Folding Forum

Hi,
my cpu is folding, but unfortunately my --> gpu is 0.

I am on a Win10 Enterprise machine with a Core i7-5775C (GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 71 Stepping 1).
Interestingly, FAH identifies my OS Arch as AMD64.... shouldn't that be Intel?

My Motherboard is an "Asus Z97-A".
The display adapter is called "Intel(R) Iris(TM) Pro Graphics 6200" in CPU-Z

CUDA: Not detected: Failed to open dynamic library 'nvcuda[dot]dll' (module not found) [the latter in braces is my translation]
OpenCL Device 0 Platform:0 Device: 0 Bus: NA Slot: NA Compute:2.0 Driver:20.19

The CUDA thing could be just an unimportant warning, I've read in a few places.

--> How can I use my gpu?
Best regards
Sebastian

AMD64 OS Arch is normal.

Intel GPUs aren't supported, only nvidia and amd are.

Cuda not detected is normal if you dont have an nvidia card.

Welcome to the F@H Forum sebastiandiel,

AMD64 means that the operating system is 64-bit.

Currently, F@H doesn't support iGPUs. It only supports GPUs from AMD/Nvidia that have OpenCL 1.2 and Double Precision.

CUDA is needed only for Nvidia GPUs, not AMD GPUs.

Assuming that you have a supported AMD/Nvidia GPU, I would suggest that you:
Manually download the GPUs.txt file from here: https://apps.foldingathome.org/GPUs.txt (right-click save as GPUs.txt)
Exit the client
Copy the GPUs.txt file from the Downloads folder to %AppData%\FAHClient
Reboot your system
Start up the client and ensure that you can see your GPU in the log file
Add a GPU slot from FAHControl -> Configure -> Slots tab -> Add -> GPU -> OK -> Save

Let me know if that works or not

I understand that my intel GPU is currently not supported. Not a problem, as my cores are doing their chores.
Thanks for your support!

As a historical note, the architectures is called AMD64 because Intel did not create it. For 64-bit processing Intel was pushing to go to a new architecture, IA-64 or Itanium. AMD came out with an extension of the x86 instruction set and marketed their chips as being fully x86 compatible, the 32-bit performance of early IA-64 chips was atrocious. AMD was successful, and Intel ended up also adding the AMD 64-bit instructions to their existing x86 line.

Way off topic - but I always wondered if the IA-64 architecture was actually better for 64bit that AMD64 … Yes, AMD64 was a far better progression and allowed 32-bit processes to be used in 64-bit environment much better - pretty much guaranteed it would "sink" IA-64 - but from a pure 64-bit position (had 32-bit not been in play) which would have been more performant?