GPU OCing Help Thread

[Snow Crash]

Otis, are you talking about the GPUGrid Preferences, Maximum CPU % for graphics setting?
If so that is for projects to use in rendering screensavers ... no one here would ever be running anything as a screensaver cause that takes away from crunching doesn't add to it right?

Mabyboi: the only increase I see on your card is that you upped the shaders from stock to 1584 and I don't think you are getting all you can at that speed. Not only is Win7 and HT being on slowing you down a bit but can you tell us what your CPU core speed is?

If everyone can add their OS to the info that would be great. While our CPUs are being used very little I think they are actually a bigger bottle neck than we could have possibly imaged. On one hand it makes no sense that something used so little would have much of an effect but I have seen a difference on gpu usage between HT on and HT off which equates to CPU availablility. I am trying to track down how much clock speeds themselves matter also. Think of it this way ... while the GPU is waiting for the CPU, it is doing exactly that ... waiting. As a reference to the numbers below the Vista64 machine is running at 4.2 GHz and the XPPro @ 4.0 GHz. I also used only TONI_CAPBIND wus in my analysis.

I use Precision and Voltage Tuner (both from EVGA)

GTX 295 (EVGA vanilla)
@1038 mv = 576/1242/999 (stock mv (1038) and stock frequencies)
@1038 mv = 576/1512/1080
@1075 mv = 576/1548/1080
@1088 mv = 576/1566/1080
@1188 mv = 540/1584/1080 (max volts from voltage tuner)
@1188 mv = 540/1656/1080 (max volts from voltage tuner)

My card can run these frequencies on both Vista Ultimate 64/ Win7 Home Premium 64, and XP Pro 32

WinXP gets better runtimes than Vista (and Win7) at SLOWER frequencies
Vista @ 1584 = 18425 seconds runtime (57424 ppd)
XPPro@ 1512 = 17725 seconds runtime (59693 ppd)

gets better as I bump up shaders on XPPro
XPPro@ 1656 = 16850 seconds runtime (62793 ppd)

The thing I can reason as to why they have such different runtimes is that Vista and XP have very different CPU runtimes for the same type WUs.
Vista 64 = 2700 seconds
XPPro32 = 850 seconds.

I now have my 295 runing on XP Pro 32 HT OFF and cpu dropped to 600 seconds, I'll have to wait a bit to see if my overall runtime drops.

Overclocking is nice and can get you better runtimes but I think OS is actually more important.

While you might think I am crazy take a look at the Top Hosts ... the only other two card system that beats me has 275s and I swear I'm gonna catch that one

[Otis11]

Huh... I didn't know that it was only for screen saver... Didn't test anything. Just set it to max.

And SC - I know you're not crazy... (it's called dedication )... but I know I for one don't have much choice over which OS I use... I'm just trying to get the most out of what I have...

[mreuter80]

Wow this is very surprising, because I thought this setting is for projects that have a screen saver (WCG, Spinhenge, SETI, Einstein, etc.).
The parameter says on those projects how much of the CPU should be dedicated to running the screen saver graphics (and taking resources away from the number crunching).
I thought in GPUGRID, the setting has no effect.

If it has an effect it should be definitely mentioned in the first message.

I will try this one.

Thanks for the info

Otis, are you talking about the GPUGrid Preferences, Maximum CPU % for graphics setting?
If so that is for projects to use in rendering screensavers ... no one here would ever be running anything as a screensaver cause that takes away from crunching doesn't add to it right?

Yup, confirmed as I thought ... this setting has NO effect on the speed.
The only reason I could see is that the WCG setting to 100% may have a slight impact. But that would also have an impact on the WCG units - that's something I don't want and don't try.

cheers

[Snow Crash]

pwolfe ... we sure could use your Linux numbers! Even if you are runing stock that will tell us quite a bit about the world outside of Windows.

I just read that if you get to the edge of your shader freq, if you up your gpu core a notch or two you can get the last shader bump to be stable.

Does anyone here know a serious GPU bencher they can pm an invite to give us a 201 lesson on OCing GPUs and tweaking OSes, typically on air?

[Otis11]

pwolfe ... we sure could use your Linux numbers! Even if you are runing stock that will tell us quite a bit about the world outside of Windows.

I just read that if you get to the edge of your shader freq, if you up your gpu core a notch or two you can get the last shader bump to be stable.

Does anyone here know a serious GPU bencher they can pm an invite to give us a 201 lesson on OCing GPUs and tweaking OSes, typically on air?

I'll second that!

[Mabyboi]

Mabyboi: the only increase I see on your card is that you upped the shaders from stock to 1584 and I don't think you are getting all you can at that speed. Not only is Win7 and HT being on slowing you down a bit but can you tell us what your CPU core speed is?

Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit. HT on, stock for CPU, going to overclock that when i get my new fan controller (this weekend). 701/1577/1233. I get about 40-45K ppd.. wish it was higher..

Im going to try and get my i7 up to about 4 or 4.2ghz this weekend...

Anything else?

[Snow Crash]

If you could leave your GPU at the settings you have now we will be able to see if there is any difference once you OC your CPU

[Otis11]

If you could leave your GPU at the settings you have now we will be able to see if there is any difference once you OC your CPU

That's actually a really good idea... Leave it and give it another day or two at current clocks. OC the CPU and let it stablize (both point wise and stability wise) and then push it up some more.

[CaptMorgan]

Yo guys real quick- when i get home from work tonight i am gonna load Win7 64-bit with my i7 860. I can do it @ stock with the dual GTX 275's @ stock of course- or since I am starting fresh would it be better or preferable I do something else?

[Otis11]

That sounds good to me... Give us a baseline and then OC just the CPU to see if it has an effect. Then after establishing a second base, go for the GPU.

Just what I'm thinking... anyone else got ideas?

[lkiller123]

It will be nice if someone can help me max out my shader clock.

753/1944/1135, running stable and error-free on GPUGrid for a week already. But I got artifacts on Furmark.

Running on 9800GTX+ and 196.75.

[HuffPCair]

Just got a bfg 275

So far I have the clocks to
705/1566/1220

May try to go farther, but who knows. I rather game right now lol

Its a BFG 275 OC and my temps are idle 40C and load 68C with fan at 75% while folding.

[Otis11]

Just got a bfg 275

So far I have the clocks to
705/1566/1220

May try to go farther, but who knows. I rather game right now lol

Its a BFG 275 OC and my temps are idle 40C and load 68C with fan at 75% while folding.

Is that F@H or GPUGrid? their temps are different so I have to ask.

Thanks for the stats!

[Mabyboi]

If you could leave your GPU at the settings you have now we will be able to see if there is any difference once you OC your CPU

will do, im just waiting for my fan controller to come in so that i can push higher and be able to control the temps. ill let you know what i get though!

[CaptMorgan]

will do, im just waiting for my fan controller to come in so that i can push higher and be able to control the temps. ill let you know what i get though!

Which 1 you end up gettin, I saw your thread, and was thinking a fan controller would not be a bad idea

[Mabyboi]

Which 1 you end up gettin, I saw your thread, and was thinking a fan controller would not be a bad idea

Sunbeam Rhobeus Extreme

[INFRNL]

@ Mabyboi: Nice controller! I used to have one. I now have a Lamptron FC5 controller. Lamptron makes some good fan controllers too.

@ Otis: I do not recall what all you are running or what all your settings are or what not, but you may be right on your numbers. Since I haven't been around very much lately I missed a setting. I changed a setting on grid preference and I am currently getting almost 30k ppd on my GTX 275's now There is still a performance increase over gtx 260, but not sure if its enough to warrant the additional cost. To me if you had enough cards as I did not long ago, it adds up to quite a bit.

What shaders do you run your gtx 260@? I have mine set to 1599 on precision, but graph shows 1584: this is on my gtx 260-216. I am going to try and get 1620 on it again I think or may just leav it. I think my clocks are great for a 260

@ Capt: I was going to say something to you but forgot If you feel comfortable, you will want to overclock the shaders for max production. There is quite a bit of increase going from stock to 1620 shaders on those 275's. some will run stock to cut down on babysitting fees

[Otis11]

I'm at 1512 right now and it's lookin like I can pull 27k, but that might be a little optimistic. Only 2 days here, so we'll have to see. Probably won't clock it up any more till after spring break (two weeks).

I'm experimenting on a few hunches here... If I can get my numbers substantially higher than normal then I did something right.

[Mabyboi]

Just a little update on my 295:

Currently running at 727/1623/1308,

Ran furmark stable for 20 mins, waiting on GPUgrid stability.

Max temp during furmark was 38c per core

[CaptMorgan]

Mabyboi- I should try out FurMark. though I go by Otis11's sig- if your GPUGRID stable your stable, though I have had my share of instability

[Mabyboi]

Mabyboi- I should try out FurMark. though I go by Otis11's sig- if your GPUGRID stable your stable, though I have had my share of instability

haha, over all my cards ive never had instability, and with temps these low, i dont hope to have it again..

the only issue i see now is that these WU's have been running for 1 hour 30 mins, but have 7 hours 30 mins left... normally my WU's take on average 6 to 6hours and 15 mins...

anyone?

[Snow Crash]

If you paused them or left them running while you were running furmark then boinc manager is only giving you it's best guess as to total elapsed time as opposed to actual runtime to complete the WU. I bet if you watch the time to completion it is going down a little faster than 1 to 1 against the elapsed time. All should be fine.

I am tweaked about as far as I can possibly go ... I might have a tiny bit more memory and that's it. Otis ... let us in on those secret tweaks your working on ... I need to shave just 5 more minutes and then I will be processing TONICAP_BIND wus in 4 hours 30 minutes. Drives me nutz that I am at 4:35 and can't seem to find the last 5 minutes AND be stable.

[Mabyboi]

If you paused them or left them running while you were running furmark then boinc manager is only giving you it's best guess as to total elapsed time as opposed to actual runtime to complete the WU. I bet if you watch the time to completion it is going down a little faster than 1 to 1 against the elapsed time. All should be fine.

Yeah i paused everything for Furmark. thanks!

2 hours in im only done 11 and 13%?! by this point im usually at like 30%?!

[CaptMorgan]

I am tweaked about as far as I can possibly go ... I might have a tiny bit more memory and that's it. Otis ... let us in on those secret tweaks your working on ... I need to shave just 5 more minutes and then I will be processing TONICAP_BIND wus in 4 hours 30 minutes. Drives me nutz that I am at 4:35 and can't seem to find the last 5 minutes AND be stable.

Snow what you talkin about- an actual exact(or about exact) shader OC that will get you ( and all of us ) in a better running?

[Snow Crash]

Otis is the one with the secrets ...
I blather on endlessly so nothing to hide here ... GTX295 540/1656/1080 set in Precision using @1188 mv set in Voltage Tuner. Windows XP 32 bit with HT off, i7-920 21 * 196. Testing 1101 on the memory ... see if it gets me anything. My shaders are MAXED If I turn them up to the next strap (1674) no matter what I try I can't keep them running for more than a day or so at best.