Message boards :
Number crunching :
PCIe speed and CUDA performance
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4
Author | Message |
---|---|
zoom3+1=4 Send message Joined: 30 Nov 03 Posts: 65777 Credit: 55,293,173 RAC: 49 |
Lack of difference in calculations in first three results show that two units are identical, especially in sane of testing purposes. Thank You, I was only correcting an error on Todds part, But then a 4x slot is not a problem for a GTX295 doing Seti@Home, As long as the 4x slot(electrically) is long enough for a 16x card to fit in It. The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's |
hbomber Send message Joined: 2 May 01 Posts: 437 Credit: 50,852,854 RAC: 0 |
And what if u don't get corrected in case where you wrote incorrect statements? The cases you are missing are about GT240's power consumption and GT260s power consumption and last is where also, riding popular wave, gave an advice to run several units simultaneously. In those I corrected you, and ran actual tests to prove last case. What if I didn't? Ppl would think 240 consumes 100+ watts and 260 consumes 270 watts alone, effectively missing two most efficient cruncher GPUs and would lose time and resource, running more than one unit on 470, where is not needed. I appreciate your acknowledge of mistakes, but better don't let them float around at all. Bcs not every time someone would correct you. Yet another example of long floating uncorrected mistake is to use or not to use hyper-threading. And still no one has brought question, how does 4 cores perform, regarding is HT on or off during the period(yeah, there is huge difference if u crunch with 4 cores, but leave HT on). I'll say it for last time - let the people assess numbers, according to their environment and desires. As for 295s. I would not quote Todd in same way bcs two reasons. I haven't observed such card(and in multi GPU environments it very hard to keep track how particular card/GPU performs) and I have suspicion that 295 is not saturating the bus that hard. It has internal synchronization mechanisms(with NF200), may get handled by driver differently, e.g using packed commands for both GPU and they gets dispatched internally, thus utilizing the bus not more than regular high end card or in comparable levels. World shattering, u say. Well, few damaged tiles, another "world shattering" number, brought "Columbia" down. For some they are few, for others they were matter of life. Its harsh example, but you cannot assess how much world shattering for other ppl something is, even those few dozens of seconds. Your irony about my attitude won't help your prove your statements in any topic, a friendly reminder. My attitude towards you does not affect other ppl directly, while the stuff about GTX 260 using 270 watts does. As much as you continue to teach people which is much and which is less, speaking GENERALLY and posting incorrect information on several places already, we cannot agree on any topic. |
ML1 Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 20372 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20 |
... But then a 4x slot is not a problem for a GTX295 doing Seti@Home, As long as the 4x slot(electrically) is long enough for a 16x card to fit in It. I've seen examples where the endstop on a x4 PCIe connector has been cut out so that you can slot in a x16 card or whatever. Does that still work ok even for a x1 slot? (Who needs super expensive motherboards if you can make up an evil GPU cruncher out of x1 slots?!...) Happy fast crunchin', Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) |
zoom3+1=4 Send message Joined: 30 Nov 03 Posts: 65777 Credit: 55,293,173 RAC: 49 |
... But then a 4x slot is not a problem for a GTX295 doing Seti@Home, As long as the 4x slot(electrically) is long enough for a 16x card to fit in It. I have no idea, It should work in theory, But I've never tried that. As long as there isn't anything physically in the way of the 16x card edge, It might work, But I don't know that for sure. The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's |
-BeNt- Send message Joined: 17 Oct 99 Posts: 1234 Credit: 10,116,112 RAC: 0 |
And what if u don't get corrected in case where you wrote incorrect statements? And each time I was quoting wall values instead of card values. Which one is more important total power consumption or in picking a power supply depends on the conversation. And while I was wrong on the topic at hand I wasn't incorrect. Two different things.
So....like I've always qualified my statement on that, there have been people having issues with HT on, but it effects everyone differently depending on the computer setup. Steve is one person I know can give insight on that, and I always direct them to him since he has an out standing amount of time trouble shooting it and figuring it out.
The #1 and #3 computer in the world for Seti run 4x 295's one on a quad core machine the other on a six core. The crunching times are approximately the same. Both are being ran on the 1366 socket (i7, Xeon). The one thing we don't know is what motherboards they are using, Helli is #3 I know he posts here, so counting on NF200 is a bit of a stretch even if your assumption is correct without knowing. The one certain for sure is the faster cruncher is on XP x64 with 2 more cores and a faster clock speed by about 600 odd MHz. To bring Todd back into it, his machine ranks in #10 as the fastest 480 cruncher with 3 of them. His times are about half the time a 295 is doing them on the 480 but, are pulling the same numbers as his single 480 machine at #11.
You talking about me bring up topics that don't apply here then have the adacity to try and compare crunching numbers with the death of an entire space shuttle crew due to a limited number of tiles!?! We can agree on one topic, already did with you earlier in another thread, your matter of discourse is you don't want to agree with me(or anyone?) despite the facts you don't agree with. Traveling through space at ~67,000mph! |
hbomber Send message Joined: 2 May 01 Posts: 437 Credit: 50,852,854 RAC: 0 |
And your "forgot" to mention that these are wall values, and especially in case of 260 it was written "card alone" or same meaning :) You again did wrote incorrect stuff about cards in SLI mode.Just now! I wasnt about to bring this last thing here, but you really need harsh examples. What if no one corrects you, to ask again? Man, you really need at all to cut writing on topics where you are not certain on what you know. |
-BeNt- Send message Joined: 17 Oct 99 Posts: 1234 Credit: 10,116,112 RAC: 0 |
And your "forgot" to mention that these are wall values, and especially in case of 260 it was written "card alone" or same meaning :) Wow dude keep digging, maybe you'll find some tests questions I answered wrong on in the 3rd grade too! I didn't forget to say wall values, I understood them as card values and didn't read into the article to see the finer details. But it's called conversation, discussion, a forum, not an encylopedia. I don't need harsh examples, that was the understanding of how SLi works, or used to, until the drivers were updated, that's why I said "my understanding" not "it works this way". Get over yourself. You also fail to mention how I was right directly after that fact. The bottom line is you want to personally attack me because I don't agree with your statistics or theories because the facts and numbers point elsewhere on more than just your rig. Hate to tell ya brother but your rig isn't the be all of facts about Seti. Traveling through space at ~67,000mph! |
j tramer Send message Joined: 6 Oct 03 Posts: 242 Credit: 5,412,368 RAC: 0 |
nvidia card facts.....look at the pipe lines, and the fill rates....look at newest cards at the bottom of the list....no wonder they cost so much, and out perform the older cards http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/NVIDIA-Chips-Comparison-Table/132 :) |
-BeNt- Send message Joined: 17 Oct 99 Posts: 1234 Credit: 10,116,112 RAC: 0 |
Yeah that makes me feel really bad about my GTS 250, but makes me feel better about the price I paid for the 480! Nice link indeed. Traveling through space at ~67,000mph! |
Sutaru Tsureku Send message Joined: 6 Apr 07 Posts: 7105 Credit: 147,663,825 RAC: 5 |
Thanks to all again! Please use kindly language here in my/this thread. I wouldn't like to see a forum mod close this thread, because he need to act because of the forum rules. Thanks! |
-BeNt- Send message Joined: 17 Oct 99 Posts: 1234 Credit: 10,116,112 RAC: 0 |
Indeed, sorry for the bit of offroading that has taken place in your thread Sutaru, I'm done with that segment of the conversation as it has deteriorated into interpersonal attacks, and won't be posting in response unless it feeds the topic of PCIe and CUDA performance. Thanks. Traveling through space at ~67,000mph! |
j tramer Send message Joined: 6 Oct 03 Posts: 242 Credit: 5,412,368 RAC: 0 |
A buddy of my sent me to this site.....lots of info about everything....but really interesting info about video cards, speeds, bits, fill rates, direct x ....nice compare rates....good way to value price, bang for your buck !!! :) |
Raistmer Send message Joined: 16 Jun 01 Posts: 6325 Credit: 106,370,077 RAC: 121 |
The earlier discussion of speed and bandwidth never went on to discuss latency and other effects which are also important to actual throughput. In the thread http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=225823 there are quite a few screenshots of PCIe peak throughput vs. size of transfer for ATI cards, I'd presume nVidia cards would show similar effects. There is quite big transfer for Gaussian search (GPU->CPU) in case gaussian found on GPU. 1M dots each of float4 type. |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.