It seems that a lot of GPU problems revolve around specific versions of drivers. Though NVidia has their own support structure, you can often learn from information reported by others who fold.
I brought a 970 a few months ago, specifically for folding, and was getting around 250kPPD
I recently had to move the card over to a new machine (same OS - win 7) but found PPD dropped to 125k PPD (consistently, on every WU over the last 4 days).
I'm wondering if it's the driver I'm using. I can't remember what I was using before, but now I'm on 353.62. Is there a better one for folding?
Brief extract from log below - let me know if you need more.
For comparison, I have a EVGA GTX 960 under Ubuntu Linux 12.04 -
I have captured two 9704s and the associated client's reported PPD at 130k -
Driver Version: 352.41 - The 9704's seem similar to other WU's PPD,
at least on my machine
Not sure where you're seeing the PPD figures that you're quoting but if you check http://www.linuxforge.net/bonuscalc2.php you'll see that you're getting more than you think you are, assuming you're running 24/7. If your figures are coming from FAHControl then you need to wait a few frames (I've seen it take as many as 10 frames) before the estimate settles down to where it should be. Besides using the online calculator you can install HFM.net (in the 3rd party software forum) as it does a pretty good job of estimating PPD usually as soon as the first frame is completed depending on how you set it up.
According to the online calculator and using the TPFs in your latest log the 9704 is actually earning around 300K PPD which is very close to my 970 on that project. Your 10477 is currently earning 252K PPD. Other projects can and do vary from the low 200s to just above 300K ... don't think I've ever seen anything in the low 100s on my 970 but I don't use the Advanced control software to look at the PPD estimates even though they do improve as the WU progresses.
Another possibility you might look at is the GPU you replaced. Was it earning much lower PPD on the same projects? FAHControl may need time before it accurately shows the PPD for the 970. You could 'Finish' the current work and uninstall the client on that computer including data so the old estimates are removed and then re-install so the estimates are only for the 970 work. Whenever I replace a GPU with a different model I always re-install the driver and the client.
Thanks bollix - v interesting and insightful!
I was quoting my PPD from the FAH client itself (although I was waiting until jobs were 10%+ done before paying any attention, I know how inaccurate the early stages can be)
I've tried reinstalling FAH and drivers and no improvement sadly.
I've also downloaded HFM and that is reporting the same ballpark PPD as the client itself - currently 130k PPD on P10486. Interestingly the link you sent suggests that should actually equate to a PPD of 260k
Wierd, right? Any ideas?
I noticed the link states the project is a beta. I've not 'signed up' to betas specifically in the advanced options. Could that be relevant?
Signing up for beta gives you write access to the beta forum, along with improved opportunities to get support by others running the same project. The actual PPD is always based on the project, itself, plus your passkey.
The PG may re-align the project settings (changing the PPD) if they get reports that those settings are too high or too low.
Okay, let's take it one step at a time:
1. The client itself does not display PPD ... either you're looking at FAHControl (aka Advanced Control) or Web Control. Which one?
2. When you uninstalled FAH did you check the box for Data removal? Did you have to re-enter your folding username, team # and passkey when you installed it again?
3. In HFM go to Edit Preferences, click on the Options tab and set the Calculate PPD option to use Last Frame. After at least 10 percent what is the Estimated TPF that is showing on FAHControl's Status tab? What does HFM show in it's TPF column? Lastly, look at the log tab in FAHControl and manually calculate the time between the last two %s.
4. P10486 is not beta ... it is listed in the regular Project Summary (link at the top of this page). Again, what exactly are you looking at that says beta?
Weird? Yes, so far it's not making a lot of sense.
EDIT: see the next post!!!
Last edited by bollix47 on Fri Nov 06, 2015 1:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
I'm having a similar but more severe problem with one of my (brand new) GTX 970s. It is only at about 60-65% GPU utilization and only netting about 60-70K PPD. It is a brand new Asus Strix 970. System is fresh install of Windows 10 x64. The CPU is not doing any folding, it is a Celeron J1900. It is headless and I remote into it via Teamviewer.
My other system, using the same type of work unit, downloaded the same day even, is getting closer to 300K PPD. It is an EVGA FTW GTX970, clocked just slightly higher.
The EVGA card is using some older nvidia drivers so I tried those as well as the latest with the Asus card but with no change to the weak production.
The date in Windows appears to be correct. Is there a different date I should be looking at?
The only other thing I can think of is that the Asus GPU power connector is the 8-pin style and I am currently using a 6-pin connector because my 400W PSU does not have the 8-pin style. Right now the entire system is drawing about 110W from the wall, so I am sure the PSU is capable from a wattage perspective.