A Fermi benchmark of sorts...

[Talonman]

Thank you!!!

It seems like awful specific info, for a guy that is just making the entire story up, doesn't it?

32 instances x 7 Fermi = 224 GPU Folding instances, and probably about 1 or 2 CPU folding instances, for a total of about 226.

He is folding on over 200 processors. there is no way that is fermi. its just gpu3 beta. 31 gpu's and an i7. g80 and up are MIMD arrays of SIMDs. it sounds like it is a current gpu because he is getting 700 points per SM. that sounds like g92. i find it ironic that if there are 248 active cpus that means exactly 31 gpu's.

226 and 248 are pretty darn close.
22 might have just went to never-never land, while he was getting set up.

Looking here: http://fah-web.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/...sername=FahMan
Active clients (within 7 days) = 228

That would be 7 Fermi * 32 instances + 4 CPU clients running... (Looks correct to me.)


More thoughts: Each Fermi needed to have 32 folding instances loaded up on each GPU, to ensure it was working at 100% of it's capacity.

Each of the 32 folding instances get 16 Fermi shaders to calculate on, and must produce about 1,800 PPD. (1800 X 32 = Fermi's 57,600 PPD)

On g92, (1) GTX 275 produces 9K a day...
9K PPD / 240 Shaders = 37.5 Points per Shader, per Day.
37.5 PPS X 16 g92 Shaders = is only 600 PPD.

If 1 Fermi shader is 3 X as fast as a g92 shader when folding...
16 Fermi shaders would produce 1,800 PPD.
32 Folding instances, running 1 per cluster on (1)Fermi = 57,600 PPD

This all comes down to if you think Fermi's new shaders, with their memory cashes and better calculation speed, can be 3 X as fast as a g92 shader at folding.

If you believe they can be, then 32 folding instances running on (1) Fermi, with each instance being processed on 16 (New improved) shaders = 57,600 PPD.

I see no reason why Fermi couldn't have a 3 X jump in shader speed over g92 when folding.

FahMan was telling the truth, and has the PPD to back it up!