%, the Software shows little to no change in GPU usage.

Expected Behavior

No response

Steps To Reproduce

No response

Environment

latest version through flatpak 
Intel i5 12600k and Amd 6650xt

Anything else?

No response

@MUZYOU MUZYOU added the bug Something isn't working label Apr 29, 2024
@MUZYOU
Copy link
Author

MUZYOU commented Apr 29, 2024

截图 2024-04-29 20-48-40

@nokyan
Copy link
Owner

nokyan commented Apr 29, 2024

Hi, thanks for the issue. This is a bit odd as Resources should be incorporating the computational load of AMD GPUs. What does nvtop say?

@MUZYOU
Copy link
Author

MUZYOU commented May 3, 2024

It shows "No GPU to monitor".

@nokyan
Copy link
Owner

nokyan commented May 4, 2024

That's very odd. I can go look for whatever radeontop is doing and try to adapt that maybe.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants