Message boards :
Number crunching :
GPU Performance?
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Wiyosaya Send message Joined: 4 Jan 11 Posts: 3 Credit: 12,303,483 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
I am going to do a new PC build in a couple of months, and I may be able to upgrade the GPU on one other machine. Currently, I run nVidia GPUs, however, I note that some AMD GPUs far exceed the processing speed of my 1GB GTX 460 on MW@H (some by a factor of 10 in terms of total compute time). If I do upgrade the GPU in the other machine, what I would be looking to do is buy an inexpensive AMD GPU (maybe 77X0 or 78X0) and then dedicate that to MW@H. To that end, I am wondering whether anyone has compiled a list of GPUs vs their performance on MW@H. I would prefer to get an AMD GPU that has at least 3x the performance of my GTX 460, and having such a list would be helpful. Thanks. PS - I searched for GPU performance, but I did not find anything. My apologies if this is duplicates another thread. ![]() |
swiftmallard![]() Send message Joined: 18 Jul 09 Posts: 299 Credit: 303,483,622 RAC: 23 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
You can start by taking a look here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_AMD_graphics_processing_units Make certain to get a card capable of double precision processing. Take a look at the top credit crunchers in the stats and you can see what they are running. |
ExtraTerrestrial Apes![]() Send message Joined: 1 Sep 08 Posts: 204 Credit: 219,354,537 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
I don't have a good list at hand, but performance at MW is directly proportional to the theoretical maximum double precision performance. Which is 1/16th the single precisions performance (usually only this number is quoted in reviews) for HD77x0 and HD78x0, so these are actually rather bad at MW. For your GTX460 it's 1/12th - better, but still inefficient. GTX680 even goes as far 1/24 *ouch* For HD79x0 and HD69x0 it's 1/4th, that's where their strength at MW comes from. Any AMD capable of double precision older than these has a ration of 1/5, which is still very good. In essence: you can calculate the performance of pretty much any AMD by the following: clock speed * number of shaders * double precision fraction There's a slight exception to this rule: currently the HD7xx0 have to run less efficient code, so there's still some untapped potential left in them. MrS Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002 |
Wiyosaya Send message Joined: 4 Jan 11 Posts: 3 Credit: 12,303,483 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
Thanks for the replies. They are a good starting point. ![]() |
©2023 Astroinformatics Group