Posts by [TA]Assimilator1
|
21)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Updated GPU Requirements (Currently not supporting GPU tasks)
(Message 68085)
Posted 31 Jan 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: Huh? Care to clarify? Do you mean the forum or the project? (not that it's really relevant to this thread). |
|
22)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new!
(Message 68018)
Posted 16 Jan 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: tictoc Got it, thanks :). hoppisaur Ok I'm confused now lol, so previously your AMD A12-9800 APU @4.2 GHz managed a time of 120s, but now it's at 3.8 GHz & managing 101s? You mentioned you tweaked the bios, did you by chance increase the iGPU clock? (if that's possible?). Sorry to hear about the dead m/brd :(. vseven What CPU does that machine have? (I'm not trawling through pages of this thread & I don't see you listed in the AnandTech thread). ************************************************************************ Btw, apologies folks, I meant to post a link here to the new benchmark thread in this forum & forgot! :o After the 3 folks above have answered their questions here, I'd appreciate it if further benchmarks were posted to the new thread. Thanks :) New benchmark thread here! - http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/forum_thread.php?id=4379 |
|
23)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new!
(Message 68017)
Posted 16 Jan 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: where is link to your task times..? why you hide computer/s ? Beg your pardon!!?? If you think you can do a better job then go ahead & do it! Yes it's a 1 man show because I started this off after seeing a benchmark thread in the Folding@home forums years ago, (& a MW one in the AnandTech DC forum). So instead of spouting empty BS insults why don't you explain why this thread is a joke? You're taking the piss after the amount of time I've put into this thread! And I assume you're talking to tictoc about hiding computers, he's entirely entitled to do so! Some people have genuine security reasons for doing so, e.g a person on my team lived in a very sparsely populated area of a small population country & he has many computers, getting his IP to get a rough location of where he is could be enough to find his house. Links to tasks times aren't very useful as the results move on, links to individual tasks may be more useful but it would be a pain to look at every single task for every single time posted by every user. Yes a screenshot would be useful, but not required as this is done on trust, if a time looks dodgy then we can inquire more about it, it could be an innocent mistake, like wrong credit WUs, faulty machine, maths error etc. Theirs no need to take the accusatory tone that you are taking! And no, the 1st task is not always the fastest, something odd about your machine it seems! Or you're badly explaining yourself, that sentence is badly written. If you're getting task times varying from 20-25 to 40-50 then theirs something wrong with your setup, that is not a normal variation, even when running multiple WUs! The average of 5 result tasks smooths out any slight variations that typically occur. |
|
24)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Benchmark thread 1-2019 on - GPU & CPU times wanted for new WUs, old & new hardware!
(Message 68005)
Posted 12 Jan 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: Firstly, please note I cannot edit this post 1hr after posting it, so for the latest table & any changes in benchmark requirements check out my latest posts here. Or check out the AnandTech MW benchmark thread I created there, as I can update that indefinitely, AFAIK! And it includes links to the peoples original time posted. It's link http://forums.anandtech.com/threads/milkyway-h-benchmark-thread-winter-2016-on-updated-1-2019-gpu-cpu-times-wanted-for-new-wus.2495905/. I know lots of people running MW@H would like to know how their rigs compare to other peoples & would like to see how an upgrade could improve output. Whilst you can look through the MW BOINC stats the info is rather vague, it doesn't give clock speeds or specific GPUs for example, nor does it account for anything that might add to WU times. So please share your new scores for old & new GPUs & CPUs alike! At some point in, or near the summer 2018 MW changed the WUs again, currently it seems that 227.62 & 203.92 WUs are the common ones, so here's a new table with the 227.62 credit WU. The app is still v1.46 for the GPU. I've added a table for running concurrent WUs as many people do that, & Nvidia cards in particular benefit from doing that. Note though that times from doing that can be more erratic than running singularly. Requirements for the benchmark :- Average of at least 5 WU times (not cherry picked please! ;)). A dedicated physical CPU core for each GPU (for optimal MW WU times). If only using BOINC for CPU tasks, & you have an HT capable CPU, then the only way to be certain of this (bar disabling HT) is to set the BOINC computing preferences (in advanced mode>options) so that you have 1 less CPU thread running then you do physical cores. Don't panic too much about lost CPU ppd, it doesn't take long to run MW GPU WUs ;) (see table). Please state what speed & type CPU you have, as it now has a significant affect on GPU WU times! Please state GPU clock speeds if overclocked (including factory overclocks) or state 'stock'. Please only crunch 1 WU at a time per GPU, preferably. Or if you are running concurrent WUs, state how many & I'll put your time in the 2nd GPU table. For CPU times please state whether Hyper Threading (or equivalent) is enabled or not, times for both states welcomed. It would also be useful if you could state your BOINC & driver version, & OS, incase it does make any difference. If you find your WU times are fluctuating more than a couple of % for singly run WUs then use GPU-Z or your grx card driver tools to check that your GPU is able to hit near 100% load (although I'm not sure that Nvidia cards can hit that for MW). Note that even when crunching normally, the GPU load will be on/off on this current MW app, so the GPU load graph should look like a series of blocks. Just looking at my RX 580, it was going to zero load roughly every 27s. Also check using task manager that your CPU does actually have the spare load to give to MW (& btw, GPU crunching won't show up in the TM). Current GPU statistics ~ Average Run Time to Complete 1 MW v1.46 227.62 credit WU :- HD 7970, GPU 1200 MHz(!) (CPU, Xeon E5 ES 10 core @2.7 GHz (ht off) ...... 38.2s .... tictoc R9 290, GPU 1000 MHz, (CPU, ???....................) ....................................... 70.9s .... tictoc HD 7870 XT 3GB(DS), GPU 925 MHz (CPU, C2 Q9550 @3.58 GHz) ............... 73.2s .... Assimilator1 RX 580 GB, GPU 1350 MHz (CPU, i7 4930k @4.1 GHz) .............................. 97.3s .... Assimilator1 RTX 2080 Ti, GPU ???? MHz (CPU, i7-8700K @4.7 GHz no AVX) ............... 110.6s .... IEC R7 iGPU on an AMD A12-9800 APU (CPU, 4.2 GHz) ................................. 120.3s .... hoppisaur RX 570, GPU stock (CPU, i7-4771 ?? GHz) ............................................. 121s ....... Jim1348 Current GPU statistics ~ Average Run Time to Complete multiple MW v1.46 227.62 credit WU :- RX 570, GPU stock (CPU, i7-4771 ?? GHz) (2 concurrent WUs) .............. 194s ....... Jim1348 Current CPU statistics ~ Average Run Time to Complete 1 MW v1.74 227.62 credit WU :- Previous benchmark thread here http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/forum_thread.php?id=3551&sort_style=6&start=0 ************************************************************ Mods Please could you stickify this one & un-stick the other one? Thanks :) |
|
25)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new!
(Message 68004)
Posted 12 Jan 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: New benchmark table posted in the AnandTech thread here http://forums.anandtech.com/threads/milkyway-h-benchmark-thread-winter-2016-on-updated-1-2019-gpu-cpu-times-wanted-for-new-wus.2495905/ (more up to date, as I can actually update posts there beyond 1hr!). Mods Could you de-stickfy this thread please? I will post a new thread soon.... |
|
26)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new!
(Message 68003)
Posted 12 Jan 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: Here's some of the new 227.62 tasks for your database. All times are with one task running per GPU. Hi, added times to the AnandTech benchmark thread, but are both those GPUs in the same machine? If not what CPUs are with which GPUs? It is trending slower today as I turned off motherboard core boost (3.8 -> 4.2) to see if I am hitting a wall with what the motherboard is able to deliver. 10WU avg is now 135.06. I think my powersupply isn't up to the task of boosting the cpu while the iGPU units are being used. Or it could just be driver or mobo related. I am going to try other hardware as it was frozen this morning (locked up). Is the 135s time with the CPU at 3.8 GHz with 227.62 WUs? (I'll add that time too if so). Will link the AT thread again in a moment. |
|
27)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new!
(Message 67986)
Posted 5 Jan 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: A link to valid tasks is no use for my table, I need a calculated average of 5 benchmark WUS :), also you say the last 5 averaged were 121s, but looking at your current page (for 227.62 credit) WUs I'd say the average is about 193-194s, something on your rig change? Hi Jim I am (mainly) after singly run WUs, so your 1st time was the right one :), I just wanted to clarify what changed the times. But yea running 2 (& more on some cards)at once certainly can improve throughput. (Btw, CPUs are much slower at MW than GPUs, so that's not what's giving hoppisaur APU a good score IMO). Will add yours, hoppisaur & tictocs time when I post the new thread (at some point! ;)). hoppisaur I see the R7 is a 3rd gen GCN architecture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_Core_Next#third, which is what the Radeon R9 285 is based on, that's why it's got fairly decent MW times :). |
|
28)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
Updated GPU Requirements (Currently not supporting GPU tasks)
(Message 67981)
Posted 3 Jan 2019 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: Matthew Any chance of an updated table for what old & new GPUs work with the new apps? |
|
29)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new!
(Message 67938)
Posted 11 Dec 2018 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: I just started with an RX 570 running at the stock clock of 1244 MHz under Win7 64-bit, and supported by two cores of an i7-4771. And I am using the latest AMD drivers (Radeon 18.9.3) if it matters any more. A link to valid tasks is no use for my table, I need a calculated average of 5 benchmark WUS :), also you say the last 5 averaged were 121s, but looking at your current page (for 227.62 credit) WUs I'd say the average is about 193-194s, something on your rig change? [edit] Just seen your inbetween reply ;). I've just remembered this thread has been stickified, I'll have to get this one unstuck & the new one stickified once we've received further confirmation on the 227.62 WUs. |
|
30)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
All Milkyway@Home 1.02 tasks ending in computation error on HD6950.
(Message 67936)
Posted 11 Dec 2018 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: You're sure grx card isn't over-heating? Btw this thread is talking about HD6950 issues :p. |
|
31)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new!
(Message 67935)
Posted 11 Dec 2018 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: Ok guys, I've been looking at the range of credited WUs in this Top participant's valid list - http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/results.php?hostid=780711&offset=0&show_names=0&state=4&appid= And I'm only seeing 227.62 or 203.92 credit WUs in 200 tasks. So it would seem the 'old' benchmark WU is over along with it's benchmark table. Are you guys seeing the same thing in your valid tasks? If so then I need to change the benchmark requirements to the 227.62 WUs (then we may have a rough comparison to the old table, maybe!). If you guys concur on the above I will start a new benchmark thread (seeing as I can't edit the op! grr) I will kick it off with the usual requirements, as below :- Average from at least 5 WU times using 227.62 credit WUs only (not cherry picked please! ;)). A dedicated physical CPU core for each GPU (for optimal MW WU times). If only using BOINC for CPU tasks, & you have an HT capable CPU, then the only way to be certain of this (bar disabling HT) is to set the BOINC computing preferences (in advanced mode>options) so that you have 1 less CPU thread running then you do physical cores. Don't panic too much about lost CPU ppd, it doesn't take long to run MW GPU WUs ;) (see previous table). Please state what speed & type CPU you have, as it now has a significant affect on GPU WU times! Please state GPU clock speeds if overclocked(including factory overclocks) or state 'stock'. Please state whether only crunching 1 WU at a time per GPU, or state how many are run concurrently (I will create a separate table for that). For CPU times please state whether Hyper Threading (or equivalent) is enabled or not, times for both states welcomed :). It would also be useful if you could state your BOINC, driver version, & OS, incase it does make any difference. If you find your WU times are fluctuating more than a couple of % then use GPU-Z or your grx card driver tools to check that your GPU is able to hit near 100% load (although I'm not sure that NVidia cards can hit that for MW), note that even when crunching normally, the GPU load will be on/off on this current MW app, so the GPU load graph should look like a series of blocks. Also check using task manager that your CPU does actually have the spare load to give to MW (& btw, GPU crunching won't show up in the TM). ********************************************************************************************************** Regarding AMD vs NVidia for MW@H, AFAIK it's still the case that even when an NVidia card is matching an AMDs card for raw Double Precision power, the AMD card still does better, although running concurrent WUs on NVidia's closes this gap a lot. Not sure why this is the case, although I have vague memories of MW being written for AMD cards only initially, IIRC! Evans & vseven I see you've already posted WU times for the 227.62 WUs, if you can each provide me with an average from at least 5 WUs I will kick off the table with your times :). Btw Vseven, you mentioned 'new software', what new s/w? Also what CPU was that V100 running on? XArchAngel Interesting info you have their, but you didn't mention once which credit WUs they were! ;), crucial for the benchmark table. |
|
32)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new!
(Message 67934)
Posted 11 Dec 2018 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: Hello, Seeing as no else answered you! No special program for benchmarking or seeing 'benchmarks', simply go to the Milkway homepage> your account> tasks. Then pick at least 5 Work Units with 227.23 credits & average the time. (Although I'm wondering how prominent the 227.23 WUs are now....) |
|
33)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new!
(Message 67630)
Posted 26 Jun 2018 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: Thanks for the replies & data guys, good to see an on going discussion :). I will post an updated table when I get time (not much for here atm I'm afraid), & when I've had answers to the questions below. Mikey, JoeM, tictoc, ultraZ did you use times from WUs with 227.23 credits? JoeM Both the HD5870 and the HD6970 were mated with the 8350 CPUs. The HD5870 mated with the slightly faster one. Both 8350 CPUs are running stock, no overclock A? Lol, err you say they're both with 8350s running stock, but 1 CPU is faster??? You've lost me mate ;). ultraZ Good to know that's still the case & to see numbers for it :). I think I need to create a 2nd table showing WU times for concurrent run WUs, if the common type WU isn't changing all the time..... DVDL Wow! The Volta is insane, both in terms of FP64 performance & price! lol mlek Interesting, & good info :) vseven Quite a range of credit number WUs & times there, is that typical now? (I haven't looked in ~6mths). Btw, if you want your time in the table, it'll need to be an average of at least 5 of the 227.23 credit WUs. BeemerBiker Hmm, that's concerning, no 227.23 credit WUs? (PS. I've got an e46 330d, if you care about 4 wheeled vehicles ;)) |
|
34)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new!
(Message 66864)
Posted 16 Dec 2017 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: Chooka You got it right 1st time :). Nice time for a modern card btw :) Darrell What speed was that 1100T running at? Stock? Latest benchmark table Since v1.46 was released on 1/5/17 (UK date format :p), the WU times & credits changed. Times are apparently 'slightly longer' & the main WUs (99%+) & thus the new benchmark WU is 227.23 credits. See below the v1.46 table for the other benchmark requirements. Btw, watch out for the 227.26 credit WUs, they are very rare (approx. 1% of WUs atm), but despite their tiny increase in credit they take about 5% longer, at least on my HD 7970, ~56s vs 53s. Current GPU statistics ~ Average Run Time to Complete 1 MW v1.46 227.23 credit WU :- R9 280X, GPU 1030 MHz (CPU, ???) .................................................................. 50.4s .... JoeM HD 7970, GPU 1000 MHz (CPU, i7 4930k @4.1 GHz) ......................................... 53s ....... Assimilator1 Vega 56, stock (CPU, 2500k @4.3 GHz) ............................................................... 63s ....... Chooka HD 6970, GPU 890 MHz (CPU, Phenom II X6 1090T, stock) .............................. 94s ....... Hassan Shebli HD 6970, stock (CPU, ???????) .......................................................................... 107s ....... JoeM RX 480 8GB, GPU o/c to? (CPU, Phenom II X6 1100T @?) ............................... 110s ....... Darrell HD 5870, GPU 900 MHz, (CPU, ?????? ) ........................................................... 116s ....... JoeM RX 470 4GB, GPU 1205 MHz (CPU, Phenom II 1100T, stock) ......................... 127s ....... [AF>HFR] Seeds GTX 1070 Ti, GPU 2 GHz (CPU, Ryzen 1700X @3.9 GHz) ................................ 169.8s .... Keith Myers GTX 1060, stock (CPU, Pentium G3900) ............................................................ 250s ...... DVDL HD 7750, stock (CPU, ? ) ..................................................................................... 647s ........ JoeM Current CPU statistics ~ Average Run Time to Complete 1 MW v1.46 227.23 credit WU :- Ryzen R7 1700X (8C, stock 3.4 GHz, RAM o/c 2667 MHz) .................................. 3315s no HT ... JoeM Ryzen R7 1700X (8C, stock 3.4 GHz, RAM o/c 2667 MHz) .................................. 4428s HT on ... JoeM 8350 (7C, ?????) ................................................................................................... 5105s ...... JoeM 8350 (7C, ?????) ................................................................................................... 5388s ...... JoeM For links to each time go to the AnandTech thread here https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/milkyway-h-benchmark-thread-winter-2016-on-different-wu-gpu-cpu-times-wanted.2495905/#post-38654842 |
|
35)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new!
(Message 66863)
Posted 16 Dec 2017 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: Thanks Chooka :) I've never heard of a Vega 56, lol. I see they only came out in August, I've got some reading to do! Looking at the wiki for it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_RX_Vega_series , I see the 56's DP when boosting is 659, & 518 GFLOPS otherwise. Which is somewhere between the HD 6930 & the HD 6970, above & below the R9 290, & when boosting just about the R9 390 (for DP only, which is what MW@H uses). I see it's not a cheap card btw! :Q JoeM Thanks for all the times, lots of info :), but you still missed off what CPUs those GPUs run with ;) lol. Interesting to see even the HD 7750 benefits from running 2 WUs at once! Btw 1030 MHz for the 280X isn't AMD stock, I guess it must be a factory o/c. You've just pipped me to the top ;). Are the 8350s @ stock? What CPU does the HD 6970 & 5870 run with? Any differences between the 2 8350s to account for the slightly different times? Clock speed? DVDL Cheers :) wb8ili I appreciate the times you've given me but there's a bunch of information missing, were the times all derived from an average of a min of 5 WUs? What CPU's were they running with? Were either the CPUs or GPUs overclocked? if so, what to? ******************************************************************** Folks, I'm spending a load of time on follow up questions to requirements asked for in the table. And I don't have so much spare time here anymore ;). Please could anyone who wants there time posted to the table, state at least :- GPU model & speed, or state 'stock'. State what CPU the GPU was running with & whether it's o/ced (CPU type & speed has been affecting GPU WU times now for over a year). Confirm that the time is an average of at least 5 227.23 credit WUs. For the best & most stable times you need a free physical CPU core for your GPU, & for the GPU to be crunching only 1 WU at a time. Btw, I've dropped the requirement to state GPU RAM MHz as it makes no real difference, but feel free to state it as people can hit the link to your post to look for more info :). Adding times to the AT table now..... |
|
36)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
All Milkyway@Home 1.02 tasks ending in computation error on HD6950.
(Message 66862)
Posted 16 Dec 2017 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: No idea really, maybe more a Mac/MW issue?? Might be worth starting a new thread for it. What does the BOINC event log say? |
|
37)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new!
(Message 66791)
Posted 20 Nov 2017 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: Ok cool, thanks, added your time to the AT table :). Will post a new table here when DVDL answers. |
|
38)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new!
(Message 66788)
Posted 19 Nov 2017 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: Thanks Keith & AF HFR Seeds, I will add your times :). Added to AnandTech table. DVDL Sorry, only just noticed you didn't say what CPU that was running with? you didn't add my 6970 to your list! As per my answer on the 26/9/17 http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/forum_thread.php?id=3551&postid=66666, I was awaiting an answer from you! As to whether the time was from an average of at least 5 WUs. Which you still haven't answered ;) And I assume your CPU isn't o/ced? |
|
39)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
New Benchmark Thread - times wanted for any hardware, CPU or GPU, old or new!
(Message 66771)
Posted 5 Nov 2017 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: ********************************************************NEW BENCHMARK TABLE & REQUIREMENTS*********************************************************************** Please use validated 227.23 credit WU results only, they must be from the MilkyWay@Home v1.46 app Btw, watch out for the 227.26 credit WUs, they are very rare (approx. 1% of WUs atm), but despite their tiny increase in credit they take about 5% longer, at least on my HD 7970, ~56s vs 53s. Average of at least 5 WU times (not cherry picked please! ;)). A dedicated physical CPU core for each GPU (for optimal MW WU times). If only using BOINC for CPU tasks, & you have an HT capable CPU, then the only way to be certain of this (bar disabling HT) is to set the BOINC computing preferences (in advanced mode>options) so that you have 1 less CPU thread running then you do physical cores. Don't panic too much about lost CPU ppd, it doesn't take long to run MW GPU WUs ;) (see table). Please state what speed & type CPU you have, as it now seems to have a significant affect on GPU WU times! Please state GPU & RAM clock speeds if overclocked (including factory overclocks) or state 'stock'. Please only crunch 1 WU at a time per GPU, otherwise it will massively increase WU time! (even if it does increase output, the WU times seem to fluctuate much more than singly crunched WUs, so you can't just 1/2 the times either). [note, the following paragraph may no longer be relevant for v1.4x, time will tell] I've decided to relent a bit on the above, but only for the GTX Titan as it can't achieve anywhere near full load with just 1 WU, I will add a proviso stating this by each Titan's score (which will be derived from the total time crunched, divided by the number of WUs being crunched simultaneously. 8 WUs at once seems to be the choice so far). For CPU times please state whether Hyper Threading (or equivalent) is enabled or not, times for both states welcomed :). It would also be useful if you could state your BOINC & driver version, & OS, incase it does make any difference. If you find your WU times are fluctuating more than a couple of % then use GPU-Z or your grx card driver tools to check that you GPU is able to hit near 100% load (although I'm not sure that NVidia cards can hit that for MW), note that even when crunching normally, the GPU load will be on/off on this current MW app, so the GPU load graph should look like a series of blocks. Also check using task manager that your CPU does actually have the spare load to give to MW (& btw, GPU crunching won't show up in the TM). Current GPU statistics ~ Average Run Time to Complete 1 MW v1.46 227.23 credit WU :- HD 7970, GPU 1000 MHz (CPU, i7 4930k @4.1 GHz) ......................................... 53s ....... Assimilator1 RX 480 8GB, GPU o/c to? (CPU, Phenom II X6 1100T @?) ............................... 110s ........ Darrell AnandTech MW benchmarking thread (with updateable table & req's) https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/milkyway-h-benchmark-thread-winter-2016-on-different-wu-gpu-cpu-times-wanted.2495905/ |
|
40)
Message boards :
Number crunching :
6970 tweaking
(Message 66770)
Posted 5 Nov 2017 by [TA]Assimilator1 Post: Yep, you could overclock your GPU, but aside from that make sure you have a spare (physical) CPU core for your GPU crunching for optimal times. Your card might also get greater ppd by running 2 WUs at once. Btw, would be good to have an accurate time for your 6970 over in my benchmark thread http://milkyway.cs.rpi.edu/milkyway/forum_thread.php?id=3551&postid=66771 :) |
Previous 20 · Next 20
©2024 Astroinformatics Group