Welcome to MilkyWay@home

ATI 4750/4770/4890 support

Message boards : Number crunching : ATI 4750/4770/4890 support
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

1 · 2 · 3 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile shaf*

Send message
Joined: 9 Mar 09
Posts: 37
Credit: 37,538,556
RAC: 0
Message 17301 - Posted: 1 Apr 2009, 23:00:35 UTC

Do we envisage milkyway@home being able to run on these cards as I'm intending to sell up and jump to 47xx.
ID: 17301 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile borandi
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 09
Posts: 180
Credit: 27,806,824
RAC: 0
Message 17317 - Posted: 2 Apr 2009, 6:45:28 UTC
Last modified: 2 Apr 2009, 7:40:48 UTC

Edited. Was speaking a load of crap :)

(And I've got a couple of 4670s lying around which I can't use. Trying to sell them to get a 4850 =P)
ID: 17317 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile borandi
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 09
Posts: 180
Credit: 27,806,824
RAC: 0
Message 17318 - Posted: 2 Apr 2009, 7:18:20 UTC

On a side note, the 4890s just got released on Overclockers.co.uk today :) 210GBP is the cheapest, though.
ID: 17318 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
jedirock
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 8 Nov 08
Posts: 178
Credit: 6,140,854
RAC: 0
Message 17319 - Posted: 2 Apr 2009, 7:26:43 UTC - in response to Message 17317.  

Only x8xx cards are being supported, as they support double precision. This project relies on double precision accuracy, that x7xx cards do not provide. I made a thread about the issues of single vs. double precision here : http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/forum_thread.php?id=764

I don't know how that stands against the HD4770 though. Reputed performance puts it above the HD4830 and almost to the HD4850. It comes with GDDR5 memory as well. If those stats are indicative of anything, it may well be capable of double-precision.
ID: 17319 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile borandi
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 09
Posts: 180
Credit: 27,806,824
RAC: 0
Message 17320 - Posted: 2 Apr 2009, 7:38:18 UTC - in response to Message 17319.  

Good point. The 4770 uses the RV740 chip, which is essentially the 40nm version of the RV770LE, which is used in 4830s. The 4770 core speed is 800Mhz, between the 4850 and 4870, however only has 640 cores compared to the 800 of the 48xx series.

I couldn't find anything conclusive on whether the 47xx series was double capable or not (my initial assumption was on the fact that 46/47 series is designated 'high consumer end' and 48/49 is 'high performance end'). I did however find a post by Gipsel on the AMD forums asking this question back on 10th Feb.
ID: 17320 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Cluster Physik

Send message
Joined: 26 Jul 08
Posts: 627
Credit: 94,940,203
RAC: 0
Message 17322 - Posted: 2 Apr 2009, 9:23:26 UTC - in response to Message 17320.  

I couldn't find anything conclusive on whether the 47xx series was double capable or not (my initial assumption was on the fact that 46/47 series is designated 'high consumer end' and 48/49 is 'high performance end'). I did however find a post by Gipsel on the AMD forums asking this question back on 10th Feb.

Yes, I asked this. But as they don't comment on future products, I don't know either.
But the 4890 is compatible for sure. The relative crunching speed should be the same as I speculated a month ago.

When neglecting the 1-2 seconds CPU calculation for every WU (which is justified if you have two or more concurrent WUs running), one can break it down to the following performance relations (taking the HD3850 as base):
3850 : 3870 : 4830 : 4850 : 4870 : 4890 : 4890 OC (900MHz) : 4890 OC (1GHz, appears to be realistic with a good card)
1 : 1.16 : 1.72 : 2.33 : 2.80 : 3.17 : 3.36 : 3.73
Of course the ratios only applies for stock clocks (670MHz for 3850, 775MHz for 3870, 575MHz for 4830, 625MHz for 4850, 750MHz for 4870 and 850MHz for 4890 with the memory speed only a very minor factor). The performance scales linearly with GPU clock speed.
ID: 17322 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile GalaxyIce
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 6 Apr 08
Posts: 2018
Credit: 100,142,856
RAC: 0
Message 17881 - Posted: 8 Apr 2009, 4:11:15 UTC - in response to Message 17322.  


But the 4890 is compatible for sure. The relative crunching speed should be the same as I speculated a month ago.

Has the HD4890 been tested as working? Has anyone got it working yet? Does it perform better than the HD4870 for MW crunching?

Has anyone found any MW WUs to test it on?


ID: 17881 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
John Clark

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 08
Posts: 1734
Credit: 64,228,409
RAC: 0
Message 17882 - Posted: 8 Apr 2009, 4:35:28 UTC - in response to Message 17881.  


But the 4890 is compatible for sure. The relative crunching speed should be the same as I speculated a month ago.

Has the HD4890 been tested as working? Has anyone got it working yet? Does it perform better than the HD4870 for MW crunching?

Has anyone found any MW WUs to test it on?



I am sure you have seen the discussion started by PoorBoy in this other thread, your one, Ice. He seems to be the first to try one of the new HD4890's, and is running in to a bit of difficulty getting the card to run MW.
Go away, I was asleep


ID: 17882 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile GalaxyIce
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 6 Apr 08
Posts: 2018
Credit: 100,142,856
RAC: 0
Message 17885 - Posted: 8 Apr 2009, 7:41:30 UTC - in response to Message 17882.  
Last modified: 8 Apr 2009, 7:58:11 UTC


But the 4890 is compatible for sure. The relative crunching speed should be the same as I speculated a month ago.

Has the HD4890 been tested as working? Has anyone got it working yet? Does it perform better than the HD4870 for MW crunching?

Has anyone found any MW WUs to test it on?



I am sure you have seen the discussion started by PoorBoy in this other thread, your one, Ice. He seems to be the first to try one of the new HD4890's, and is running in to a bit of difficulty getting the card to run MW.

Yes John Clark, I have seen the discussion in my own thread. Your stating the obvious remains unabated. In my post that you quote above Cluster Physik says 'in this thread' that that "the 4890 is compatible for sure", and my web site zslip.com reflected this until this morning, when I changed it to say it does not work with the HD4890. Poorboy has indicated that he can't get his to work, but I ask in this thread with "HD4890" in the title whether anyone has got this new card to work with the ATI optimized apps, so that I can keep my website zslip.com up to date.

So I ask again, not what poorboy is doing or whether I read my own threads, but "has anyone got the HD4890 working with the optimized apps?"

ID: 17885 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Jord
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 Aug 07
Posts: 125
Credit: 207,206
RAC: 0
Message 17888 - Posted: 8 Apr 2009, 8:40:55 UTC - in response to Message 17885.  

So I ask again, not what poorboy is doing or whether I read my own threads, but "has anyone got the HD4890 working with the optimized apps?"

I would wait until the correct drivers are released. The problem at the moment seems to be that the available drivers (Cats 9.3) don't support the 4890. The 9.4s (to be released today?) should.
Jord.

The BOINC FAQ Service.
ID: 17888 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
STE\/E

Send message
Joined: 29 Aug 07
Posts: 486
Credit: 576,548,171
RAC: 174
Message 17891 - Posted: 8 Apr 2009, 9:17:25 UTC
Last modified: 8 Apr 2009, 9:21:13 UTC

Sorry guy's, I didn't notice this Thread or I would have Posted my Problem's with the 4890 here instead of where I did. The 9.4 Drivers aren't out yet as I just checked again. I left the 4890 Card in the Computer even though it wasn't doing anything but so I could try the new drivers as soon as I notice that they are out. If the new Drivers don't work I'll pull it then and put the 4870 back in.
ID: 17891 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
John Clark

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 08
Posts: 1734
Credit: 64,228,409
RAC: 0
Message 17897 - Posted: 8 Apr 2009, 10:23:05 UTC - in response to Message 17891.  

Sorry guy's, I didn't notice this Thread or I would have Posted my Problem's with the 4890 here instead of where I did. The 9.4 Drivers aren't out yet as I just checked again. I left the 4890 Card in the Computer even though it wasn't doing anything but so I could try the new drivers as soon as I notice that they are out. If the new Drivers don't work I'll pull it then and put the 4870 back in.



Never mind, the thread you chose seemed, on the face of it, appropriate at the time, so I wouldn't feel out of sorts. Just be aware that Ice takes a poor view of anyone posting the obvious, to him, even when it is posted on the assumption it may have been missed and is directly connected to the question he asked earlier.
Go away, I was asleep


ID: 17897 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile GalaxyIce
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 6 Apr 08
Posts: 2018
Credit: 100,142,856
RAC: 0
Message 17899 - Posted: 8 Apr 2009, 10:25:59 UTC - in response to Message 17897.  

Sorry guy's, I didn't notice this Thread or I would have Posted my Problem's with the 4890 here instead of where I did. The 9.4 Drivers aren't out yet as I just checked again. I left the 4890 Card in the Computer even though it wasn't doing anything but so I could try the new drivers as soon as I notice that they are out. If the new Drivers don't work I'll pull it then and put the 4870 back in.



Never mind, the thread you chose seemed, on the face of it, appropriate at the time, so I wouldn't feel out of sorts. Just be aware that Ice takes a poor view of anyone posting the obvious, to him, even when it is posted on the assumption it may have been missed and is directly connected to the question he asked earlier.

No John Clark, I just take a dim view of you posting your usual drivel which has nothing to do with anything that helps.


ID: 17899 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile verstapp
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 26 Jan 09
Posts: 589
Credit: 497,834,261
RAC: 0
Message 17908 - Posted: 8 Apr 2009, 12:15:43 UTC

To play it safe, either splurge and go for a 48xx, or go [relatively] cheap and get a 38xx, if you can find one.
Cheers,

PeterV

.
ID: 17908 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
John Clark

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 08
Posts: 1734
Credit: 64,228,409
RAC: 0
Message 17916 - Posted: 8 Apr 2009, 12:40:53 UTC
Last modified: 8 Apr 2009, 12:41:49 UTC

With the announcement on the home page of CUDA based clients for the nVidia cards. Is there a consensus on what nVidia cards would run the client, and the best bang for buck (like the HD4850 for ATI and MW).

One advantage the nVidia equivalents for MW would have over the ATI HDxxx Radeons will be the ability to run more projects than just MW.
Go away, I was asleep


ID: 17916 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Cluster Physik

Send message
Joined: 26 Jul 08
Posts: 627
Credit: 94,940,203
RAC: 0
Message 17919 - Posted: 8 Apr 2009, 13:25:00 UTC - in response to Message 17916.  
Last modified: 8 Apr 2009, 13:28:17 UTC

Is there a consensus on what nVidia cards would run the client, and the best bang for buck (like the HD4850 for ATI and MW).

I would think the GTX260 has the best performance per $ or € with the new GTX275 coming in at a close second place.
ID: 17919 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
John Clark

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 08
Posts: 1734
Credit: 64,228,409
RAC: 0
Message 17924 - Posted: 8 Apr 2009, 14:13:34 UTC - in response to Message 17919.  

Is there a consensus on what nVidia cards would run the client, and the best bang for buck (like the HD4850 for ATI and MW).

I would think the GTX260 has the best performance per $ or € with the new GTX275 coming in at a close second place.


Looking as the prices of the Asus GTX260 PCI-E2.0 512MB priced at £175 and the Asus ATI HD4870 512MB also priced at £185 they are similar. Both locally.

Is there an nVidia equivalent in performance and price to the Asus ATI HD4850, locally this is priced at £130? This latter ATI card looks like it is the golden price-performance point.
Go away, I was asleep


ID: 17924 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile borandi
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Feb 09
Posts: 180
Credit: 27,806,824
RAC: 0
Message 17926 - Posted: 8 Apr 2009, 14:29:41 UTC - in response to Message 17924.  
Last modified: 8 Apr 2009, 14:29:59 UTC

Is there an nVidia equivalent in performance and price to the Asus ATI HD4850, locally this is priced at £130? This latter ATI card looks like it is the golden price-performance point.


I picked up my two 4850s (Asus 512MB versions) for £112 each from ebuyer. Takes around 40s for a 30cred WU.

As for ATi vs. nVidia on this project, ATi should get the nod ahead given the increase in double precision speed over nVidia. Correct me if I'm wrong...
ID: 17926 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile GalaxyIce
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 6 Apr 08
Posts: 2018
Credit: 100,142,856
RAC: 0
Message 17927 - Posted: 8 Apr 2009, 14:31:02 UTC - in response to Message 17924.  
Last modified: 8 Apr 2009, 14:34:28 UTC

Is there a consensus on what nVidia cards would run the client, and the best bang for buck (like the HD4850 for ATI and MW).

I would think the GTX260 has the best performance per $ or € with the new GTX275 coming in at a close second place.


Looking as the prices of the Asus GTX260 PCI-E2.0 512MB priced at £175 and the Asus ATI HD4870 512MB also priced at £185 they are similar. Both locally.

Is there an nVidia equivalent in performance and price to the Asus ATI HD4850, locally this is priced at £130? This latter ATI card looks like it is the golden price-performance point.

I don't know where you mean by 'locally', but in England at ebuyer.com you can get a ASUS ATI HD4850 for £109.99, and a ASUS ATI HD4870 for £154.38 or a XFX HD4870 for just £149.99, all prices include VAT tax. Even pcworld.co.uk will give you a Sapphire HD4850 for £122.23 including VAT tax.

[edit] I cross posted with borandi. ebuyer is OK, but there are sites where you can get even lower prices - shop around...

ID: 17927 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
localizer

Send message
Joined: 28 Jan 08
Posts: 40
Credit: 379,931,801
RAC: 0
Message 17929 - Posted: 8 Apr 2009, 14:47:34 UTC - in response to Message 17927.  
Last modified: 8 Apr 2009, 14:48:40 UTC

........... Try overclockers.co.uk - they have XFX 260s (55NM, 216 SP ) at £150 inc VAT. 275s are likely to prove the best £/performance - but as of yet supply is still too short in the UK to see some sensible pricing.

£160 should give you a choice of 4870 1Gb cards ..... some sites also have free delivery at this price. You shouldn't be paying more than this for a 4870 any more....
ID: 17929 · Rating: 0 · rate: Rate + / Rate - Report as offensive     Reply Quote
1 · 2 · 3 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : ATI 4750/4770/4890 support

©2024 Astroinformatics Group