7640 & 7643

If you think it might be a driver problem, see viewforum.php?f=79

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

bruce
Posts: 20824
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: 7640 & 7643

Post by bruce »

sswilson wrote:I believe Stanford has typically applied a "30%" possible range on what PPD might be expected, and believe it or not, these come close to being 30% below recent standards. What's making them look soooooo bad is the fact that we just got through a batch of WUs which were providing PPD well over 30% above what has been the standard.

I'd like to see a more consistant PPD being applied, but am willing to cut Stanford some slack on this one. ;)
I'm not aware of any +/- 30% policy, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

What I do know is that they benchmark on a GTX 460 and if you're using anything else, hardware differences will not accelerate all Projects identically, resulting in variations in PPD which Stanford cannot predict nor can they change them.
bruce
Posts: 20824
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: 7640 & 7643

Post by bruce »

I've alluded to suspicions that the PCIe bus may be the limiting factor for these projects rather than the compute speed of the GPU. See Subject: TPF is WAY long -- P7641 for one such example.

As has already been pointed out, the speed of the data transfers has two important components, bandwidth and latency.

What I do not see is anybody reporting enough detailed information for us to draw any concrete conclusions.
sswilson
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:34 am
Hardware configuration: ASUS Crosshair IV Formula / AMD 1090T / 4X2 Gig GSkill Pi PC3-12800 / Corsair TX750W PSU / Sparkle GTX275 Plus / CoolerMaster Cosmos S / MCP655 WC Pump / MCR320 Rad / 6X Yate Loons / PA120.1 / 2X Scythe Ultra Kaze / Enzotech Luna WB / Dell Ultrasharp 2209WA

Gigabyte P35-DQ6 / Q6600 / 2X 1G 1066 Firestix / "Baked" XFX GTX 280 (RIP again :( ) / MSI GTS 450 Cyclone OC /PC P&C 750W Silencer / MCR220-QP-Res / DD DDCPX-Pro / Apogee GT / Highspeed PC Tech Station / Samsung 931BF / BenQ Q9T4
Location: Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: 7640 & 7643

Post by sswilson »

I was going to play with the bus speed / cpu clock / mem speed to see if I could get any kind of quantifiable results, but unfortunately I've been pulling 8XXX WUs on my GPUs for the last few days. :)

And as far as the %30 goes.... yeah, nothing official, but it's been the kind of response I remember getting any time I've questioned the PPD output of a particular WU over the years. :)
bruce
Posts: 20824
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: 7640 & 7643

Post by bruce »

bruce wrote:What I do not see is anybody reporting enough detailed information for us to draw any concrete conclusions.
Please report your observations here: viewtopic.php?f=74&t=21223
*hondo*
Posts: 102
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 9:50 am
Hardware configuration: Geoforce 250 GTS Active for F@H

4 Core Intel not used at all for F@H
Location: England UK

Re: 7640 & 7643

Post by *hondo* »

bruce wrote:I've alluded to suspicions that the PCIe bus may be the limiting factor for these projects rather than the compute speed of the GPU. See Subject: TPF is WAY long -- P7641 for one such example.

As has already been pointed out, the speed of the data transfers has two important components, bandwidth and latency.

What I do not see is anybody reporting enough detailed information for us to draw any concrete conclusions.
Would not the reference PC-CPU-GPU take care of that in the PPD calculation?
Sorry if I'm being dumb, I just Fold them, & notice the 5k+ drop in PPD
Grandpa_01
Posts: 1122
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:36 am
Hardware configuration: 3 - Supermicro H8QGi-F AMD MC 6174=144 cores 2.5Ghz, 96GB G.Skill DDR3 1333Mhz Ubuntu 10.10
2 - Asus P6X58D-E i7 980X 4.4Ghz 6GB DDR3 2000 A-Data 64GB SSD Ubuntu 10.10
1 - Asus Rampage Gene III 17 970 4.3Ghz DDR3 2000 2-500GB Segate 7200.11 0-Raid Ubuntu 10.10
1 - Asus G73JH Laptop i7 740QM 1.86Ghz ATI 5870M

Re: 7640 & 7643

Post by Grandpa_01 »

sswilson wrote:I was going to play with the bus speed / cpu clock / mem speed to see if I could get any kind of quantifiable results, but unfortunately I've been pulling 8XXX WUs on my GPUs for the last few days. :)

And as far as the %30 goes.... yeah, nothing official, but it's been the kind of response I remember getting any time I've questioned the PPD output of a particular WU over the years. :)
Actually what has been refered to here on this site by most people is 15% + or - which = 30% in reality. Which in my opinion is too much there are some smp projects that currently have a variation of of 100+% 7011 which is the slowest around 20,000 PPD on a i7 970 @ 4.4Ghz and a 7021 which gets 68,000 on the same rig the bulk of the smp projects give me an average of 35,000 PPD. This has been pointed out numerous times but is apparently acceptable so who knows what the real + / - numbers are. :wink:

The current 7640 and the 7641 - 7643 were noted as being below normal from the day they first came out but I believe the 7640 was re-benched and adjusted. I do not think the 7641 - 7643 ever were. But apparently they are set at the right value for the science being done. :e?:
Image
2 - SM H8QGi-F AMD 6xxx=112 cores @ 3.2 & 3.9Ghz
5 - SM X9QRI-f+ Intel 4650 = 320 cores @ 3.15Ghz
2 - I7 980X 4.4Ghz 2-GTX680
1 - 2700k 4.4Ghz GTX680
Total = 464 cores folding
RoomateoYo
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 5:11 pm
Hardware configuration: i7-2600k @ 4.4 GHz
GTX780

i7-2630QM
GT555M
Location: Jackson, MI

Re: 7640 & 7643

Post by RoomateoYo »

Seeing no change of ppd on my gtx570 for these units
Ripper36
Posts: 60
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 8:55 am

Re: 7640 & 7643

Post by Ripper36 »

Bruce has posted a request for data on this issue on viewtopic.php?f=74&t=21223
Image
Post Reply