Quite low PPD GTX 480 & 4690k

[Hughesy26]

Hi all,

I recently installed a second hand gtx 480, expecting to see ~40k PPD based on other users posts. (https://docs.google.com/a/westbournesch ... tput=html# for example)

However it's been running for a couple of days and it only seems to get 25k tops. Is it due to;
a - a misconfiguration on my side? In which case, great, that's fixable!
b - just an old card and that's the best I can expect?
c - my expectations were too high...maybe the data I am looking at is old and points have got harder to earn since the release of newer GPUs?

I'm running driver 327.23 (I tried the latest driver but after getting ~20k PPD at best I did some research and found this older driver was recommended to be better for 700 series and below)

Its running with a 4690k on full power. It's done quite a few WUs, all the ones I have seen have been 0x18

The 4690k is only getting ~5k PPD. I was expecting higher from 3 cores (4th powering GPU obviously) running at 4Ghz.

I'm using a passkey and I guess I'm getting the QRB as I the estimated credit is always 2-4x the base credit

The desktop is therefore actually no better than my laptop which doesn't sound right to me. Any suggestions greatly appreciated!

[JimboPalmer]

In that list, it seems to be getting 30k PPD on the Core 17 project p13001, and 40k PPD on the Core 17 P9201. So it would seem normal depending on what WUs you are getting.
i am not sure there are any Core 18 WUs in that list.

[Hughesy26]

P9201 is actually getting 49-53k over 9 separate data points. And P9406 is getting 44k. So my 25k max seems low. I'm actually getting 13k PPD right now (project 9610, core 18, 70% complete)

You're right...all in that google docs are Core 17 WUs. But I thought Core 18 would be better for Nvidia GPUs, so I should be getting ~40k?

Also, separate to the google docs I saw someone else post on this forum a while ago they would expect a 480 to get 40k ppd, so 25k does seem a bit low?

[bruce]

But I thought Core 18 would be better for Nvidia GPUs, so ...

I don't understand what led you to reach that conclusion. I'd think that from what's known, there's an equal chance that the opposite it true.

[wilding2004]

I wouldn't put much faith in that google docs list. I have a R9 270X that has never got anywhere near the 100k ppd suggested in the list, it usually makes 80-85k ppd. I've also got a couple of GTX 970's that average about 290k ppd and very occasionally get 320-350k ppd. Again nowhere near the figures being claimed on that list.

Also note that most of the cards on the list are clocked very, very high. How does your card compare with others in FAHbench? That's probabaly a better indication of whether or not you have a performance problem

[Hughesy26]

OpenCL (Single P) Explicit: 19.4645 Implicit: 83.2494

I can only see one other 480 benchmark but theirs got 20.6915 / 83.349, so pretty similar I guess!