Is the GTX 295 still the best card for CUDA? (Better than a GTX 470?)

Message boards : Number crunching : Is the GTX 295 still the best card for CUDA? (Better than a GTX 470?)

Author	Message
MadMaC Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 4 Apr 01 Posts: 201 Credit: 44,046,642 RAC: 54,061	Message 1050400 - Posted: 22 Nov 2010, 22:57:59 UTC - in response to Message 1050107.
	Yes, the 295 is still the card to beat. Although on some projects, ATI is a killer. Not here, though. Two 295's in one rig are a powerful couple of crunchers. I have 2 465's in another rig, and they are rather lame. Very dissapointed in them, I be. Mark, you can run upto 3 wu's per card on fermi - that will bump your RAC up :-) ____________
	ID: 1050400 ·

msattler Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 9 Jul 00 Posts: 34121 Credit: 342,190,202 RAC: 538,978	Message 1050406 - Posted: 22 Nov 2010, 23:24:07 UTC - in response to Message 1050400.
	Yes, the 295 is still the card to beat. Although on some projects, ATI is a killer. Not here, though. Two 295's in one rig are a powerful couple of crunchers. I have 2 465's in another rig, and they are rather lame. Very dissapointed in them, I be. Mark, you can run upto 3 wu's per card on fermi - that will bump your RAC up :-) I dunno.... I thought I tried that and they just took 3 times as long to run, so no real gain. Maybe I'll give it another go when work starts flowing here again. ____________ ****** "Ask not, what your kitty can do for you. Ask what you can do for your kitty." As it is kitten, so shall it be done.
	ID: 1050406 ·

SciManStev Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 20 Jun 99 Posts: 4291 Credit: 62,643,407 RAC: 73,318	Message 1050408 - Posted: 22 Nov 2010, 23:33:54 UTC - in response to Message 1050406. Last modified: 22 Nov 2010, 23:35:08 UTC
	Hello Mark, You can run up to 3 at a time, and there is a definite time increase for two, but you get more out in a given time period, as that is what I did to get a RAC of 47,000, with pendings in the 700,000 range for my one rig. I am set for three now, but since I switched, SETI has not been able to provide enough constant worf to see if there is a gain. The times are not doubled, but are a little longer. That alone means that you will get more out in a given time. At the moment I am set up with hyperthreading on, and 3 wu per card. That would give 18 wu's at a time, and I'm iunterested in seeing how it performs. I believe that with the new servers, I'll be able to get enough work to see where I'm at, and tune the system. It's just too hard to get a good read on where a system will top out when there is not enough work to keep it supplied. Steve ____________ Warning, addicted to SETI crunching! Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group. GPUUG Website
	ID: 1050408 ·

VBobier Send message Joined: 30 Nov 03 Posts: 40746 Credit: 32,040,001 RAC: 19,754	Message 1050421 - Posted: 23 Nov 2010, 0:20:37 UTC - in response to Message 1050408.
	Hello Mark, You can run up to 3 at a time, and there is a definite time increase for two, but you get more out in a given time period, as that is what I did to get a RAC of 47,000, with pendings in the 700,000 range for my one rig. I am set for three now, but since I switched, SETI has not been able to provide enough constant worf to see if there is a gain. The times are not doubled, but are a little longer. That alone means that you will get more out in a given time. At the moment I am set up with hyperthreading on, and 3 wu per card. That would give 18 wu's at a time, and I'm iunterested in seeing how it performs. I believe that with the new servers, I'll be able to get enough work to see where I'm at, and tune the system. It's just too hard to get a good read on where a system will top out when there is not enough work to keep it supplied. Steve Either that, Or You'll be the first person to have figured out how to Tune a Fish. ;) ____________ BSG Anthem My Facebook page
	ID: 1050421 ·

jason_gee Volunteer developer Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 24 Nov 06 Posts: 4037 Credit: 60,123,388 RAC: 59,349	Message 1050498 - Posted: 23 Nov 2010, 6:01:49 UTC - in response to Message 1050406. Last modified: 23 Nov 2010, 6:03:19 UTC
	Yes, the 295 is still the card to beat. Although on some projects, ATI is a killer. Not here, though. Two 295's in one rig are a powerful couple of crunchers. I have 2 465's in another rig, and they are rather lame. Very dissapointed in them, I be. Mark, you can run upto 3 wu's per card on fermi - that will bump your RAC up :-) I dunno.... I thought I tried that and they just took 3 times as long to run, so no real gain. Maybe I'll give it another go when work starts flowing here again. Ahhh, I wondered when the reasons would come out ;) For reference on my 480, with x32f: 1 Mid AR task at a time: ~8 mins total, 8 mins each 2 Mid AR tasks at a time: ~14 mins total, 7 mins each 3 Mid AR tasks at a time: ~18 mins total, 6 mins each 4 Mid AR ... too long So I've been running 3 at a time, and the dual core with the single 480 reached a RAC high of 26000. I'm not sure what the 465 dynamics would be, but at least 2 tasks at a time should hide some of the CPU usage that the GPUs would have been otherwise idle. The same operation wasn't workable on the GTX 260 in the other room, and dynamics of the best number of tasks to run on Fermi at a time may vary with future application optimisation levels, as well as model of card. Jason ____________ "It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change." Charles Darwin
	ID: 1050498 ·

Previous · 1 · 2

Message boards : Number crunching : Is the GTX 295 still the best card for CUDA? (Better than a GTX 470?)