Folding Forum

When the bonus was introduced, it was intended to match the points with scientific value, and there never has been any doubt that both speed of WUs and quantity are important. Thus it makes sense to compare both the total (with bonus) and the baseline (without bonus).

Originally, bonuses increased the baseline points by a relatively small factor and the bonus formula made a lot of sense to me. Since then, GPU performance has increased by a huge factor, hence the bonus has also increased by an even larger factor while CPU performance hasn't changed much -- and in many cases, it has actually gone down since some CPUs are dedicated to servicing the GPUs instead of folding, themselves.

IMHO, the large bonuses for fast GPUs have distorted the ability to accurately describe scientific results, so I feel obligated to compare the baseline points, too. I do like 7im's suggestion to compare baseline points also.

I guess this below comparison is still accurate, but there is a new kid on the block, 1060 3GB. Does anybody have PPD numbers for it?
It is priced similar to RX 470 and has 1152 CUDA Cores (1060 6GB has 1280). That would theoretically make it 10% slower (4.0 TFLOPs vs 4.4 TFLOPs)
It looks like it could be both PPD AND $/W king?
Does anybody have PPD numbers for it?

RX 480 - 310k PPD, 130w, 230-280 dollar.
RX 470 - 280k PPD, 105w, 200-230 dollars. (around 88-90 per cent of 480 based on chip and clocks.)
RX 460 - 143k PPD*, 60w, 110-140 dollars. (43 per cent of SPs, TUs, 117 per cent clocks = around 50 per cent of 470 performance).

nVidia:

Titan X Pascal - 1400k PPD, ~250w, 1300 dollar.
Titan X - 700-850k PPD, ~230w, 1200 dollar (old price, now 1100-1200?)
GTX 1080 - 700-900k PPD, ~160w, 700 dollar
GTX 1070 - 600-750k PPD, ~120w, 430-470 dollar
GTX 1060 - 330-420k PPD*, ~90w, 290 dollar (around 47% of 1080, based on clocks and chip)

Nice chart for those wondering who the current king is:
Thanks to foldinger@reddit!
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... s=57f3e0fa
- - - - - ppd/price - ppd/watt
Titan XP - 1.1 - - - - - 5.6
GTX 1080 1.3 - - - - - 5.0
GTX 1070 1.7 - - - - - 5.6
GTX 1060 1.5 - - - - - 4.2
with 3 GB 1.7 - - - - - 4.2
- -RX 480 1.3 - - - - - 2.4
- -RX 470 1.3 - - - - - 2.4
- -RX 460 1.3 - - - - - 2.4

These are hard numbers or estimations ?

The Nvidia numbers are Hard numbers, my 1070 routinely gets 600-720k PPD depending on WU and boost clocks

The Pascal cards, do they get older core WUs like the infamous 762x or is it smooth sailing only with Core 21 WUs ?

MARSTG wrote:The Pascal cards, do they get older core WUs like the infamous 762x or is it smooth sailing only with Core 21 WUs ?

Currently no one is getting those older Core_15 projects, WU's ran out several months ago. The projects are being checked to see if any more runs are needed.

As for Core_21, Core_18 is still being used by some projects and I have not checked whether or not any of the Core_17 projects are still active.

All FAHCores are designed to work on recent hardware, tested on whatever is available in the lab or on beta tester's hardware and expect to work long into the future. As newer drivers and newer hardware is designed, it's always hoped that older cores will continue to work in newer environments -- and generally, they do. Early Tesla GPUs are the only generation that I've seen that failed to be reliable on newer cores.

Those statements do not account for the fact that most researchers start new studies on the latest FAHCore. Older projects that reach their conclusion do end, so there's a gradual progression toward newer FahCores, whether or not old projects reach their conclusion or continue to gather more data.

antropofob wrote:I guess this below comparison is still accurate, but there is a new kid on the block, 1060 3GB. Does anybody have PPD numbers for it?
It is priced similar to RX 470 and has 1152 CUDA Cores (1060 6GB has 1280). That would theoretically make it 10% slower (4.0 TFLOPs vs 4.4 TFLOPs)
It looks like it could be both PPD AND $/W king?
Does anybody have PPD numbers for it?

RX 480 - 310k PPD, 130w, 230-280 dollar.
RX 470 - 280k PPD, 105w, 200-230 dollars. (around 88-90 per cent of 480 based on chip and clocks.)
RX 460 - 143k PPD*, 60w, 110-140 dollars. (43 per cent of SPs, TUs, 117 per cent clocks = around 50 per cent of 470 performance).

nVidia:

Titan X Pascal - 1400k PPD, ~250w, 1300 dollar.
Titan X - 700-850k PPD, ~230w, 1200 dollar (old price, now 1100-1200?)
GTX 1080 - 700-900k PPD, ~160w, 700 dollar
GTX 1070 - 600-750k PPD, ~120w, 430-470 dollar
GTX 1060 - 330-420k PPD*, ~90w, 290 dollar (around 47% of 1080, based on clocks and chip)

Nice chart for those wondering who the current king is:
Thanks to foldinger@reddit!
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... s=57f3e0fa
- - - - - ppd/price - ppd/watt
Titan XP - 1.1 - - - - - 5.6
GTX 1080 1.3 - - - - - 5.0
GTX 1070 1.7 - - - - - 5.6
GTX 1060 1.5 - - - - - 4.2
with 3 GB 1.7 - - - - - 4.2
- -RX 480 1.3 - - - - - 2.4
- -RX 470 1.3 - - - - - 2.4
- -RX 460 1.3 - - - - - 2.4

Thanks for quoting me and putting in all the hard work to get the numbers right

Which driver for pascal is producing the most? I am still on the first one available when the cards first hit online retailers...

road-runner wrote:Which driver for pascal is producing the most? I am still on the first one available when the cards first hit online retailers...

I am on the newest one (version 370 from graphics-drivers ppa), currently getting 290000 points on one Core21 project on 1060 3GB version.
So go ahead and update. And dont forget to add abovementioned ppa first.
sudo add-apt-repository ppa:graphics-drivers/ppa
sudo apt-get update
And then just go to "additional drivers" and choose the newest one.
It will install opencl and libcuda also.

BTW, to save me from searching, could somebody give me a hint for best Maxwell driver to run on W10?

antropofob wrote: BTW, to save me from searching, could somebody give me a hint for best Maxwell driver to run on W10?

After the big W10 update trashed OpenCL, I switched to 372.90, and that's been stable on both a 970 and a 1070 in W10.

EVGA GTX 1070/1080 [all] ACX 3.0 can burn out because voltage parts and VRAM can get too hot. EVGA offers some thermal pads to put in.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Folding/commen ... _burn_out/

I use MSI GTX 1070 ARMOR 8G OC with reduced voltage and overclocking.
Default: 1920 MHz, 1.050 V
Now: 2000 MHz / 1.012 V (or 1962 MHz / 1.000 V)

GPU Boost 3.0 - Voltage/Frequency Curve Tweaking (MSI AfterBurner 4.3.0 beta)

Any numbers for the 1050Ti/1050 cards?

foldy wrote:I added calculated numbers in the sheet
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... gVlxRPnz0/
Conclusion: Not good for folding

Not necessarily, a 1050ti would be a good drop in replacement for a 750ti, especially if you are short of PCIe Cables, and no adapters are not an option - too many horror stories of them melting.