Tesla Personal Supercomputing Gpu's |
![]() |
| log in |
Message boards : Number crunching : Tesla Personal Supercomputing Gpu's
1 · 2 · Next
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
I have been pondering since the Supercomputing Gpu's came out few years ago if is really i mean really worth it forking out $4000 for one of those cards. With all the video cards out there like the GTX 500's and GTX 600's look like cheap alternative to Nvidia's Supercomputing Gpu's. ever improving cuda technology I want to make a super cruncher. But which one will it give me some good bang for my buck? | |
| ID: 1310972 · | |
|
Tesla GPU are not for all, they are so expensive and the price/performance for crunching is not good. Go for Testa only if your software realy need one. There target is the corporate market not the end user market. | |
| ID: 1310997 · | |
Tesla Kepler are they worth the price and for SETI? Any sugestions? No, not worth the price for SETI. A lot of people here can explain this far better than I, but the short answer to why Teslas have a triple-quadruple price tag is: a) They are far better at Double Precision (which however SETI does not use) b) Most of what you are paying for is NVIDIA support, not the GPU itself. Think expensive warranty. Edit: Oh and welcome to the message boards!:) | |
| ID: 1311004 · | |
|
The three 690-cards-per-host limitation, that is strictly due to Windows? | |
| ID: 1311027 · | |
The three 690-cards-per-host limitation, that is strictly due to Windows? DOn´t know why, when i ask the answer was, no mather the MB have suport for 4 GPUS the 690 is realy a 2xGPU on one, for make it work it uses a lot of resources and 4 of them on one host exausts the windows resources. What resources i don cleary Know. Just know because when i try to build a supercruncher, does not work and i ask help from Nvidia suport. But at the time the win 8 was not avaiable, so i don´t know if that changes, in win 7/64 or XP not works. On the other hand, there is a fix avaiable from EVGA (never see it realy work or not), but is realy complicated and requires a compleate rewrite of the GPU BIOS, even if you know how to do that, is something very dangerous to do with a high price GPU. I know someone who try and need to send the GPU back to EVGA... for repairs... I nerver try i could be crazy but not totaly madness to play with fire. That limitation only apears on the 690, you could use for example 2x690 + 2x680 on a single host without problem or even 4x590 if you have, the PCIe slots avaible, a way to feed them (PSUCPU) and manage to take out the heat. ____________ | |
| ID: 1311032 · | |
The three 690-cards-per-host limitation, that is strictly due to Windows? I can confirm the power draw and the heat at my 4x590 rig. I use 2 x1200 watt psus. One for the system and the 2x590, and one for the other 2x590. Now about the limitations.... i don't know...Maybe it is driver issue and not windows? My rig working perfect with 275.33 driver, but i have problems with the latest drivers, like restarts, blue screens etc. ____________ | |
| ID: 1311036 · | |
The three 690-cards-per-host limitation, that is strictly due to Windows? No is not a driver problem, the problem is the way the GPU interacts with the windows itself, something like we have in the early computer days, when you exaust the IRQ avaiables, simply you reach the OS capacity to control any more devices. Yes the 590 runs hotter and uses more power (up to 365W by Nvidia specs) so a big PSU is needed (for drive 2 of them a 1250 PSU is a good choice for a 24/7 cruncher). The 3x690 limitation is only on the 690, 4x590 works perfectly, the problem, they are not avaiable anymore (you can buy them only in the secondary market normaly only used) and draws a lot more power than the 690 (about 20-30% more to do the same job). You will fell the diference in your high power bill. Running a super heavy cruncher (that uses about 1.5-2KW/hr) is not cheap, you will notice it on the power bill! (edit) The expected RAC figures i give is with 24/7 usage in a crunching only host, optimized apps. etc. ____________ | |
| ID: 1311050 · | |
|
@ Juan, how do you have your 4 580's setup? | |
| ID: 1311132 · | |
|
The issue is not limited to windows : It is a CPU /MB capacity issue. | |
| ID: 1311139 · | |
The issue is not limited to windows : It is a CPU /MB capacity issue. As i say there is a way... but not for all, ask TIM and few other owners of TOP Hosts and you will now what i talk... ____________ | |
| ID: 1311148 · | |
|
Juan wrote: As i say there is a way... but not for all, ask TIM and few other owners of TOP Hosts and you will now what i talk... I understand what your saying, it's just hardware technology is leaping and bounding. Soon, if not already there will be a motherboard that will support as many as 16 dual slot GPUs. What I was saying is that it's not "the OS' that is the bottleneck. its purely a hardware capacity problem. Increasing the OS capacity is as simple as an update compared to the physical limitations. | |
| ID: 1311151 · | |
@ Juan, 1) how do you have your 4 580's setup? 1 - It´s not realy a 4x580, is a 1x590+2x580 - the boinc only show the last GPU on the host. 2 - For best performance 2x680 is beter and easy to handle, but remember, the number of slots in your MB is limited, if you have a 2 slot MB if you put 1 690 then you could put a second GPU in the future (if you have the PSU of course). My experience, use the best GPU you could buy /suport 3 - Of course NO, if you have the PSU and don´t care about the power bill, the 590 and the 690 produces almost the same RAC (the 690 with the new keppler optimized apps actualy do a little more). But you need to remember, the power bill, the 590 need about 25% more power than the 690 to do the same job and produces a lot of more heat, if you live in a high price KW/hr region as me, the diferences pays the 690 in few months. In another point of view, the production of the 590 stops about 6 months ago so is hard to find brand new ones. BTW I´m use both cards 590/690 my experience, if you forget the power bill, the 590 is less expensive, need more power to work and produce to much heat, is dificult to handle all that heat in a 2x590 host even with a lot of fans. On the other side the 690 cost a lot more but runs cooler and is easy to handle the heat in a 2x690 host. You choice... less initial cost x less monthly power bill Use more than 2 GPUs on a single host is complicated. Realy not for begginers. 3 is relatively dificult to handle but with few experience and help you could try, 4 just for experienced users try only if you realy know how to do. @tron, im not sure it´s only a MB/hardware limitation, when i ask Nvidia few months ago (that could be changed after that) I allready ask if i change the MB, etc. could fix the problem and the answer was the same, only with a new GPU BIOS, thats why i abandon the ideia. On other hand in the undergroud there is a rummors of a new Boinc development that will virtualy merge your hosts as they are a single cruncher, but don´t expect anything on that area for the following months maybe in few years, it´s a marvelous ideia but something very hard to develop due the complexity of the job. ____________ | |
| ID: 1311158 · | |
|
Thanks for the great information. Power isn't cheap in Germany as well, so sounds like a 690 would be the best choice for me. | |
| ID: 1311160 · | |
Thanks for the great information. Power isn't cheap in Germany as well, so sounds like a 690 would be the best choice for me. I don´t have any 295, but i very sure if you actualy make a 3x295 host work would be ease to put 2x690 or a 3x690 to work, you will be impress with who fast and cool they are and the diference in your monthly power bill. We have a german friend (tpl): http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/show_user.php?userid=171379 he have a 3x690 host and you could PM and ask about the performance, power and heat it needs/produce, and of course in german and knows about the electric cost in Germany. ____________ | |
| ID: 1311162 · | |
|
Looks like tpl is also running a couple 295 rigs. One has 2 cards, but is only showing 3 cores which is an issue I've had as well with one my cards. | |
| ID: 1311166 · | |
Looks like tpl is also running a couple 295 rigs. One has 2 cards, but is only showing 3 cores which is an issue I've had as well with one my cards. Go speak with him, he is a very nice guy with a lot of experience, sure you will like him. ____________ | |
| ID: 1311168 · | |
|
If you were to use an a10 5800k fm2 motherboard 8 gig of pc1866 ddr3 memory a 650 watt power supply and 2 hd6870 video cards plus 1 scrooged case. | |
| ID: 1311215 · | |
The issue is not limited to windows : It is a CPU /MB capacity issue. I am using the Asus P6T7 WS SuperComputer. http://www.asus.com/Motherboards/Intel_Socket_1366/P6T7_WS_SuperComputer/ ____________ | |
| ID: 1311256 · | |
|
Ok, in My 2nd motherboard a used Asus Rampage 3 Extreme motherboard, the R3E has 4 pcie slots, when all 4 x16 length slots are populated each slot is x8 wide in ability, of course it has an i7 940 cpu installed. It's good to know that 4x590 cards will work, 4x690 cards would have been nice, but yeah their not inexpensive in the least. I run Windows 7 Pro x64, Boinc 6.10.58 x64, x41g and BoincTasks 1.43 as the front end to Boinc 6.10.58. I was going to use a Rosewill 1300w psu with 108A for the 1st 3 GTX590 cards and an FSP 450w Booster X5 video card psu for the 4th GTX590 card, all will be water cooled. | |
| ID: 1311295 · | |
The issue is not limited to windows : It is a CPU /MB capacity issue. @Tim I´m interested and curious to, are you actualy realy run 4x690 on that board? Did you have the same problem when you try to put the 4 board to work in the past? Or that kind of double CPU board actualy fix the resources problem to? @Bobier For us, "mere mortals" the Asus Rampage 3 Extreme is one of the best MB you could use for a cruncher, exactly the one i try to put the 4x690 in the past, sure an excelent choice. Maybe the things change and now is possible to put 4x690 on that, lets see the Tim answer. On that MB you shout go easely at least for a 3x690+1x590 and a double PSU solution works fine but with a lot of heat, you need to take some special care with the mechanical fix in the #2 GPUs if you put 4 to work, very few space avaiable but as you use watter cooling that will be not a problem. I´m strongly sugest not to put 3x590 (even 3x690) on one PSU, even on a platinum 1350W PSU, just the 3x590 will drain near 1100W (900W on a 690) from the PSU, to close to the edge, you could expect a total component failure after few months. A 2xGPU per PSU is a better and more reliable solution for 24/7 usage. Could some people don´t agree but for an long lasting, stable and turn-on and forget 24/7 usage, you could only use 60/70% of the total capacity of a PSU (60% is better than 70%). On a heavy cruncher, one of the weakest point is actualy the PSU itself because the internal components performance decays with the past of the time. We can´t do nothing about to avoid that, even with a high grade solid capacitors, the charging/discharging cycle take his toll. PD: If you can, go for the latest beta x41zb builds, works perfect on the 690 with a lot of few keppler directed options squeezing a lot more juice from the GPU. ____________ | |
| ID: 1311307 · | |
Message boards : Number crunching : Tesla Personal Supercomputing Gpu's
| Copyright © 2013 University of California |