New core = significant production drop GPU
Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team
-
- Posts: 1024
- Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 12:43 pm
Re: New core = significant production drop GPU
I'm suggesting that PG didn't make that decision. They updated CUDA and the net result was not good for Fermi. That puts the pressure on NV to figure out how to make sure that the new CUDA doesn't cripple Fermi (unless they intended for it to help sell more upgrades, which I doubt.)
-
- Posts: 660
- Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 5:57 am
- Hardware configuration: a) Main unit
Sandybridge in HAF922 w/200 mm side fan
--i7 2600K@4.2 GHz
--ASUS P8P67 DeluxeB3
--4GB ADATA 1600 RAM
--750W Corsair PS
--2Seagate Hyb 750&500 GB--WD Caviar Black 1TB
--EVGA 660GTX-Ti FTW - Signature 2 GPU@ 1241 Boost
--MSI GTX560Ti @900MHz
--Win7Home64; FAH V7.3.2; 327.23 drivers
b) 2004 HP a475c desktop, 1 core Pent 4 HT@3.2 GHz; Mem 2GB;HDD 160 GB;Zotac GT430PCI@900 MHz
WinXP SP3-32 FAH v7.3.6 301.42 drivers - GPU slot only
c) 2005 Toshiba M45-S551 laptop w/2 GB mem, 160GB HDD;Pent M 740 CPU @ 1.73 GHz
WinXP SP3-32 FAH v7.3.6 [Receiving Core A4 work units]
d) 2011 lappy-15.6"-1920x1080;i7-2860QM,2.5;IC Diamond Thermal Compound;GTX 560M 1,536MB u/c@700;16GB-1333MHz RAM;HDD:500GBHyb w/ 4GB SSD;Win7HomePrem64;320.18 drivers FAH 7.4.2ß - Location: Saratoga, California USA
Re: New core = significant production drop GPU
Not to put too fine a point on it, but after I installed the Kepler GTX660Ti card on 27 November, all 27 of the P8057s that card got were done on core 15 2.24. All of the other projects (7623, 8043, 8044, 8045, 8054, 807x) have used 2.25.
I didn't do anything to force use of one core over another - just had the FAH client autodetect what was needed when the card was installed, and WUs started folding. The client loaded whichever core it deemed appropriate.
So this Kepler fine ran fine (more than fine??) on 27 work units using core 2.24.
Given that, I really don't have much to compare, efficiency wise, for the performance of core 2.25 vs earlier cores on the only Kepler GPU I have.
I didn't do anything to force use of one core over another - just had the FAH client autodetect what was needed when the card was installed, and WUs started folding. The client loaded whichever core it deemed appropriate.
So this Kepler fine ran fine (more than fine??) on 27 work units using core 2.24.
Given that, I really don't have much to compare, efficiency wise, for the performance of core 2.25 vs earlier cores on the only Kepler GPU I have.
Re: New core = significant production drop GPU
Then he as well as others who have been around this project should know when new hardware comes out the best PPD/$ or PPD/W can drastically change. SMP changed everything. As did GPU folding. They've also probably seen things changed w/o the best of communication before. I don't know PG personally but I've been around enough scientists/engineers to know communication isn't what they are best at. I can say the same about myself.Nathan_P wrote:Thats a bit unfair, Grandpa has been with the project nearly 5 years now has 700m+ points and 29.5k WU under his belt, not exactly someone who comes and goes. Actually most of the big spenders stay with the project through thick and thin as they have invested a lot of money because the believe in the project's goals.mmonnin wrote:Big time spenders like Grandpa come and go. Its a fact of any DC project. It doesn't give him or anyone else special treatment because they spent money to get their competitive fix on.
I just don't think this round is different than any other in this regards and its not something to get all worked up about. Things will just change again. I remember waiting and waiting to see what ATI cards would be supported when GPU folding came about. I didn't really get an answer then either and now a 1950 XT is not even in a PC unable to be used by FAH. It happens. It sucks. I've been there.
In reality, the transistor count on a GPU just outnumbers a normal desktop CPU these days.