GTX 260 to GTX 295 and only got 2,000 more RAC? |
![]() |
| log in |
Questions and Answers : GPU applications : GTX 260 to GTX 295 and only got 2,000 more RAC?
1 · 2 · Next
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
I have been running this new card for 2 weeks now and only see 2k more RAC! What a waste of money! Can this be correct? | |
| ID: 919780 · | |
|
When upgrading hardware, or installing an optimised application, it can take a month to 6 weeks to show up in RAC values. And that's when the system isn't having issues coping with all the work being uploaded. | |
| ID: 919784 · | |
I have been running this new card for 2 weeks now and only see 2k more RAC! What a waste of money! Can this be correct? When things are stable my GTX295 is good for about 8000 RAC on its own to add to the 8000 RAC of my overclocked quaddie. Even when things are stable, it takes more than 2 weeks for RAC changes to settle down (check how your Pendings have jumped when we can see them again). F. ____________ | |
| ID: 919785 · | |
|
So was this estimate of 14-14k RAC wrong? | |
| ID: 919813 · | |
So was this estimate of 14-14k RAC wrong? Well mine has never got anywhere near that. It is running at stock clock and gives the figures I posted. F. ____________ | |
| ID: 919826 · | |
When things are stable my GTX295 is good for about 8000 RAC ... Really? You let run the stock_CUDA_app or Raistmer's_CUDA_VLARkill_app? One of my 4 OCed GTX260-216 make a ~ 8,000 RAC with Raistmer's latest app. ____________ >Das Deutsche Cafe. The German Cafe.< | |
| ID: 919850 · | |
|
pending credit page is still disable which is giving people false impressions about how much credit they are getting for work that is pending which they can't see. give it time and Patience!!!! | |
| ID: 919851 · | |
|
| |
| ID: 919852 · | |
When things are stable my GTX295 is good for about 8000 RAC ... I don't hold with VLARkill so I rebrand them running the stock CUDA app. Can't overclock the GTX295 because of heat (at the moment it is 20% UNDERclocked but the figures were from when it was running at stock speed). Initial load of a CUDA WU to the GPU takes about 25 sec of CPU time but the rest of the time that CPU core is crunching a 603 (I don't see any point in leaving it idle for the rest of the ~10 minutes on a 0.4x AR CUDA WU). F. ____________ | |
| ID: 919854 · | |
I don't hold with VLARkill so I rebrand them running the stock CUDA app. Can't overclock the GTX295 because of heat (at the moment it is 20% UNDERclocked but the figures were from when it was running at stock speed). Initial load of a CUDA WU to the GPU takes about 25 sec of CPU time but the rest of the time that CPU core is crunching a 603 (I don't see any point in leaving it idle for the rest of the ~10 minutes on a 0.4x AR CUDA WU). Yes, O.K., it depend which kind of CPU and GPU. [ EDIT: And how much of it.. ;-) ] One of my 4 OCed GTX260-216 make an AR=0.44x WU in 6:45 [m:s] and shorties in 2:30. And I have big (25 % CPU, 100 % Core) and very long (~ 5 sec. every ~ 5 sec.) boinc.exe peaks because of small cache of ~ 4 days.. ~ 3,500 WUs.. ;-) I had let run 4 CPU WUs and 4 GPU WUs.. and the performance of the GPUs were very very bad and the RAC would be much much less than like now. So for my GPU cruncher (system) I need to let idle the CPU. ____________ >Das Deutsche Cafe. The German Cafe.< | |
| ID: 919861 · | |
|
| |
| ID: 919984 · | |
Thanks, Sutaru. I am already running the CUDA v2.2 dll's so I will likely grab the updated nonVLARkill and see what that does. F. ____________ | |
| ID: 920025 · | |
|
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=4578997 | |
| ID: 921686 · | |
|
That same PC is now up to almost 15,400 RAC and still not showing any signs of leveling off any time soon. | |
| ID: 921983 · | |
That same PC is now up to almost 15,400 RAC and still not showing any signs of leveling off any time soon. It is now almost 16,750 and moving up the list of top computers. #11 and about to move into the top 10. I was only getting about 5,000 RAC prior to adding the GTX295 CUDA card. ____________ | |
| ID: 922483 · | |
|
20,800 RAC and still climbing. | |
| ID: 923783 · | |
|
Hi, CUDA enabled cards have 'extreme' computation way's (SSSE3) and very little 'other' things to do, except putting a few pixels on your screen . | |
| ID: 923909 · | |
Could you please elaborate what has led you to draw this conclusion? Also, what exactly is different about the Tesla cards vs. Geforce cards? P.S. On a side note, glanced at your hosts and wanted to ask if your X9650 was OC'ed? Thanks, Keep Crunching! ____________ "The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not Eureka! (I found it!) but rather, 'hmm... that's funny...'" -- Isaac Asimov | |
| ID: 923971 · | |
|
Bouncing between 23,500 and 23,800 RAC now with the GTX295. | |
| ID: 926069 · | |
Probably ONLY TESLA_CARDS/SYSTEMS are safe on the long run! Hi, @ Westsail & *Pyxey* , yes, I have the QX9650 running @ 3,5GHz, now. (Backed off during the heat, from 3,65GHz). My 'worries', since I've blown a few cards, cheap ones, are the temps on some cards and the MTBF (Mean Time Between Failures). Geforce cards are made for graphics and there is little known about them running at full speed, all the time and doing computations. TESLA cards are made for computing. {Don't know how 'much' is in a name :)} IMHO, I do think, only time (& OC ), can tell. BTW, sorry for my late reply. ____________ Knight Who Says Ni N!, OUT numbered................. | |
| ID: 926233 · | |
Questions and Answers : GPU applications : GTX 260 to GTX 295 and only got 2,000 more RAC?
| Copyright © 2013 University of California |