Just installed GTX 480 with driver 197.41
All job cancelled after a few seconds.
Any ideas?
Ton van Born (ftpd)
____________
Ton (ftpd) Netherlands
/ 
Reply
Quote
Have a look at this:
http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/forum_thread.php?id=1620&nowrap=true#38664
Going to be a while before it will run, as code changes are needed, even then its performance will be poor due to the double precision limitation. You would be better off using a Fermi on a Single Precision Project
Regards
Zy
/ Reply
Quote
Unfortunate the cuda app has compute capability 1.3 hard coded into it, so the app will not find a valid card and exit. The behaviour is effectively the same as if you were running it on older G80 or G90 with no double precision support. The good news is that is it only 1 one line change to the code and a one line change to the Makefile to fix it. It will also require building against Cuda 3.0 and need 195 series drivers on linux or 196/197 series on Windows.
/ Reply
Quote
Normally if you do not have the right card Milkyway does not download any WU, so why now it downloads WU??
Ton
/ Reply
Quote
The milkyway application itself doesn't have any influence on when jobs are downloaded, the boinc client does that. I am going to guess that the boinc client contains a compute capability test like this:
whereas the milkway app has a test like this:
so that compute 2.0 cards are OK with the boinc client and not OK with the milkway app. The first first is a guess, because I haven't seen the boinc client code, but the second part is definitely right - you can see it in the code available for download here.
/ Reply
Quote
Correct, the code specifically asks for compute capability 1.3. I will have to look into the changes that compute capability 2.0 brought and determine whether or not they support the CUDA Framework 2.3.
/ Reply
Quote
Any idea when the change to CC 2.0 can take place?
My Fermi-cards are still waiting for WU.
Ton (ftpd)
/ Reply
Quote
I posted new applications on Milkyway@Home version 3, I only have a GTX 285 so I am not able to test whether it works or not.
/ Reply
Quote
I posted new applications on Milkyway@Home version 3, I only have a GTX 285 so I am not able to test whether it works or not.
hi testing no error so far:) 5.20min GTX480
/ Reply
Quote
Hmmm...slower than my 4850. What's it like at Collatz?
/ Reply
Quote
Hmmm...slower than my 4850. What's it like at Collatz?
hi:) 8.15min
/ Reply
Quote
Hmmm...slower than my 4850. What's it like at Collatz?
hi:) 8.15min
5 minutes faster than my 4870.
/ Reply
Quote
Hmmm...slower than my 4850. What's it like at Collatz?
hi:) 8.15min
5 minutes faster than my 4870.
1:05 slower than my 5830.
____________
/ Reply
Quote
I posted new applications on Milkyway@Home version 3, I only have a GTX 285 so I am not able to test whether it works or not.
hi testing no error so far:) 5.20min GTX480
and:
hi:) 8.15min
To contrast I have a 5870 and the comparable times are >2Min at MW and ~5:44-6:00 at Collatz, and at a cost of a little over $400 a bit cheaper ...
Just food for comparison. I hate losing the ability to run other projects like GPU Grid, but the cost benefit ratio says ATI to me ... I can get a suite of 5870 cards to replace my older Nvidia cards as soon as I can ... and my production is going to go up a lot... and my power is staying the same or falling (depending on whose numbers you use) ...
In one system I am doing about 294K CS per day with a 5870 and GTX280 card... I had a system with a pair of GTX260 cards and it was doing about 72K a day ... it is too soon to know if it is going to go all the way up to 290K or not, would be nice, but even so, one card is likely to double that machine's production... my pair of 4870 cards do about 140K per day together which also is not bad at all ...
I will know better in a couple days when the stat sites start to crunch the data but here is hoping ... :)
/ Reply
Quote
The benchmarking I have done for the GTX470 shows it to be slightly better than twice as fast at double precision compared to a GTX275. The linear algebra benchmarks I use are generally memory bandwidth limited - a stock GTX275 hits about 77 Gflop/s double precision, and the GTX470 hits about 160 Gflop/s doing the same operation running identical code. There are new architectural features in Fermi which should allow that to improve further with some tuning.
On pure compute bound jobs (and Milkyway seems to be one of the few), Cypress has a considerable advantage. On memory bandwidth bound codes (or mixed single-double precision codes), the performance gap will be a lot smaller.
I hope to get a Telsa C2050 to test in the next week or so.
/ Reply
Quote
GTX480 - WU Milkyway 3 = OK - 5 min. 8 secs.
Is it possible just to download the new version 3 WU's, because all other WU
will cancel?
If possible also more WU and not just 12!!!
Ton (ftpd)
/ Reply
Quote
If you want to push the beast - there is a good review on o/c the 480 at Guru3d (they also did one for the 470, which was a little dubious in outcome).
They did not push further with the 480 or 470 due to the crazy heat and noise levels, but it gives an idea what it can do, albeit it was games orientated comparisons and therefore single precison as such.
3D Mark Vantage GTX480
Guru3d Concluding Remarks
Regards
Zy
/ Reply
Quote
I have a GTX 480 and also a GTX 470.
Not any problems with noise and heat. There are very much OK!
Ton (ftpd)
____________
Ton (ftpd) Netherlands
/ Reply
Quote
At stock it will be "ok" - even NVidia are not going to field something that needs earplugs at stock. Although the 480 gets close to that in its guise as an egg-fryer.
They crippled the original design by killing of a shader cluster bringing it down from 512 to 480, because they had to shove more volts through the beast to make up for poor production quantities. So at current stock its "ok" at the price of some pretty lacklustre performance in comparison to the generation of card that its meant to be.
The point of the Guru3d review was o/c. The noise and heat generated at levels of o/c, where there should not be issues, was not acceptable to the point they did not go further.
In fact they explicitly stated they would not until some custom water cool solutions were available to bring heat and power under control.
Regards
Zy
/ Reply
Quote
The benchmarking I have done for the GTX470 shows it to be slightly better than twice as fast at double precision compared to a GTX275. The linear algebra benchmarks I use are generally memory bandwidth limited - a stock GTX275 hits about 77 Gflop/s double precision, and the GTX470 hits about 160 Gflop/s doing the same operation running identical code. There are new architectural features in Fermi which should allow that to improve further with some tuning.
And were they the only game in town I would be salivating over upgrading my 260/280/295 cards to the latest and greatest.
However, the numbers you post here for the 470 shows that it is twice as fast as my 4870 for Collatz (~16 min) it is more than twice as slow for MW (~3:15) and the 4870's are only about $150 US ...
In a way I regret my slow migration to the world of ATI because I really do like GPU Grid for example and there is no doubt that the CUDA applications are more common still ... but, we are up to 3 ATI projects with SaH looming on the horizon in having a viable 4th application "real soon now" to quote Jerry Pournell ...
/ Reply
Quote
..... In a way I regret my slow migration to the world of ATI because I really do like GPU Grid for example and there is no doubt that the CUDA applications are more common still ......
Been down that road as well, and in some ways still have a nagging itch about moving, I also have a real urge to help at GPUGrid due to one particular application there, waited and waited for Fermi, but it became clear it was going to be a dog so I moved, I just could not justify the cost/performance equation of Fermi. I had been using NVidia for 15/20 years - ever since they first hit the consumer market, so did not take the decision to move Vendor lightly.
I change cards every 3/4 years, and about 4 weeks ago finally took the plunge and went ATI. No real regrets, the numbers and economics speak for themselves, and were re-afirmed after the Fermi disaster. The only reason to go Fermi now is because of a particular need anyone has for CUDA - otherwise ATI have it in the bag now.
And they will do for at least 5 years. The days of "leapfrogging" the graphics lead are over for a while. NVidia are too far behind. A two year old 5870 takes out a Fermi 480, let alone the 5xxx mid life refresh due in Q3, let alone the ATI 6xxx cards with a completely new architecture due for release Spring 2011. NVidia have nothing left to respond with, apart from straw clutching and PR stunts for product releases.
Regards
Zy
/ Reply
Quote
..... In a way I regret my slow migration to the world of ATI because I really do like GPU Grid for example and there is no doubt that the CUDA applications are more common still ......
Been down that road as well, and in some ways still have a nagging itch about moving, I also have a real urge to help at GPUGrid due to one particular application there, ...
I too have a soft spot in my heart for GPU Grid as they were my first GPU love ... but ... the project fell into the 6 months in and we don't have to talk to the participants much any more kind of thing and well now we have applications that don't seem to run as well, the CPU usage is drifting up (again) and I don't see them actively working to make the client work better to meet their needs.
By that i mean, we should be able to have BOINC take into consideration prioritization so that if we have a GPU Grid task on hand we slot it next so that we can return it ASAP. Does not have to violate RS over time (though RS has fallen so far down the chain of things considered that I feel that it is not respected at all anymore ... can't prove it because of the lack of good logging and projects that run out of work so often ... but ...)
I was hoping DNETC would prove out, but, to this point they seem to be a disappointment also with an application that locks-up and their bland denials of the possibility ...
For me the real long term driver is total power consumption for work done ... I don't have the specific numbers because I have been running pairs of GPUs so long it is hard to say what the real earnings of specific cards are ... but, I just pulled one GTX260 out of a system which had a pair of them and it looks like my daily numbers are going to go from 70K + a day to 200K a day on the same system.
My 5870 + GTX280 system does nearly 300K a day ... I can only imagine what I would get from pairs of 5870 cards ... well, next card will let me know though I just bought a new KVM so that may have to be pushed off a month before I will know ... heck, replacing the GTX295 would double production (or more) and cut power consumption in half... well, 3 more upgrades to go ...
As to the leapfrogging, I am not so sure that it might not be possible for Nvidia to "get it" and come up with an innovation that will stun ATI ... because sure as taxes ATI is likely to get complacent, though they may own the next cycle or two as you have noted.
/ Reply
Quote
More food for thought...
Using BOINC Stats numbers for the last 30 days I had 24 days before I added in (again) a GTX280 card, 4 days with that card add by itself and then 2 days with the HD5870 added. The numbers are slightly biased by the fact I also added a change in OS from WIn XP-32 to Win7-64 and biased in the other direction with loss of computing because of mistakes in OS configuration, and other daily tevails documented elsewhere ...
Lastly, I am going to ignore the production of CPU work in that it is really a small percentage of the daily totals ... should demand warrant I can go back and try to get more precise but I don't really think that it matters that much ...
Normal project mix is MW, Collatz, GPU Grid (though not on all systems as the GTX295 seems unstable for those tasks, and I have run DNETC off and on in the last week or so ... all projects given equal weight of 100 RS, all projects only run on GPU, oh and I have run 4-5 SaH tasks on one system).
24 day configuration of cards was:
2 ea HD4870 (W04) i7 920
2 ea GTX260 (W03) i7 920
1 ea HD5870 (W02) i7 940
1 ea GTX295 (W01) Q9300
4 day configuration of cards was:
2 ea HD4870 (W04) i7 920
2 ea GTX260 (W03) i7 920
1 ea HD5870 (W02) i7 940
1 ea GTX280 (W02) i7 940
1 ea GTX295 (W01) Q9300
2 day configuration of cards was:
2 ea HD4870 (W04) i7 920
1 ea GTX260 (W03) i7 920
1 ea HD5870 (W03) i7 920
1 ea HD5870 (W02) i7 940
1 ea GTX280 (W02) i7 940
1 ea GTX295 (W01) Q9300
However, I feel the numbers are illustrative ...
In 24 days I was producing work and managed to generate 11,345,366 / 24 = 472,723 CS/day
In the 4 days of only adding in a GTX280 (with OS change as noted): 2,279,073 / 4 = 569,768 CS/day
Estimated improvement is 569,768 - 472,723 = 97,045 CS/Day
In the 2 days with the replacement of a GTX260 with an HD5870: 1,547,923 / 2 = 773,961 CS/day
Estimated improvement is 773,961 - 569,768 = 204,193
Based on machine specific numbers
The system with paired GTX260 cards did 65-75K per day
The system with paired HD4870 cards does 139-160K per day
I don't have great numbers for the 5870 + 280 system because it is less than a week old, but the "spot" number I have from a couple days ago is 284-294K per day (Using todays "weekly" of 3,040,255 / 7 = 434,322 CS/Day; so I am not sure what it the right number there)
If you estimate that the GTX260 does about half of the work of the total system at 72K per day or 35K, the 5870's estimated productivity is on the order of 230-240K per day...
{edit} this is borne out with todays "spot" number for that system of 256,262 from prior values of 60-75K{/edit}
This is just a rough thumb estimate ... but, I have to say it is gratifying to see my daily numbers jump from 300-550K a day to the 700-800K per day area ... only time will tell if this lasts ... if I can get the systems to run smoothly I should have fewer bad tasks and may see a slight improvement over time ... time will tell ...
/ Reply
Quote
I agree - there's just no contest all the way up and down the product range, ATI own it. NVidia had the opportunity with the failed GF300 development - but could not nail it - then had to use an existing GPgpu and mess with it to evolve to "Fermi" and we end up with a noisy egg-fryer.
You are right that its within NVidia's capability to pull a rabbit out the hat and jump back in - they are a good Company at heart - but the sheer realities of chip development mean thats not going to happen for 4 or 5 years. They dropped the ball big time, and first have to salvage what they can from "Fermi" before committing to "son of Fermi", sheer cost pressures dictate that, let alone fabrication which they still dont have a grip on.
ATI let NVidia into the market 15/20yrs ago because ATI got complaicent, NVidia have just returned the honours ..... (!)
I hope NVidia do pull out a rabbit in 4/5 years time, else the dynamics of competition die out, and we all lose big time with inflated price performance, and increased development cycles with no viable competition.
The big unknown is the move to combine cpu & gpu onto one chip (again - what goes around comes around!), and Intel are coming into play on the sidelines because of it. This migration back to one chip could well sink NVidia in the long term at consumer level at least, if not all levels, as it has no inherent cpu base.
My money is on the main long term term market being an ATI/AMD v Intel fight in 5 years going forward, with the two of them fighting over going back to one chip - a combined cpu/gpu. NVidia will still be there .... maybe .... but it would be the last throw at consumer level before they abandone consumer cards and go back to CUDA compute level only.
Regards
Zy
/ Reply
Quote
I hope NVidia do pull out a rabbit in 4/5 years time, else the dynamics of competition die out, and we all lose big time with inflated price performance, and increased development cycles with no viable competition.
The big unknown is the move to combine cpu & gpu onto one chip (again - what goes around comes around!), and Intel are coming into play on the sidelines because of it. This migration back to one chip could well sink NVidia in the long term at consumer level at least, if not all levels, as it has no inherent cpu base.
My money is on the main long term term market being an ATI/AMD v Intel fight in 5 years going forward, with the two of them fighting over going back to one chip - a combined cpu/gpu. NVidia will still be there .... maybe .... but it would be the last throw at consumer level before they abandone consumer cards and go back to CUDA compute level only.
I am not sure that on chip graphics are going to be a real big thing ... of course I have been wrong before... I suspect that there might be some on chip solutions but that the eternal market is not going to go away because the on-chip is likely to be a low end "common" solution that is just not going to satisfy the high end gamers ...
Especially because to upgrade the system the investment is now for a much larger and more expensive chip instead of a less costly drop in card for the same performance increase ... of course, for those of us that are interested in GPUs ... this would not be all bad... on chip GPU along with add on cards ... more performance ... :)
/ Reply
Quote
Still no news of the cards GTX470 and GTX480 will work soon.
I get no replies on any messages, why?
The new application MW3 works OK for these cards.
Possible to choose in preferences? All other jobs will cancel!
Any reaction, please??
Thx,
Ton (ftpd) - Netherlands
/ Reply
Quote
Still no news of the cards GTX470 and GTX480 will work soon.
I get no replies on any messages, why?
Um, because they are hard at work? :)
Seriously, the card just came out ... and all the projects are struggling with the changes needed. GPU Grid is likewise working on making their application work with the card. The sad truth is that living on the "bleeding edge" means suffering ... and in this case that suffering is that the applications are lagging ...
Since most users do not have this card, the updates to make it work are, as they should be, a lower priority than getting other things done ... like on MW getting the new application fielded ... which for you has the side benefit of allowing your card to work ...
Patience is required ...
/ Reply
Quote
I accept "bleeding", and thx for the quick answer, as it should!!
I also did some solutions!?
Ton (ftpd)
/ Reply
Quote
I accept "bleeding", and thx for the quick answer, as it should!!
I also did some solutions!?
Ton (ftpd)
The good news is that GPU Grid may be getting a handle on the new card though I do not know when they will be issuing work for the new application. There is a new post by GDF there that discusses the matter ...
/ Reply
Quote
I have donated the two fermi-cards!
Ton
/ Reply
Quote
Paul - saw your post - FYI I have 2 machines with 2 5870 cards - I am getting about 450-460k daily in MW and about 350-370k in Collatz (when MW is down).
/ Reply
Quote
Paul - saw your post - FYI I have 2 machines with 2 5870 cards - I am getting about 450-460k daily in MW and about 350-370k in Collatz (when MW is down).
Ah thanks ... :)
The only "solid" number I have is for the Dual 4870 system (~139K) and for the 5870 & GTX260 system (~290K) ... so that is good news ... I hope when I replace the GTX260 I will see about 150-200K boost in my totals...
Schedule says the card is here Friday ... so should be in and working something Friday and better data should come next week ...
I have noticed that the RAC in BOINC Stats is pointing up like a rocket from the last exchange of a 5870 for a GTX260 and I went from what looks like a 450K average to 600-650K a day average ... hard to know when the data bounces around so much ... I saved a copy of teh 60 day history in BOINC Stats and plan to save several more over the next couple of weeks to see when I go ...
I don't think I will get close to 1M a day until I get two more 5870s going ... and that is going to take all summer ...
But thanks for the data ... :)
{Edit-add}
Just looked at the number for the two systems and they are more "reasonable" as in more of what I would expect. The early numbers were showing that the system with the GTX280 was far and away out performing the one with the GTX260 (both have a HD5870) but now with one week's data the weekly number for the 280 equipped system is actually showing a 222K daily production which is close to the 200K+ showing on the 260 equipped system ...
Youi can see here the two systems, both are running WIn7-64, the 920 is 5870 & 260 and the 940 is the 5870 and 280 ...
The other i7 920 has the dual 4870 cards ...
/ Reply
Quote
I am getting about the same as Farscape, albeit on a 5970 - its real world comparible to 2 x 5870, just on one card as its the same 2 GPUs.
Regards
Zy
/ Reply
Quote
Paul - I think you will really enjoy the ATI cards - they operate smoothly and crank! The only time I sing the blues is when MW goes down and Collatz gets overloaded.....I have a few nice CPUs but not enough....
/ Reply
Quote
Paul - I think you will really enjoy the ATI cards - they operate smoothly and crank! The only time I sing the blues is when MW goes down and Collatz gets overloaded.....I have a few nice CPUs but not enough....
Oh, my yes, I do love them ... as I just noted elsewhere I am 5 and 2 Friday when the next 5870 shows up on my doorstep ...
With the latest card I will hope to be doing about 700K consistently and with luck maybe a little more ... I want to be careful not to poke the beast too much lest he retaliate and murphy strike ...
/ Reply
Quote
Paul - I think you will really enjoy the ATI cards - they operate smoothly and crank! The only time I sing the blues is when MW goes down and Collatz gets overloaded.....I have a few nice CPUs but not enough....
I am a recent convert (a month) after 15 yrs with NVidia having seen results like you and others get, never thought I would ever go ATI, but there ya go, times are a changing :)
Have a peak at DNETC, you can run it with the same setting as MW and "pay's" well, so would be a good b/up if you get caught in the future the way you describe re MW & Collatz
Regards
Zy
/ Reply
Quote
Paul - I think you will really enjoy the ATI cards - they operate smoothly and crank! The only time I sing the blues is when MW goes down and Collatz gets overloaded.....I have a few nice CPUs but not enough....
I am a recent convert (a month) after 15 yrs with NVidia having seen results like you and others get, never thought I would ever go ATI, but there ya go, times are a changing :)
Have a peak at DNETC, you can run it with the same setting as MW and "pay's" well, so would be a good b/up if you get caught in the future the way you describe re MW & Collatz
Regards
Zy
Zy,
I am 931,844 at DNETC ... I had a run of failures but now seem to be running them successfully (again, for now) ... so, yes I am aware ... :)
The one thing that bothers me is that they are like Aqua, they want to use all the resources and BOINC does not do the hand over well from running 8 applications to running one on all 8 cores ... it has a bad habit of running on idle for fairly long stretches ... the same with DNETC wanting to run on all the GPUs at the same time...
Personally, I prefer to run more diverse workloads because on HT that improves throughput ... running the same code on all 8 virtual processors means that you get less from HT than if your workload is more diverse ... that is one of the reasons I don't run Aqua that much and when I have run DNETC, it is on systems where I have mixed cards so I don't have it monopolize my GPUs ...
Besides, they have a nasty bug where the cards / tasks get snarfled...
/ Reply
Quote
.... I am 931,844 at DNETC ... I had a run of failures but now seem to be running them successfully (again, for now) ... so, yes I am aware ... :)
..........
Besides, they have a nasty bug where the cards / tasks get snarfled...
I know you are aware of it, the suggestion was for Farscape.
You are on my "guru to ask list", no way do I try the reverse rofl, you're way above my league :)
I hate that bug ..... but at least the error trap catches it now and mitigates the old problem of being blocked out for hours.
Regards
Zy
/ Reply
Quote
What has all this to do with gtx470 or gtx480?
Make another thread?
Ton (ftpd)
/ Reply
Quote
What has all this to do with gtx470 or gtx480?
Make another thread?
Ton (ftpd)
/ Reply
Quote
Fair cop guv .....
You're right .... *holds up hand*
Regards
Zy
/ Reply
Quote
Any news yet?
When comes the new application MW3 into production?
My fermi-cards and i are still waiting???
Ton (ftpd) Netherlands
/ Reply
Quote
Any news yet?
When comes the new application MW3 into production?
My fermi-cards and i are still waiting???
Ton (ftpd) Netherlands
do not prepare yourself to whatever rac... gtx 480/470 are really crippled in dual precision performances, way under ati cypress series... I'm sorry about that, but I think that the performances/watt here on milkyway will be really disappointing.
/ Reply
Quote
Any news about milkyway3 available?
The gtx470/480-cards (and I) are still waiting for a normal reply??
Ton (ftpd) Netherlands
____________
Ton (ftpd) Netherlands
/ Reply
Quote
GTX480 - WU Milkyway 3 = OK - 5 min. 8 secs.
Is it possible just to download the new version 3 WU's, because all other WU
will cancel?
If possible also more WU and not just 12!!!
Ton (ftpd)
Bump I have gtx 470 w/driver 19775 My card keeps grabbing work with v0.24 (cuda23) is there a work around to get v.03? V .03 was installed on 22 April Apps page
/ Reply
Quote
Could do with a confirmation on what is happening with this?
I have read that the version 3 of the GPU app is working well, but where to get it and how to install it? I presume it is an app_info edit, but can someone post the steps needed?
Thx
/ Reply
Quote
We can show you where to get it, only problem is there is no work for MW3 currently.
I think this is all that will be required app and dll wise.
http://www.arkayn.us/milkyway/milkyway3_0.05_windows_intelx86__cuda23.zip
app_info will have to be gotten from someone else as I do not know the exact syntax needed.
____________
/ Reply
Quote
We can show you where to get it, only problem is there is no work for MW3 currently.
I think this is all that will be required app and dll wise.
http://www.arkayn.us/milkyway/milkyway3_0.05_windows_intelx86__cuda23.zip
app_info will have to be gotten from someone else as I do not know the exact syntax needed.
Well Im 50% nearer than I was so your help is appreciated...
/ Reply
Quote
That app didn't work - it was the cuda 2.3.
On the apps page there aer two versions of the 0.3 app, one for cuda 2.3 and one for cuda 3, both released on the 22nd April. THe v3 app is not listed on the optimised apps page, so does anyone know where I can get it???
/ Reply
Quote
There are 3 MilkyWay@Home Version 3 shown with an installation date of 22 April, one CPU and 2 GPU (cuda23). One for Windows Version 0.03, one for Windows Version 0.03 (cuda23) and one for Linux Version 0.03 (cuda23). I do not see any CUDA applications other than cuda23 on that applications page.
/ Reply
Quote
Plus I did not do the 0.3 app, I did the 0.5 app that is not listed on that page.
This is where I have been looking.
http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/download/?C=M;O=A
____________
/ Reply
Quote
Thanks for that link...
I think I was getting confused - sorry! I will try and find the links again, but I can remember reading when googling forum posts of people crunching MW on GTX470/480's..
What does the version 0.5 app bring - is it fermi compatible? Or am I better leaving well alone..
Thx again
/ Reply
Quote
I think you will have to just wait until they actually roll out MW3, right now all they are releasing are MW units which are not Fermi compatible.
____________
/ Reply
Quote
Are there plans for a fermi app?
I tried searching the news section but couldn't find anything..
/ Reply
Quote
Im not sure if GPUGRID supports Fermi, but I know Folding@home does(beta atleast)although its not a BOINC based project http://folding.typepad.com/news/2010/05/open-beta-release-of-the-gpu3-clientcore.html
/ Reply
Quote
Im not sure if GPUGRID supports Fermi, but I know Folding@home does(beta atleast)although its not a BOINC based project http://folding.typepad.com/news/2010/05/open-beta-release-of-the-gpu3-clientcore.html
Folding a Boinc project? Yeah, Stanford got up to a certain point and then shelved all development on their Boinc app, No reason was stated, Of course It couldn't be cause of an old Berkeley vs Stanford rivalry, It must have been for some other reason, like maybe money and/or talent availability... But then again Stanford(F@H) never did say why Folding@Home didn't become another Boinc project. Too bad really.
____________
12/21/2012? Bah Humbug!
/ Reply
Quote
I already crunch Rosetta and would like to stay within the BOINC umbrella if I can..
AFAIK - seti is the only one supporting fermi at the moment in the astromony field, and Id like to stay with 'space sciences' if possible as that is my main interest. I was just wondering where I can find info on the development status for MW3 and fermi as there is not much out there
/ Reply
Quote
GPUGRID have a Fermi app - its pretty stable now after a lot of hassles with it.
/ Reply
Quote
You are right that its within NVidia's capability to pull a rabbit out the hat and jump back in - they are a good Company at heart - but the sheer realities of chip development mean thats not going to happen for 4 or 5 years. They dropped the ball big time, and first have to salvage what they can from "Fermi" before committing to "son of Fermi", sheer cost pressures dictate that, let alone fabrication which they still dont have a grip on.
ATI let NVidia into the market 15/20yrs ago because ATI got complaicent, NVidia have just returned the honours ..... (!)
I hope NVidia do pull out a rabbit in 4/5 years time, else the dynamics of competition die out, and we all lose big time with inflated price performance, and increased development cycles with no viable competition.
i'm not so sure if you are familiar with VLSI design but nvidia could be back on top at 28nm and if things go well with their silicon spin they could have a nice 40nm gpu too.
there is nothing wrong with the fermi architecture and there is nothing wrong with r600 architecture. the physical implementation of these chips is terrible because the time for that stage was spent designing logic. the real killer of a chip is time, not making a bad architectural choice.
The big unknown is the move to combine cpu & gpu onto one chip (again - what goes around comes around!), and Intel are coming into play on the sidelines because of it. This migration back to one chip could well sink NVidia in the long term at consumer level at least, if not all levels, as it has no inherent cpu base.
My money is on the main long term term market being an ATI/AMD v Intel fight in 5 years going forward, with the two of them fighting over going back to one chip - a combined cpu/gpu. NVidia will still be there .... maybe .... but it would be the last throw at consumer level before they abandone consumer cards and go back to CUDA compute level only.
Regards
Zy
the relentless goal of computers over the past decades has been to make them smaller and faster. nvidia can become a major player in the mobile market with ARM. also i dont see a reason they could not go x86 as cyrix didnt have a license.
/ Reply
Quote
So I just bought a Nvidia 470 GPU from Doc that uses "1.21 Gigawatts of power" but it can only be used in the future. Ha ha, great Scott!
So all, since SETI is down for several days a week, I need a NEW cause to crunch. I'll start a new thread. Please response to what you know the 470/480s can do.
Get crunchin'
Dave
/ Reply
Quote
Dave,
Welcome to the crunch-club.
You can crunch dnetc or collatz or gpugrid or seti.
They all work OK with fermi-cards.
Good luck,
Ton(ftpd) Netherlands
PS You use Windows/7 which is performing badly with fermi-cards. Please use XP or linux.
____________
Ton (ftpd) Netherlands
/ Reply
Quote