Message boards :
Number crunching :
ATI 4750/4770/4890 support
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
![]() Send message Joined: 9 Mar 09 Posts: 37 Credit: 37,538,556 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
Do we envisage milkyway@home being able to run on these cards as I'm intending to sell up and jump to 47xx. |
![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 21 Feb 09 Posts: 180 Credit: 27,806,824 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
|
![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 21 Feb 09 Posts: 180 Credit: 27,806,824 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
|
Send message Joined: 8 Nov 08 Posts: 178 Credit: 6,140,854 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
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. ![]() |
![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 21 Feb 09 Posts: 180 Credit: 27,806,824 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
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. ![]() |
Send message Joined: 26 Jul 08 Posts: 627 Credit: 94,940,203 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
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): |
![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 6 Apr 08 Posts: 2018 Credit: 100,142,856 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
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? |
Send message Joined: 4 Oct 08 Posts: 1734 Credit: 64,228,409 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
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 ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 6 Apr 08 Posts: 2018 Credit: 100,142,856 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
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?" |
![]() Send message Joined: 30 Aug 07 Posts: 125 Credit: 207,206 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
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. |
Send message Joined: 29 Aug 07 Posts: 486 Credit: 576,548,171 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
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. |
Send message Joined: 4 Oct 08 Posts: 1734 Credit: 64,228,409 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
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 ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 6 Apr 08 Posts: 2018 Credit: 100,142,856 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
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. No John Clark, I just take a dim view of you posting your usual drivel which has nothing to do with anything that helps. |
![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 26 Jan 09 Posts: 589 Credit: 497,834,261 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
|
Send message Joined: 4 Oct 08 Posts: 1734 Credit: 64,228,409 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
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 ![]() ![]() |
Send message Joined: 26 Jul 08 Posts: 627 Credit: 94,940,203 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
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. |
Send message Joined: 4 Oct 08 Posts: 1734 Credit: 64,228,409 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
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). 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 ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 21 Feb 09 Posts: 180 Credit: 27,806,824 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
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... ![]() |
![]() ![]() Send message Joined: 6 Apr 08 Posts: 2018 Credit: 100,142,856 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
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 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... |
Send message Joined: 28 Jan 08 Posts: 40 Credit: 379,931,801 RAC: 0 ![]() ![]() |
........... 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.... |
©2024 Astroinformatics Group