GTX 590 a good choice ?

Hello,

it is time to add one more card to my setup of 2 heavily overclocked EVGA GTX 295 water cooled cards. I'm thinking to buy Point of View / TGT GTX 590 with water block so i can add it on my setup. Is this a good choice or wait to see what is the performance of the new GTX 780 in Q1 2013 ? What do you think ?

Regards

____________

I have both 590/690, air cooled, my opinion 590 works to hot, to much trouble to keep it cool, and uses a lot of power, the 690 is better, produces almost the same RAC and works with less power and is cooler (but not to much, stills needs extra fans when used for crunching). In wather cooled you r only concers is your electric bill, the 590 uses about 25% more electric power to do the same job.

The 780 apears to be a good promise but you are comparing 2xGPU´s with single GPU (780) probabily they will launch a 790 with a 2xGPU version. The 15% increase is against the 680 not the 690.

The 2xGPu´s are great if you have few slots avaiable, or whant to buil an super-cruncher with few on them on a single MB, and knows how to handle the heat, otherwise a 2x670 for example is chaper and actualy produces more RAC and are easy to handle than a single 690.

But keep in mind, each case is a unique case, in my case that´s is my opinion, from a user point of view not a technical opinion.
____________

Speaking of the devil, here's some tidbits on the 700 series, there may be 2 dual gpu cards, the GTX790 and the lower powered GTX785...

Putting a 590 in with 295's isn't a good idea as your 295s can only handle one WU per a GPU core (4 total at a time in your case) where the 590 could handle 2 or 3 WU's at a time per a GPU core. So you wouldn't be getting the optimal performance out of the 590.

I'd suggest putting the 590 in its own computer or pull the 295s and just run the single 590. According to FRED'S LIST a GTX 295 will do 1 WU in 130 sec and a GTX 590 will do 1 WU in 53 sec. So based on that you would get 2 WUs from the 295 every 260 sec and 2 WUs every 106 sec from the 590 if you where only running 1 WU at a time on each GPU core. Based on this the 590 would be able to do 4 WU's every 212 sec beating out your pair of 295's by 48 sec to complete the same number of WU's.

The thing I'm not sure about on Fred's list is if the numbers are based on only running 1 WU at a time on all the cards or are the results based off the optimal WU's per a card. Maybe someone else will be able to answer that question.

I have both 590/690, air cooled, my opinion 590 works to hot, to much trouble to keep it cool, and uses a lot of power, the 690 is better, produces almost the same RAC and works with less power and is cooler (but not to much, stills needs extra fans when used for crunching). In wather cooled you r only concers is your electric bill, the 590 uses about 25% more electric power to do the same job.

The 780 apears to be a good promise but you are comparing 2xGPU´s with single GPU (780) probabily they will launch a 790 with a 2xGPU version. The 15% increase is against the 680 not the 690.

The 2xGPu´s are great if you have few slots avaiable, or whant to buil an super-cruncher with few on them on a single MB, and knows how to handle the heat, otherwise a 2x670 for example is chaper and actualy produces more RAC and are easy to handle than a single 690.

But keep in mind, each case is a unique case, in my case that´s is my opinion, from a user point of view not a technical opinion.

But the old question remains...WHy? If the server actualy can´t feed a 2x690 host (I hate the 100 limit!), imagine with 2x or more 790 ...

But the old question remains...WHy? If the server actualy can´t feed a 2x690 host (I hate the 100 limit!), imagine with 2x or more 790 ...

Heh! I'm trying to get my hands on a Xeon Phi. If the article I read is to be believed, this can show up as 61 cores each with 4 threads in Linux, so 244 cpus; in my dual-Xeon with Hyperthreading on, that's potentially 260 simultaneous jobs...

I think there was some way i can set which gpu how many units to crunch or i'm wrong ?

AFAIK, there is no way. All the GPUs in the host will be using the some number of concurrent WUs, unless, you do a multi BOINC installation and then configure it so each instance of BOINC ignores certain GPUs and then you make the app_info different for each version... But if you are luky enough to get all this working then your host will be seen as 2 different hosts with separate statistics and total credits (if it matters)...

Also, if you run different GPUs with very different speeds in the same host you may get troubles with WUs beeing aborted with the error that they are taking too long time to finish, the estimated times to completion will be always wrong and they will be always changing which can lead to a lot of headaches...

I think there was some way i can set which gpu how many units to crunch or i'm wrong ?

AFAIK, there is no way. All the GPUs in the host will be using the some number of concurrent WUs, unless, you do a multi BOINC installation and then configure it so each instance of BOINC ignores certain GPUs and then you make the app_info different for each version... But if you are luky enough to get all this working then your host will be seen as 2 different hosts with separate statistics and total credits (if it matters)...

Also, if you run different GPUs with very different speeds in the same host you may get troubles with WUs beeing aborted with the error that they are taking too long time to finish, the estimated times to completion will be always wrong and they will be always changing which can lead to a lot of headaches...

Actualy, there is a way, and works, but you need to know what you are doing.

Check this post at Vyper´s site, he teach you how to do that:

http://vyper.kafit.se/wp/index.php/2011/02/04/running-different-nvidia-architectures-most-optimal-at-setihome/

Just a warming: Do not try if you don´t know realy what you are doing.