Forum > GPU crunching
GTX 460 superclocked
Jason G:
One step ahead, looking at the schedule for recent 400 series releases:
--- Quote --- GeForce/ION Release 256 WHQL NVIDIA Recommended 258.96 July 19, 2010
GeForce/ION Release 256 BETA 258.69 June 29, 2010
GeForce/ION Release 256 WHQL 257.21 June 15, 2010
GeForce/ION Release 256 BETA 257.15 May 24, 2010
GeForce Release 197 WHQL 197.75 May 10, 2010
GeForce Release 197 BETA 197.75 May 3, 2010
GeForce Release 197 WHQL 197.41 April 9, 2010
--- End quote ---
*Could be* in a day or so for a new Beta, unless some problem (like this one, lol) causes delays.
Ghost0210:
Think I cans ee what value Boinc is reading in the stderr now...
I've just been having a play with the shader clocks on the 465 and it would seem that Boinc reads this value and outputs to the stderr for some reason.
I've just changed my shader clock and the corresponding figure is shown in the stderr of a task completed
Here you can see that the shader has been set to 3.2Ghz for some reason (although not showing in any GPU monitoring tools)
--- Quote ---setiathome_CUDA: Found 1 CUDA device(s):
Device 1: GeForce GTX 465, 993 MiB, regsPerBlock 32768
computeCap 2.0, multiProcs 11
clockRate = 3200000
--- End quote ---
After I reset the value back to the correct 1215Mhz
--- Quote ---setiathome_CUDA: Found 1 CUDA device(s):
Device 1: GeForce GTX 465, 993 MiB, regsPerBlock 32768
computeCap 2.0, multiProcs 11
clockRate = 1215000
--- End quote ---
If Boinc only uses the core clock, then why would it output the shader clock to the stderr, unless the bug in the driver is reporting the shader as the core clock?
And with the shader set back to the correct value the Gflops is being reported correctly in Boinc of 855 Gflops:
01/08/2010 16:04:43 | | NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce GTX 465 (driver version unknown, CUDA version 3010, compute capability 2.0, 994MB, 855 GFLOPS peak)
Jason G:
--- Quote from: Ghost on 01 Aug 2010, 11:04:28 am ---Think I cans ee what value Boinc is reading in the stderr now...
...
--- End quote ---
that's the app one, [and yes looks wrong]. Stock & my cutdown one use the call from CudaRT.dll (Cuda Runtime). These device functions in the runtime are just wrappers for the same driver calls, so if one;s broken then they both will be.
[Later:] Moved a bunch of unrelated posts elsewhere. Nothing to see here, Carry on ;D
Ghost0210:
Sorry TouchuvGrey, I kinda hijacked your thread for a while there ::)
Did you manage to find out why your 460 was reporting such a low Gflops rating in Boinc?
From everything I've read about the 460 it should be around the 900 Gflops mark.
With my 465 it seems that the default profile that the nVidia performance tool loaded was corrupt and was shooting my shader clock sky high to give a massively over-r!ted Gflops figure,
Not sure if this would be the same problem (maybe downclocking? as another post said as well)
Ghost
TouchuvGrey:
--- Quote from: Ghost on 04 Aug 2010, 03:50:40 pm ---Sorry TouchuvGrey, I kinda hijacked your thread for a while there ::)
Did you manage to find out why your 460 was reporting such a low Gflops rating in Boinc?
From everything I've read about the 460 it should be around the 900 Gflops mark.
With my 465 it seems that the default profile that the nVidia performance tool loaded was corrupt and was shooting my shader clock sky high to give a massively over-rated Gflops figure,
Not sure if this would be the same problem (maybe downclocking? as another post said as well)
Ghost
--- End quote ---
Hello Ghost:
No Problem at all about "hijacking" my thread. I'm glad that my original post inspired
such an interesting discussion. i learned some things from the portion of the responses
that i could understand ( i'm not that technical ). i'm still not sure why it is reporting ( still )
only 363 GFLOPS peak. Just a guess on my parts but could the "compute capability 2.1 "
have something to do with it ? Is BOINC misreading something ? Have i screwed up something
in my computer to the point where the 460 is delivering far less than it should ?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version