MMM
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 111

Thread: Gpu2 Client Is Here!!!! This Is Not A Joke!!

  1. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Hhw
    Posts
    4,036
    Quote Originally Posted by [XC] riptide View Post
    Marvin!!!! The thing that worries me is ... I then set the card at 900/900. Same time needed roughly... 91s?
    Clock the cpu higher, this client needs it more then the last one even

    It's also mentioned in the faq

    45s * 100 = 4500

    86400 / 4500 = 19.2 wus/day = (19.2*97) 1862PPD

    Still not so good but allot better

    So.. 2900xt's suck?? Cpu's 400mhz diffrence can't account for that. The SS from riptide is abit small can't read it clearly but dual core with no other cpu processes running I assume ( I do see vmware's I guess for dimes? )

    Edit: Dragonorta nailed it before me
    Last edited by Marvin_The_Martian; 04-10-2008 at 11:06 AM.

  2. #27
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,663
    Quote Originally Posted by [XC] riptide View Post
    Marvin!!!! The thing that worries me is ... I then set the card at 900/900. Same time needed roughly... 91s?
    This client is HEAVILY CPU dependent. Overclock it as high as you can ! Also use FahMon to calculate accurate PPD. If I'm doing 1350PPD with an Opteron185+2900XT combo, I'm sure you Intel guys will do much more.

  3. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Hhw
    Posts
    4,036
    Quote Originally Posted by SparkyJJO View Post
    Remember it just got released. Sometimes they put out really tiny units to begin with to be sure things are going smoothly before they put out the real deal.
    All GROGPU2 projects listed are 97points, let's hope there are projects which just run faster.

  4. #29
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    8,556
    Ah.... so... I'll postulate for now that this is nearly as much a new CPU client as it is a GFX client?? Cos the GFX is not under any pressure at all!

    Also I should point out I'm on Cat 8.1

    Win XP 32bit.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	GPU3folding (Large).JPG 
Views:	324 
Size:	92.4 KB 
ID:	76322  

  5. #30
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    8,556
    Quote Originally Posted by [XC] DragonOrta View Post
    Looks like you need to stop :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana: footing around with that CPU overclock.
    Ha! My SS is on standby for E8500. Then we'll see who's :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:ing around. nOOb.

  6. #31
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    8,556
    Also i noticed... that the client in taskmanager is NOT taking over 50% ie one core, when nothing else is grabbing it?? When I load up something else, the CPU is NOT 100% used. Something like 2-5% is not been used. This reminds me of the last client when combined with another project.

  7. #32
    Attack Dachshund
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    South Carolina USA
    Posts
    3,161
    just adding my data to the thread.
    2900pro 802/800 GPU client
    Q6600 3420mhz (2 smp clients on affinity changer Vista 64)
    good news and bad news...

    good news is it only takes 4-5% cpu away from my dual smps.
    good news is CC reports 50-51c full load gpu temp folding.

    bad news is a measly 343ppd.
    bad news is doesn't look like this thing is even pushing the 2900pro, temps of 50-51c sound like idle temps.

    anyway, I'm gonna run it for a day and see what it does to the ppd on the X4 labeled pc in fahmon below ((the pc that has the 2900pro)... the smp ppd is hurtin right now because it's my main pc, and I've been using it this afternoon, which eats cpu away from smp. but for 343ppd, it doesn't seem worth it. my 1950gt in my old sempron pc was turning 550ppd on the old gpu client. it may be the whole affinity changer and smp combo, but the low gpu temps really make me think this thing is not using my gpu's potential. it's like it's putting along on battery power or something. plus if it's taking 300ppd or more away from my dual smps, then it's a no brainer. I won't be on it much longer.

    Last edited by MikeB12; 04-10-2008 at 01:31 PM.

  8. #33
    Attack Dachshund
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    South Carolina USA
    Posts
    3,161
    oh, btw, for those looking for the fahlog.txt file to point fahmon to, it's in your profile/app data. that threw me for a minute, since all the other clients put it in the working app directory...

  9. #34
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    297
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeB12 View Post
    just adding my data to the thread.
    2900pro 802/800 GPU client
    Q6600 3420mhz (2 smp clients on affinity changer Vista 64)
    good news and bad news...

    good news is it only takes 4-5% cpu away from my dual smps.
    good news is CC reports 50-51c full load gpu temp folding.

    bad news is a measly 343ppd.
    bad news is doesn't look like this thing is even pushing the 2900pro, temps of 50-51c sound like idle temps.

    anyway, I'm gonna run it for a day and see what it does to the ppd on the X4 labeled pc in fahmon below ((the pc that has the 2900pro)... the smp ppd is hurtin right now because it's my main pc, and I've been using it this afternoon, which eats cpu away from smp. but for 343ppd, it doesn't seem worth it. my 1950gt in my old sempron pc was turning 550ppd on the old gpu client. it may be the whole affinity changer and smp combo, but the low gpu temps really make me think this thing is not using my gpu's potential. it's like it's putting along on battery power or something. plus if it's taking 300ppd or more away from my dual smps, then it's a no brainer. I won't be on it much longer.
    Why don't you try dedicating a core to it to get accurate results?

  10. #35
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,663
    Quote Originally Posted by wickedld9 View Post
    Why don't you try dedicating a core to it to get accurate results?
    +1

    Even one of your full cores@3.4Ghz may not be enough to keep your GPU fed full time. This client is a monster on the CPU and requires as much speed as you can throw at it.

  11. #36
    Attack Dachshund
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    South Carolina USA
    Posts
    3,161
    I'm more of a dual smp fan. If I dedicate a core, that will severely handicap smp, and plus I'm not sure how affinity changer would deal with that.. plus fahmon is already showing about a smp 400ppd drop.. if I dedicate a core that will rise to about 1000ppd smp drop.. not worth it to me.

    the same deal with my old 1950gt and the old gpu client, the ppd losses and gains cancel each other out.

    I'll let someone with a slower dual core test it out as a dedicated gpu folder, my Q6600 is too efficient as a dual smp machine. my x2 4600 would be a better candidate, but it's not stealing my 2900pro from my main pc. it's on linux using onboard video as a dedicated smp and turns about 1100ppd at 2.6ghz. it's in my fahmon ss above.

    but for a test and to get some accurate data, I'll stop my smp's and just let the gpu fold on the 2900pro at 827/874 and post some benches for thread data.
    Last edited by MikeB12; 04-10-2008 at 02:24 PM.

  12. #37
    Attack Dachshund
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    South Carolina USA
    Posts
    3,161
    okey doke. killed the smp's and just ran the gpu for a 2900pro bench.

    Q6600 3420mhz / 2900pro 827/874 catalyst 8.3
    1250ppd and uses 100% one core (25% cpu on a quad). temps ares till low for the gpu, so I guess it really doesn't push it too much.

    Last edited by MikeB12; 04-10-2008 at 03:45 PM.

  13. #38
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    41
    They got this out incredibly fast. Next big thing is to utilize both gpus on 3870x2. So, it's like crossfire computing or making a tool that has control over the PLX chip to disable cf (to run 2 clients)?


    ...hmm, waiting for those "all in 1" times. Actually feels kind of bad because this is far from energy efficient way to make things better. I'm talking about crazy cpu usage for kind of nothing. Well... i guess this has been said before (haven't read these folding forums): a greater cause justifies my electricity bill ...though my wife may disagree...
    Last edited by beard; 04-10-2008 at 03:20 PM.
    main rig | htpc
    Q9450 @ 3.60 (water) | E2140 @ 3.00 (water)
    Maximus Formula (nb, sb, mosfets water) | GA-P35C-DS3R (nb, sb water)
    Geil Black Dragon 2x2GB PC6400 CL4 (water) | OCZ FlexXLC 2x1GB PC6400 CL4 (water)
    PowerColor 3870 X2 gddr3 (water) | Sapphire 3450 512MB gddr2 (water)
    WD Raptor 36GB x2 Raid0, Samsung 500GB (all water) | Samsung 160GB x2 Raid0, Seagate 300GB (all water)
    Seasonic S12 600W | Corsair HX 520W
    ViewSonic 27.5" | Panasonic 42"
    Vista64 SP1 | XP SP3
    3DMV: P8615 3DM06: 19522

  14. #39
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Wayne NJ
    Posts
    206
    I have a 2900XT with 1GB DDR4 clocked @ 800/1000
    and a AMD 64 @ 3500MHz.

    [23:26:10] Completed 60%
    [23:26:59] Completed 61%
    [23:27:48] Completed 62%
    [23:28:37] Completed 63%
    [23:29:27] Completed 64%


    I get around 49-50 seconds per 1%

    Dunno how good that is, just for information.
    --------------------------------------------------
    AMD Phenom II 1090T @ 4GHz Asus Crosshair IV
    HD6970
    LSI Megaraid 9260-4i 4xMomentus XT
    OCZ Vertex 3@SB850
    8 gig Patriot Viper 7-7-7-24 T1
    Swiftech Watercooling
    Filco Majestouch 2
    Zowie EC1
    --------------------------------------------------

  15. #40
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    8,556
    Gius^^^^^^^^^ What Cat version you all using???

  16. #41
    Attack Dachshund
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    South Carolina USA
    Posts
    3,161
    fixed cat 8.3

  17. #42
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Wayne NJ
    Posts
    206
    Cat 8.3 is a must i heard. I am using it.
    --------------------------------------------------
    AMD Phenom II 1090T @ 4GHz Asus Crosshair IV
    HD6970
    LSI Megaraid 9260-4i 4xMomentus XT
    OCZ Vertex 3@SB850
    8 gig Patriot Viper 7-7-7-24 T1
    Swiftech Watercooling
    Filco Majestouch 2
    Zowie EC1
    --------------------------------------------------

  18. #43
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    8,556
    Yep. Thought that was the issue. I was on Cat 8.1 LOL

  19. #44
    Attack Dachshund
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    South Carolina USA
    Posts
    3,161
    I just read this on fah forum... for those interested in running smp with gpu2..

    Here's the best config I found for GPU2 + SMP on a quad core machine :

    - I run one SMP client, and I answer "idle" when it asks me if I want idle or low priority (advanced options).
    - I run one GPU client, and I select "Slightly higher" for Core priority parameter.

    With this configuration, Fahcore_11 use one entire core, and the 4 other Fahcore_a1 use the 3 remainings cores.

  20. #45
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Belgium, Galmaarden
    Posts
    221
    I'd try 2x SMP in idle. 1x GPU2 on slightly higher. Or even 2x SMP plus 2x GPU2 if you really clocked it good or it's a 100% cruncher.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ugly n Grey View Post
    I'm just not seeing the beneift to the AMD stuff right now. I mean it's fun to play with, but so is your willy and it only lasts so long before you need something else to do.

  21. #46
    Attack Dachshund
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    South Carolina USA
    Posts
    3,161
    Q6600 3420mhz / 2900pro
    TOTAL PPD COMPARISON for folding with just 2 smp's or 2 smps+gpu2.
    notes*
    -running 2smps with gpu2 on a higher priority core. (higher priority core selection only assigns 9-17% cpu, instead of a true dedicated core which is 25% on a qaud, so I see slightly less gpu ppd than when I run the gpu alone in above post for 1250ppd. the gpu is turning 1000-1200ppd on the slightly higher priority setting depending on where the cpu util fluctuates on the core assigned to gpu2-it seems to jump around between 9-17%) conclusion: the 10% loss in cpu core really only accounts for less than 100ppd loss on the gpu2 ppd. another note is my 2900pro oc's didn't make a difference in frame times, stock clocks produced the same frame timess as oc clocks on the gpu.

    but for a quick summary of the below data:
    2 smps with affinity changer by them selves = 4253ppd

    2 smps (AC) and GPU2 set with higher priotity core = 4343ppd

    in conclusion for me, it doesn't make any noticeable difference in maximizing ppd by running all 3 clients. they tend to cancel each other out concerning total machine ppd production. anyway, that's what I thought would happen, just needed to see it in action and make sure I wasn't dreaming...
    *also note this is just a window of one test; I'm sure it goes up and down as wu's always do. in fact as I was typing this one of my smp clients took a big frametime hit and went down to 738ppd, probably something to do with AC; looks like one smp started hogging cpu time, and one was getting neglected.. it'll pick back up once AC catches on to it and moves priority to the other client.


    Anyawy, here's the DATA I snapped from the test:


    2 SMP's (AC) without GPU:

    Project : 2653
    Core : SMP Gromacs
    Frames : 100
    Credit : 1760

    -- X4-A-Vista-Q6600-3.4 ghz --

    Min. Time / Frame : 11mn 41s - 2169.24 ppd
    Avg. Time / Frame : 11mn 50s - 2141.75 ppd
    Cur. Time / Frame : 12mn 03s - 2103.24 ppd
    R3F. Time / Frame : 11mn 56s - 2123.80 ppd
    Eff. Time / Frame : 12mn 10s - 2083.07 ppd


    -- X4-B-Vista-Q6600-3.4ghz --

    Min. Time / Frame : 11mn 52s - 2135.73 ppd
    Avg. Time / Frame : 12mn 00s - 2112.00 ppd
    Cur. Time / Frame : 12mn 31s - 2024.82 ppd
    R3F. Time / Frame : 12mn 23s - 2046.62 ppd
    Eff. Time / Frame : 13mn 00s - 1949.54 ppd




    2 smp's with GPU2 using higher priority on 1 core:

    Project : 2799
    Core : Unknown
    Frames : 100
    Credit : 97

    -- X4-GPU 2900pro --

    Min. Time / Frame : 1mn 06s - 1269.82 ppd
    Avg. Time / Frame : 1mn 13s - 1148.05 ppd
    Cur. Time / Frame : 1mn 19s - 1060.86 ppd
    R3F. Time / Frame : 1mn 18s - 1074.46 ppd
    Eff. Time / Frame : 17mn 23s - 80.35 ppd



    Project : 2653
    Core : SMP Gromacs
    Frames : 100
    Credit : 1760

    -- X4-A-Vista-Q6600-3.4 ghz --

    Min. Time / Frame : 20mn 10s - 1256.73 ppd
    Avg. Time / Frame : 20mn 10s - 1256.73 ppd
    Cur. Time / Frame : 20mn 10s - 1256.73 ppd
    R3F. Time / Frame : 20mn 10s - 1256.73 ppd
    Eff. Time / Frame : 12mn 27s - 2035.66 ppd


    -- X4-B-Vista-Q6600-3.4ghz --

    Min. Time / Frame : 13mn 01s - 1947.04 ppd
    Avg. Time / Frame : 13mn 04s - 1939.59 ppd
    Cur. Time / Frame : 13mn 07s - 1932.20 ppd
    R3F. Time / Frame : 13mn 07s - 1932.20 ppd
    Eff. Time / Frame : 12mn 54s - 1964.65 ppd

  22. #47
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    8
    Eh, don't get too hung up on the PPD from this very early look at the new GPU2 beta client. And as you've seen, these are very small test WUs. Larger WUs will perform better, IMO. Also watch for client tweaks in peformance as new beta revs are released. IMO, the PPD will go up.

  23. #48
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    8,556
    Well as it stands this is virtually a new CPU client. I'm getting about 60sec dead per % at 3.6 E6850. Changing the Card clocks does nothing from 743-900

  24. #49
    Attack Dachshund
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    South Carolina USA
    Posts
    3,161
    that makes sense, 7im... the 97 point unknown wu's definitely act different than the 330 point wu's that the 1950's fold...

    the 97 point beta's surprised me when load temps didn't look like the card was loading up, and oc clocks didn't affect frame times from stock clocks.

    I'm sure the real production wu's will be different.. or at least hope they will once this client gets transferred to the main client dl page..

  25. #50
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    8,556
    I agree Mike. I reckon the best is yet to come. I hope to see my card warp with pressure.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •