Welcome to MilkyWay@home

GPU Requirements [OLD]


Advanced search

Message boards : Number crunching : GPU Requirements [OLD]
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 . . . 18 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profilecenit

Send message
Joined: 16 Mar 09
Posts: 58
Credit: 1,129,612
RAC: 0
1 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 38412 - Posted: 8 Apr 2010, 19:14:33 UTC - in response to Message 35846.  
Last modified: 8 Apr 2010, 19:15:27 UTC

I was suggesting you to add the new entry ATi FirePro V8800 when I found that V8750 and V8700 were never added to the list even if they were listed in the pdf I linked...

oh, and ATi Radeon HD 5830 is working on MW@Home
ID: 38412 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
ProfileRotundmeatball

Send message
Joined: 20 Apr 10
Posts: 1
Credit: 40,788
RAC: 0
10 thousand credit badge9 year member badge
Message 38925 - Posted: 20 Apr 2010, 21:06:52 UTC

Wow, you guys with ATI cards are posting fierce times. A WU for my GTX 285s take over ten minutes! I'm just using BOINC with no special configurations. Is there something I could be doing to speed this up (besides OC'ing, that is)?

NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce GTX 285 (driver version 19713, CUDA version 3000, compute capability 1.3, 1006MB, 702 GFLOPS peak)
NVIDIA GPU 1: GeForce GTX 285 (driver version 19713, CUDA version 3000, compute capability 1.3, 1006MB, 702 GFLOPS peak)
ID: 38925 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profilebanditwolf
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 12 Nov 07
Posts: 2425
Credit: 524,164
RAC: 0
500 thousand credit badge10 year member badge
Message 38935 - Posted: 20 Apr 2010, 22:05:30 UTC - in response to Message 38925.  

Wow, you guys with ATI cards are posting fierce times. A WU for my GTX 285s take over ten minutes! I'm just using BOINC with no special configurations. Is there something I could be doing to speed this up (besides OC'ing, that is)?

NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce GTX 285 (driver version 19713, CUDA version 3000, compute capability 1.3, 1006MB, 702 GFLOPS peak)
NVIDIA GPU 1: GeForce GTX 285 (driver version 19713, CUDA version 3000, compute capability 1.3, 1006MB, 702 GFLOPS peak)

Actually for Mw you can downclock. Oc doesn't speed up the wus.
Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected the expected?
If it makes sense, DON'T do it.
ID: 38935 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
John Clark

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 08
Posts: 1734
Credit: 64,228,409
RAC: 0
50 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 38939 - Posted: 20 Apr 2010, 23:40:10 UTC - in response to Message 38925.  

Wow, you guys with ATI cards are posting fierce times. A WU for my GTX 285s take over ten minutes!


Is this the sort of times you are talking about?

Go away, I was asleep


ID: 38939 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Emanuel

Send message
Joined: 18 Nov 07
Posts: 280
Credit: 2,442,757
RAC: 0
2 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 38944 - Posted: 21 Apr 2010, 1:36:43 UTC - in response to Message 38935.  

Actually for Mw you can downclock. Oc doesn't speed up the wus.

You can downclock the memory, anyway. I do believe MW benefits from OCing the core and shading units.
ID: 38944 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Zydor
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Feb 09
Posts: 620
Credit: 100,587,625
RAC: 0
100 million credit badge10 year member badgeextraordinary contributions badge
Message 38945 - Posted: 21 Apr 2010, 2:23:40 UTC
Last modified: 21 Apr 2010, 2:24:13 UTC

Take the GPU memory down as far as it will go - even 150 would not be too low - keeping it high just creates a better space heater and wastes power.

GPU clocks can go as high as an indiviodual's setup/personal preferences allow, higher GPU clocks will speed up the WUs.

Regards
Zy
ID: 38945 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Mauro

Send message
Joined: 25 Apr 10
Posts: 1
Credit: 86,359
RAC: 0
10 thousand credit badge9 year member badge
Message 39168 - Posted: 27 Apr 2010, 2:35:08 UTC - in response to Message 38945.  

ATI Radeon HD 5970 need 1minute 43second to complet 2WU (no overclocked)
ID: 39168 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Yakk

Send message
Joined: 22 Feb 10
Posts: 6
Credit: 5,488,476
RAC: 0
5 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 39174 - Posted: 27 Apr 2010, 5:05:24 UTC

ID: 39174 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Zydor
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Feb 09
Posts: 620
Credit: 100,587,625
RAC: 0
100 million credit badge10 year member badgeextraordinary contributions badge
Message 39177 - Posted: 27 Apr 2010, 9:09:16 UTC - in response to Message 39174.  
Last modified: 27 Apr 2010, 9:21:49 UTC

Try the 5870 @ 930/300 - it will run fine, and cooler with less power, memory speed is irrelevant here, higher mem speed just creates a better space heater, save settings as a profile in CCC for switching between apps if needed.

If you are looking for a CPU app, the FP's over at Aqua are good when they have a run going. The next run is due in a couple of days, work keeping an eye on:

News on next Aqua FP Run for CPUs

Regards
Zy
ID: 39177 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
JLConawayII

Send message
Joined: 27 Apr 10
Posts: 35
Credit: 90,828,595
RAC: 0
50 million credit badge9 year member badge
Message 39771 - Posted: 17 May 2010, 2:48:11 UTC

To all you people with ATI cards: I really hate you right now. I just built a new el cheapo boinc cruncher with an Nvidia GTX260 because there is CUDA support for the majority of the astrophysics and other boinc projects I like to participate in. But the times you guys are posting for your ATI cards are just ridiculous. I'm assuming the WU's themselves are the same quantity of data as the ones for CUDA? Or are there differences in size that would make them process so much faster?
ID: 39771 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profilekashi

Send message
Joined: 30 Dec 07
Posts: 311
Credit: 149,490,184
RAC: 0
100 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 39772 - Posted: 17 May 2010, 3:09:00 UTC - in response to Message 39771.  
Last modified: 17 May 2010, 3:18:40 UTC

Tasks are the same for all platforms both here and at Collatz Conjecture.

DNETC@HOME has shorter tasks for NVIDIA cards, I thought this was by design but it may be a bug. The work processed is the same, it just processes less packets per task on NVIDIA. There are also longer DNETC tasks designed to be processed only on ATI Cypress class cards, although I think they may also get sent to NVIDIA cards but the CUDA application only processes a small amount of the total task.
ID: 39772 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
ProfilePaul D. Buck

Send message
Joined: 12 Apr 08
Posts: 621
Credit: 161,934,067
RAC: 0
100 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 39778 - Posted: 17 May 2010, 16:23:14 UTC - in response to Message 39771.  

To all you people with ATI cards: I really hate you right now. I just built a new el cheapo boinc cruncher with an Nvidia GTX260 because there is CUDA support for the majority of the astrophysics and other boinc projects I like to participate in. But the times you guys are posting for your ATI cards are just ridiculous. I'm assuming the WU's themselves are the same quantity of data as the ones for CUDA? Or are there differences in size that would make them process so much faster?

The main reason for the speed difference in MW task processing is that the 48xx and 58xx series cards are dual precision across all elements. Nvidia made a design choice that limits the number of double precision processing elements in the card... so, fewer elements, slower calculations... in effect only 1/3 or less of the card is actually working here ...

On Collatz and DNETC the playing field is a bit more level, there it is just better designs when you see speed differences in processing rates. To make you hate us more, the cards typically draw less power as well ...

On the positive side you have recognized that there are more CUDA implementations out there than ATI Stream though that is slowly changing ... and if/when OpenCL gets reasonably stable we may start to see some leveling there as well ...

In my case, the economics say migrate to ATI now as Nvidia lost this round to ATI and wait for the ATI applications to come ... we are up to 3 projects now with SaH optimizers working on a beta version of an ATI application as we speak ...
ID: 39778 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
ProfileWerkstatt

Send message
Joined: 19 Feb 08
Posts: 350
Credit: 134,485,269
RAC: 17,244
100 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 39882 - Posted: 21 May 2010, 22:00:28 UTC - in response to Message 39771.  

To all you people with ATI cards: I really hate you right now. I just built a new el cheapo boinc cruncher with an Nvidia GTX260 because there is CUDA support for the majority of the astrophysics and other boinc projects I like to participate in. But the times you guys are posting for your ATI cards are just ridiculous. I'm assuming the WU's themselves are the same quantity of data as the ones for CUDA? Or are there differences in size that would make them process so much faster?


Just one more point regarding 'el cheapo'. There are two types of GTX260 cards, one with 196 shaders and the GTX260b which has 216 shaders. The main difference is not the speed, but with the older non 'b'-card all GPUGRID WU's will fail, ~50% of the SETI WU's fail, LATTICE dont like you. I sold my one and added a second ATI-card, which works, draws less power and is much cheaper in relation to granted credit.
I posted this not to make you hate me more but to prevent other people to make the same mistake.
Alexander
ID: 39882 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
ProfileBeyond

Send message
Joined: 15 Jul 08
Posts: 383
Credit: 501,817,790
RAC: 0
500 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 40054 - Posted: 30 May 2010, 2:12:01 UTC - in response to Message 39778.  

To all you people with ATI cards: I really hate you right now.
To make you hate us more, the cards typically draw less power as well ...

Not to mention less expensive and more reliable. Don't hate us, join us :-)
(I'm currently running 8 ATI & 7 NVidia GPUs. Never have a problem with the ATIs, lots of problems with the NVidias.)

ID: 40054 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
ProfileWerkstatt

Send message
Joined: 19 Feb 08
Posts: 350
Credit: 134,485,269
RAC: 17,244
100 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 40064 - Posted: 30 May 2010, 11:55:10 UTC

For all the guys who have too much money left:

SAPPHIRE Toxic Radeon HD 5970, Full Retail, 4096MB
ATI Radeon HD 5970, 4096 MB GDDR5, aktive Kühlung
PCI-E 2.1 16x, 2xDVI (Dual Link), Mini DisplayPort
Dual GPU,GPU Takt: 900MHz; Speichertakt: 4800MHz,
2 x 256bit, Stream-Prozessoren: 2 x 1600
DirectX 11, Eyefinity, CrossfireX ready
€ 1.111,00
ID: 40064 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
ProfileMark Brown

Send message
Joined: 25 Mar 10
Posts: 2
Credit: 125,651,803
RAC: 0
100 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 40119 - Posted: 1 Jun 2010, 20:22:46 UTC
Last modified: 1 Jun 2010, 20:25:23 UTC

I am running an ATI HD Radeon 4870 X 2
Why can I only get 6 WU's in my que at a time?

When I do network maintenance I run out of work real quick. What a shame.
ID: 40119 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
ProfileThe Gas Giant
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Dec 07
Posts: 1947
Credit: 240,884,648
RAC: 0
200 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 40121 - Posted: 1 Jun 2010, 21:02:06 UTC

MW operates with a rule that only gives 6 wu's per CPU core. As much as we have asked for more, Travis indicates that more would cause database problems as the size would grow accordingly and the server just couldn't cope.
ID: 40121 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Astromancer.
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Nov 09
Posts: 49
Credit: 20,618,688
RAC: 0
20 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 40127 - Posted: 2 Jun 2010, 0:49:48 UTC - in response to Message 40119.  
Last modified: 2 Jun 2010, 0:54:01 UTC

I am running an ATI HD Radeon 4870 X 2
Why can I only get 6 WU's in my que at a time?

When I do network maintenance I run out of work real quick. What a shame.


Like TGG said, 6 WU's per CPU core. So if you want a bigger cache I guess you need an i7 for the HT. Think I need to change my cache settings so the SETI work cache is about the same size as the MW one...


And to add to the GPU list, the 5830 is missing. Unless what I've read is wrong on it doesn't support double precision FP calculations?
ID: 40127 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Profilearkayn
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Feb 09
Posts: 999
Credit: 74,932,619
RAC: 0
50 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 40129 - Posted: 2 Jun 2010, 1:54:49 UTC - in response to Message 40127.  



And to add to the GPU list, the 5830 is missing. Unless what I've read is wrong on it doesn't support double precision FP calculations?


It does support double precision, the list has just not been updated in a long time.
ID: 40129 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Astromancer.
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Nov 09
Posts: 49
Credit: 20,618,688
RAC: 0
20 million credit badge10 year member badge
Message 40130 - Posted: 2 Jun 2010, 1:57:36 UTC - in response to Message 40129.  



And to add to the GPU list, the 5830 is missing. Unless what I've read is wrong on it doesn't support double precision FP calculations?


It does support double precision, the list has just not been updated in a long time.


Good to know for sure. Thinking of getting one though more for gaming than crunching. If I were buying for crunching I think I'd go NV again since CUDA is more widely used. But I've always liked the ATI drivers better :)
ID: 40130 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 . . . 18 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : GPU Requirements [OLD]

©2020 Astroinformatics Group