Message boards :
Number crunching :
Faster GPUs with Nvidia 310.70?
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
Lee Gresham Send message Joined: 12 Aug 03 Posts: 159 Credit: 130,116,228 RAC: 0 |
[quote]According to the boinc statistics graph mine were steadily losing ground crunching 2/gpu. When did you start crunching 2 at a time? I don't remember exactly when I tried now. It was probably late summer early fall. I'll give it a try again after the outages and the scores stabilize. I only have the 1 560Ti that's rated as capable. Delta-V |
Grant (SSSF) Send message Joined: 19 Aug 99 Posts: 13736 Credit: 208,696,464 RAC: 304 |
When did you start crunching 2 at a time? Probably over a year ago, although the way time's been flying it's probably more like a couple of years now. I only have the 1 560Ti that's rated as capable. My GTX 560Ti is running 3 at a time as i don't use that computer for anything other than crunching. My 460 runs 2 at a time- it is able to run 3, but with only 1GB of RAM the system comes to a sudden halt when doing other things that need plenty of video RAM, if it had 2GB i'd run 3 at a time on it also. Both are running the optimised applications with 275.33 video drivers. Grant Darwin NT |
Lee Gresham Send message Joined: 12 Aug 03 Posts: 159 Credit: 130,116,228 RAC: 0 |
Yesterday I updated the drivers on the GTX560Ti and the 2 GTX470s to 310.90 after which I ran Performance 64 again. The 560 and the 2 470s now are able to run 2 at a time. I set each to do just that. No difference yet. Delta-V |
Grant (SSSF) Send message Joined: 19 Aug 99 Posts: 13736 Credit: 208,696,464 RAC: 304 |
Yesterday I updated the drivers on the GTX560Ti and the 2 GTX470s to 310.90 after which I ran Performance 64 again. The 560 and the 2 470s now are able to run 2 at a time. I set each to do just that. No difference yet. It would have been worth just running one at a time to see what effect the drivers had. I did upgrade mine ages ago to the 300 series, but it actually slowed crunching down so i reverted to the 275.33 drivers. Grant Darwin NT |
Claggy Send message Joined: 5 Jul 99 Posts: 4654 Credit: 47,537,079 RAC: 4 |
Yesterday I updated the drivers on the GTX560Ti and the 2 GTX470s to 310.90 after which I ran Performance 64 again. The 560 and the 2 470s now are able to run 2 at a time. I set each to do just that. No difference yet. But did you try running a Cuda42 app to go with the Cuda42 or Cuda5 driver? I guess not, since you're still on x41g Claggy |
Grant (SSSF) Send message Joined: 19 Aug 99 Posts: 13736 Credit: 208,696,464 RAC: 304 |
But did you try running a Cuda42 app to go with the Cuda42 or Cuda5 driver? Nope, didn't try updating the application at the time. Grant Darwin NT |
Lee Gresham Send message Joined: 12 Aug 03 Posts: 159 Credit: 130,116,228 RAC: 0 |
But did you try running a Cuda42 app to go with the Cuda42 or Cuda5 driver? I guess not, since you're still on x41g Claggy[/quote] Where can the cuda 42 app be found? Delta-V |
BilBg Send message Joined: 27 May 07 Posts: 3720 Credit: 9,385,827 RAC: 0 |
Where can the cuda 42 app be found? http://jgopt.org/download.html http://jgopt.net/download.html http://jgopt.info/download.html http://jgopt.com/download.html  - ALF - "Find out what you don't do well ..... then don't do it!" :)  |
mramakers Send message Joined: 20 Jul 04 Posts: 42 Credit: 3,694,335 RAC: 0 |
|
Lee Gresham Send message Joined: 12 Aug 03 Posts: 159 Credit: 130,116,228 RAC: 0 |
I did upgrade mine ages ago to the 300 series, but it actually slowed crunching down so i reverted to the 275.33 drivers.[/quote] I did try the 301 drivers once & that's when my scores dropped a fair bit and I returned to the 275 drivers. On the plus side, all of my GTX machines are climbing nicely now with the 310 drivers and the change to 2 wu at a time after a brief 1 day drop. I'm afraid the climb won't last though as seti is out of work already right now right before the next planned 2 day outage. Delta-V |
Lee Gresham Send message Joined: 12 Aug 03 Posts: 159 Credit: 130,116,228 RAC: 0 |
Where can the cuda 42 app be found? Thanks for the links! The file mbcuda.aistub lacks the statements that appear in the beginning of older version's app_info.xml that specify the path to run the seti 6.03 mb work units. Can it be added to the new versions app_info or is it incompatible with the new cuda 42? Delta-V |
Lee Gresham Send message Joined: 12 Aug 03 Posts: 159 Credit: 130,116,228 RAC: 0 |
The x41g files are contained in Fred's performance64.zip but app_info is replaced by short config file. I can't remember where I found it now. I must have had an installer.exe file but don't have it now. I do have the installers for v0.37 thru v.040 for 32 & 64 bit windows. Delta-V |
BilBg Send message Joined: 27 May 07 Posts: 3720 Credit: 9,385,827 RAC: 0 |
If I understand you want CPU + GPU computing If you have these files: Lunatics_Win32_v0.40_setup.exe Lunatics_Win64_v0.40_setup.exe (exit BOINC first and) run one of them and select only both CPU options (for AP and MB) (there is a bug in the installer - you can't select only MB and nothing else) Then put the files for/from x41zc_WinXX_cudaYY.7z (if in the SETI directory there is old file MBCuda.aistub replace it with the new MBCuda.aistub from the above x41zc_WinXX_cudaYY.7z) Run aimerge.cmd (it will create new app_info.xml from all *.aistub files found in the directory) Check (read) app_info.xml to see it is correct Start BOINC Â - ALF - "Find out what you don't do well ..... then don't do it!" :) Â |
Lee Gresham Send message Joined: 12 Aug 03 Posts: 159 Credit: 130,116,228 RAC: 0 |
Thanks BilBb, that clears up things a lot. I'll try after the server logjam clears. Delta-V |
Vipin Palazhi Send message Joined: 29 Feb 08 Posts: 286 Credit: 167,386,578 RAC: 0 |
Now that the servers are all back online and all my rigs are getting work, I am trying to replace the x41g with x41zc. The rig has a GTX260 and a GTX285, and is running nVidia driver version 285.58. 1. Arkayn's site shows many versions of the cuda file and I am not sure which one to use? 2. The x41zc_Winx64_cuda50 requires driver version 301.48 and higher, which presents me with another issue. The nVidia site gives two different downloads for the latest version 310.90 for GTX 260 and 285 (the last unified driver was 301.42). Can these two versions be installed simultaneously or will it cause any clash? |
Claggy Send message Joined: 5 Jul 99 Posts: 4654 Credit: 47,537,079 RAC: 4 |
Now that the servers are all back online and all my rigs are getting work, I am trying to replace the x41g with x41zc. The rig has a GTX260 and a GTX285, and is running nVidia driver version 285.58. You can one use the ones that your drivers supports, 285.58 is Cuda41 i think, so you have a choise of Cuda22, Cuda23, and Cuda32, the Cuda22 app is only really as a last resort if a GPU is stuck on an earlier driver or is short on memory, Between the Cuda23 and Cuda32 apps, the Cuda23 app is slightly faster, were you to upgrade to 301.48 and run the Cuda42 app you would find that a good bit slower than the Cuda23 or Cuda32 apps, were you to upgrade to 304.xx drivers to get Cuda5 support, you would probably find the Cuda32 and Cuda42 apps get a further slowdown, the Cuda5 app is even slower, while the Cuda23 app is uneffected (I've been only talking legacy pre-Fermi GPUs here), so run the Cuda23 app (Note: the Cuda23 app can't be run on Fermis or Keplars so if you upgrade GPUs you'll need to change apps) 2. The x41zc_Winx64_cuda50 requires driver version 301.48 and higher, which presents me with another issue. The nVidia site gives two different downloads for the latest version 310.90 for GTX 260 and 285 (the last unified driver was 301.42). Can these two versions be installed simultaneously or will it cause any clash? Are you sure? When i checked the downloads they give supported products for 310.90 as: GeForce 200 series: and the filenames don't seem to be any different. Claggy |
ivan Send message Joined: 5 Mar 01 Posts: 783 Credit: 348,560,338 RAC: 223 |
Now that the servers are all back online and all my rigs are getting work, I am trying to replace the x41g with x41zc. The rig has a GTX260 and a GTX285, and is running nVidia driver version 285.58. 1) Use the one that fits your processor, OS, and GPU. e.g. 64-bit, Win7, 200-series. 2) If I check for, e.g. 64-bit Win7, 2000 series on the Nvidia site it only offers one driver. Again, choose the one that suits your OS (32- or 64-bit). Never install two drivers -- I doubt if you can anyway, the latest will always supplant the earlier. |
Vipin Palazhi Send message Joined: 29 Feb 08 Posts: 286 Credit: 167,386,578 RAC: 0 |
1) Use the one that fits your processor, OS, and GPU. e.g. 64-bit, Win7, 200-series. @ Ivan I am not sure why, but when I search for 64bit XP drivers for GTX 260, the only supported devices shown are GeForce GTX 275 and GeForce GTX 260. If I use GTX 285 in the search term, the devices shown are GeForce GTX 295, GeForce GTX 285, GeForce GTX 280, GeForce GTS 250, GeForce GTS 240, GeForce GT 230, GeForce GT 240, GeForce GT 220, GeForce G210, GeForce 210, GeForce 205. This is what lead me to the conclusion that, although the driver version is the same for both (310.90) there might be some differences in them. I performed an automatic driver detection which also gave me two different download options. I do see that you are using the uk site, which is obviously giving a different result. @ Claggy I suppose cuda23 would be the best option for me at this moment. May I also ask what would be the best choice for my GTX480, as you mentioned that cuda5 app is the slowest? |
Claggy Send message Joined: 5 Jul 99 Posts: 4654 Credit: 47,537,079 RAC: 4 |
@ Claggy I was only talking about legacy GPUs there, for a GTX480 you'll probably find the Cuda42 app fastest (that reminds me, i need to do a few more Cuda benches now i'm on 310.90, results shortly) Edit: Here's the v6 Bench results for my factory overclocked GTX460 on 310.90 drivers, with Cuda42 being fastest, Cuda5 2nd fastest, and Cuda32 3rd fastest: ------------ Quick timetable WU : PG0009.wu setiathome_6.03_windows_intelx86.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 291.206 secs CPU 289.085 secs Lunatics_x41zc_win32_cuda32.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 153.489 secs, speedup: 47.29% ratio: 1.90x CPU 2.153 secs, speedup: 99.26% ratio: 134.27x Lunatics_x41zc_win32_cuda42.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 152.131 secs, speedup: 47.76% ratio: 1.91x CPU 1.981 secs, speedup: 99.31% ratio: 145.93x Lunatics_x41zc_win32_cuda50.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 152.771 secs, speedup: 47.54% ratio: 1.91x CPU 2.044 secs, speedup: 99.29% ratio: 141.43x WU : PG0395.wu setiathome_6.03_windows_intelx86.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 397.083 secs CPU 395.041 secs Lunatics_x41zc_win32_cuda32.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 29.453 secs, speedup: 92.58% ratio: 13.48x CPU 2.402 secs, speedup: 99.39% ratio: 164.46x Lunatics_x41zc_win32_cuda42.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 27.440 secs, speedup: 93.09% ratio: 14.47x CPU 1.778 secs, speedup: 99.55% ratio: 222.18x Lunatics_x41zc_win32_cuda50.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 28.033 secs, speedup: 92.94% ratio: 14.16x CPU 2.075 secs, speedup: 99.47% ratio: 190.38x WU : PG0444.wu setiathome_6.03_windows_intelx86.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 339.112 secs CPU 337.071 secs Lunatics_x41zc_win32_cuda32.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 24.742 secs, speedup: 92.70% ratio: 13.71x CPU 1.966 secs, speedup: 99.42% ratio: 171.45x Lunatics_x41zc_win32_cuda42.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 22.511 secs, speedup: 93.36% ratio: 15.06x CPU 1.825 secs, speedup: 99.46% ratio: 184.70x Lunatics_x41zc_win32_cuda50.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 22.979 secs, speedup: 93.22% ratio: 14.76x CPU 1.669 secs, speedup: 99.50% ratio: 201.96x WU : PG1327.wu setiathome_6.03_windows_intelx86.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 190.726 secs CPU 188.699 secs Lunatics_x41zc_win32_cuda32.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 15.226 secs, speedup: 92.02% ratio: 12.53x CPU 2.153 secs, speedup: 98.86% ratio: 87.64x Lunatics_x41zc_win32_cuda42.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 15.304 secs, speedup: 91.98% ratio: 12.46x CPU 1.654 secs, speedup: 99.12% ratio: 114.09x Lunatics_x41zc_win32_cuda50.exe -verb -nog : Elapsed 15.522 secs, speedup: 91.86% ratio: 12.29x CPU 1.388 secs, speedup: 99.26% ratio: 135.95x ------------ Claggy |
Cliff Harding Send message Joined: 18 Aug 99 Posts: 1432 Credit: 110,967,840 RAC: 67 |
Now that I have been running the GTX660SC for over a month now using _x41zc cuda50 and nVidia 310.90, I'm anxious to try running AP tasks using opencl_nvidia_100. Could someone please provide me with an example for the app_info.xml file and any other suggestions that may be useful. I don't buy computers, I build them!! |
©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.