Post your BOINC Startup 'CUDA' Info

Message boards : Number crunching : Post your BOINC Startup 'CUDA' Info

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 . . . 12 · Next

Author	Message
Systrax Send message Joined: 8 Sep 01 Posts: 2 Credit: 85,555 RAC: 0	Message 940204 - Posted: 15 Oct 2009, 19:33:55 UTC
	15.10.2009 21:33:39 NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce 9600 GT (driver version 19107, compute capability 1.1, 512MB, est. 46GFLOPS) oc 800/1000 ____________
	ID: 940204 ·

[KWSN]John Galt 007 Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 9 Nov 99 Posts: 2439 Credit: 16,594,037 RAC: 0	Message 940287 - Posted: 16 Oct 2009, 4:05:14 UTC
	10/15/2009 9:47:35 PM NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce GTX 260 (driver version 19107, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.3, 896MB, est. 109GFLOPS) 10/15/2009 9:47:35 PM NVIDIA GPU 1: GeForce GTX 260 (driver version 19107, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.3, 896MB, est. 109GFLOPS) Just popped these 2 in this evening...shame that they were sitting for 4 months in the box... ____________ Clk2HlpSetiCty:::PayIt4ward
	ID: 940287 ·

Geek@Play Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 31 Jul 01 Posts: 2414 Credit: 79,016,596 RAC: 0	Message 940977 - Posted: 18 Oct 2009, 1:59:12 UTC
	Saw the following posted here concerning Boinc development version 6.10.14 - client/scheduler: standardize the FLOPS estimate between NVIDIA and ATI. Make them both peak FLOPS, according to the formula supplied by the manufacturer. So I installed 6.10.14 to check it out..............and here are the results. GeForce GTX 275 (driver version 19107, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.3, 896MB, 700 GFLOPS peak) GeForce 9800 GTX+ (driver version 19107, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.1, 1024MB, 470 GFLOPS peak) GeForce 9800 GT (driver version 19107, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.1, 1024MB, 336 GFLOPS peak) GeForce 9800 GT (driver version 19107, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.1, 1024MB, 336 GFLOPS peak) GeForce GTX 260 (driver version 19107, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.3, 896MB, 498 GFLOPS peak) All my GPU's are running at stock speed. By the way Boinc 6.10.14 seems to be working well for me. At least I see no problems with it. ____________ Boinc....Boinc....Boinc....Boinc....
	ID: 940977 ·

rich1ell Send message Joined: 9 Mar 02 Posts: 4 Credit: 8,234,985 RAC: 11,445	Message 941064 - Posted: 18 Oct 2009, 10:40:43 UTC
	16/10/2009 09:15:30 CUDA device: GeForce 9600 GT (driver version 19038, CUDA version 1.1, 1024MB, est. 37GFLOPS) Stock Speed
	ID: 941064 ·

Claggy Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 5 Jul 99 Posts: 3365 Credit: 25,951,744 RAC: 1,177	Message 941069 - Posted: 18 Oct 2009, 10:54:26 UTC - in response to Message 940977. Last modified: 18 Oct 2009, 10:56:46 UTC
	These are the figures I'm getting with Boinc 6.10.14, all speeds are stock: NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce 9800 GTX/9800 GTX+ (driver version 19107, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.1, 512MB, 486 GFLOPS peak) NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce 8400M GS (driver version 19038, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.1, 128MB, 26 GFLOPS peak) Claggy
	ID: 941069 ·

Fred J. Verster Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 21 Apr 04 Posts: 3232 Credit: 31,585,541 RAC: 1	Message 941079 - Posted: 18 Oct 2009, 11:31:14 UTC - in response to Message 941069.
	Hi Claggy, see that you use the latest BOINC version? Take it, that those GFLOP values are 'single-precision', cause I have a 9800GTX+ estimated at 85GFLOPS and run BOINC 6.6.36 on that WIN XP64 host. Does BOINC 6.10.x gives raw values for both NVidia and ATI cards/GPU's ? ____________ Knight Who Says Ni N!, OUT numbered.................
	ID: 941079 ·

[AF>france>pas-de-calais]symaski62 Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 12 Aug 05 Posts: 254 Credit: 69,988 RAC: 0	Message 941111 - Posted: 18 Oct 2009, 14:56:07 UTC - in response to Message 941079.
	Hi Claggy, see that you use the latest BOINC version? Take it, that those GFLOP values are 'single-precision', cause I have a 9800GTX+ estimated at 85GFLOPS and run BOINC 6.6.36 on that WIN XP64 host. Does BOINC 6.10.x gives raw values for both NVidia and ATI cards/GPU's ? boinc 6.6.38 => yes Nvidia & no ATI boinc 6.10.x => yes Nvidia & yes ATI :)
	ID: 941111 ·

Chirag Patel Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 13 Sep 05 Posts: 48 Credit: 5,046,765 RAC: 8,463	Message 941259 - Posted: 19 Oct 2009, 4:49:58 UTC Last modified: 19 Oct 2009, 5:04:06 UTC
	Representing all the notebook crunchers out there, here's the GTX 260M 1024MB GDDR3 card (actually a desktop 9800GT in disguise): NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce GTX 260M (driver version 18682, compute capability 1.1, 1024MB, est. 60GFLOPS) The GFLOPS remains at 60, regardless of whether it's 550/1375/950 or 600/1500/900 (core/shader/memory) MHz. Right now I'm at 600/1500/900. But CUDA-Z tells me 62481 Miops/s at stock and 66941 Miops/s at OC'd speeds, so shouldn't it be est. 62GFLOPS or 67GFLOPS? Edit: Also, third post in three years... I should come here more often (the website that hosted my sig no longer exists..). ____________
	ID: 941259 ·

Claggy Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 5 Jul 99 Posts: 3365 Credit: 25,951,744 RAC: 1,177	Message 941597 - Posted: 20 Oct 2009, 22:17:50 UTC - in response to Message 941259.
	Representing all the notebook crunchers out there, here's the GTX 260M 1024MB GDDR3 card (actually a desktop 9800GT in disguise): NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce GTX 260M (driver version 18682, compute capability 1.1, 1024MB, est. 60GFLOPS) For us Notebook Cruncher's, Beta 190.38 Notebook drivers available in the 2nd post in this thread (and so enabling Cuda 2.3 for us): CUDA Toolkit and SDK 2.3 released Expect a 30% ish reduction in Cuda crunching times (with optimised Cuda apps only at the moment) Claggy
	ID: 941597 ·

ViVac Send message Joined: 10 Dec 08 Posts: 3 Credit: 1,095,116 RAC: 0	Message 941652 - Posted: 21 Oct 2009, 3:46:14 UTC
	NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce 9800 GT (driver version 19107, compute capability 1.1, 512MB, est. 19GFLOPS) downclocked to 200mhz(core) 300mhz(mem)
	ID: 941652 ·

mscharmack Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 29 Sep 01 Posts: 9 Credit: 151,490 RAC: 0	Message 941766 - Posted: 21 Oct 2009, 16:22:58 UTC
	Two home builds utilizing SLI: NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce GTS 250 (driver version 19038, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.1, 512MB, est. 84GFLOPS) NVIDIA GPU 1: GeForce GTS 250 (driver version 19038, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.1, 512MB, est. 84GFLOPS) NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce 9600 GSO (driver version 19062, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.1, 768MB, est. 46GFLOPS) NVIDIA GPU 1: GeForce 9600 GSO (driver version 19062, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.1, 768MB, est. 46GFLOPS) ____________
	ID: 941766 ·

[AF>france>pas-de-calais]symaski62 Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 12 Aug 05 Posts: 254 Credit: 69,988 RAC: 0	Message 944169 - Posted: 31 Oct 2009, 9:45:01 UTC - in response to Message 936909.
	BOINC 6.6.XX 30/09/2009 17:31:39 NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce 8400 GS (driver version 19062, compute capability 1.1, 256MB, est. 8GFLOPS) <= PCIe 1wu = 8 heures @+ BOINC 6.10.XX 31/10/2009 09:07:21 NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce 8400 GS (driver version 19062, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.1, 256MB, 43 GFLOPS peak) 43 GFLOPS WOW !
	ID: 944169 ·

MarkJ Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 17 Feb 08 Posts: 912 Credit: 14,576,307 RAC: 9,579	Message 944179 - Posted: 31 Oct 2009, 11:03:57 UTC
	Since I updated to BOINC 6.10.17 on all the machines a more meaningful comparison: Sulu: 31/10/2009 9:38:55 PM NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce GTX 295 (driver version 19062, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.3, 896MB, 596 GFLOPS peak) 31/10/2009 9:38:55 PM NVIDIA GPU 1: GeForce GTX 295 (driver version 19062, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.3, 896MB, 596 GFLOPS peak) Chekov: 31/10/2009 9:30:14 PM ATI GPU 0: ATI Radeon HD 4700/4800 (RV740/RV770) (CAL version 1.3.145, 1024MB, 1000 GFLOPS peak) Maul: 31/10/2009 2:53:28 AM NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce GTX 260 (driver version 19062, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.3, 896MB, 537 GFLOPS peak) 31/10/2009 2:53:28 AM NVIDIA GPU 1: GeForce GTX 260 (driver version 19062, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.3, 896MB, 537 GFLOPS peak) Spock: 31/10/2009 9:58:51 PM NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce GTX 275 (driver version 19062, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.3, 896MB, 674 GFLOPS peak) ____________ BOINC blog
	ID: 944179 ·

perryjay Send message Joined: 20 Aug 02 Posts: 3359 Credit: 9,659,000 RAC: 10,251	Message 944184 - Posted: 31 Oct 2009, 12:17:17 UTC
	Ok, this is new since I updated to 6.10.17.. 10/30/2009 3:01:38 PM NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce 9500 GT (driver version 19107, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.1, 1024MB, 118 GFLOPS peak) ____________ PROUD MEMBER OF Team Starfire World BOINC
	ID: 944184 ·

Wembley Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 16 Sep 09 Posts: 415 Credit: 879,818 RAC: 0	Message 944185 - Posted: 31 Oct 2009, 12:20:09 UTC Last modified: 31 Oct 2009, 12:20:57 UTC
	Boinc 6.10.17 NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce 9500 GT (driver version 19062, CUDA version 2030, compute capability 1.1, 1024MB, 106 GFLOPS peak) (clocks: 1650 shader/575 memory/680 core) ____________ Donate with your searches and online buys: http://www.goodsearch.com/toolbar/university-of-california-setihome
	ID: 944185 ·

Frosted Send message Joined: 11 Jul 99 Posts: 83 Credit: 3,898,641 RAC: 0	Message 944199 - Posted: 31 Oct 2009, 15:22:20 UTC - in response to Message 938308.
	With different versions of Bionic reporting different values I think this is kinda pointless... Get on that will ya Ace! :) Who is actually in need / using this info? If still the case, can't it be gotten more efficiently with a query directly to mork & jocelyn? And if you're going that far, might as well query a day's worth of results to build up the ultimate Seti Performance Pivot Table of CPU Class, CPU Rate, WU angle, GPU type, GPU quantity, GPU ram, OS, 32/64, etc, etc, cpu/gpu time taken, & logical time threshold buckets to detect overclocking of CPU & GPU. ____________
	ID: 944199 ·

perryjay Send message Joined: 20 Aug 02 Posts: 3359 Credit: 9,659,000 RAC: 10,251	Message 944206 - Posted: 31 Oct 2009, 16:08:47 UTC - in response to Message 944185.
	Hi Wonder Puppy, Just to let you know, I've got my 9500GT pumped up to shader:1850, core:725, memory:400. That's got me 12 extra GFLOPS over yours and with my fan set to auto@20% it is staying around 66-68c for my temp. Not sure how much extra those 16GFLOPS peak will give me but every little bit helps when you are as slow as my setup is. (the old way on 6.6.38 showed an improvement from 16GFLOPS to 21 GFLOPS using those settings.) ____________ PROUD MEMBER OF Team Starfire World BOINC
	ID: 944206 ·

Dave Barstow Send message Joined: 14 May 99 Posts: 76 Credit: 13,940,137 RAC: 8,432	Message 944216 - Posted: 31 Oct 2009, 16:45:10 UTC
	Here's a shocker, for me anyway. This is OC'd on an HP 6190 quad-core. The out-of-the-box peak was 124 GFLOPS. 10/31/2009 NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce GT 220 (driver version 18627, CUDA version 2020, compute capability 1.2, 1024MB, 144 GFLOPS peak) My HP does not like the newer driver from nVIDIA so dropped back to this one. I suspect that HP will release their version of the new driver soon. At least I hope they do. Wanna see what it can do... ____________
	ID: 944216 ·

John G Send message Joined: 29 Dec 01 Posts: 61 Credit: 5,130,016 RAC: 0	Message 944218 - Posted: 31 Oct 2009, 16:50:46 UTC
	27/10/2009 5:25:37 PM NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce GTX 295 (driver version 19107, compute capability 1.3, 896MB, est. 118GFLOPS) 27/10/2009 5:25:37 PM NVIDIA GPU 1: GeForce GTX 295 (driver version 19107, compute capability 1.3, 896MB, est. 118GFLOPS)
	ID: 944218 ·

Terost Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 8 Credit: 420,293 RAC: 0	Message 944225 - Posted: 31 Oct 2009, 17:32:26 UTC - in response to Message 944218.
	10/31/2009 8:52:06 AM NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce GTX 285 (driver version 19062, compute capability 1.3, 1024MB, est. 133GFLOPS)
	ID: 944225 ·

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 . . . 12 · Next

Message boards : Number crunching : Post your BOINC Startup 'CUDA' Info