Forum > GPU crunching
GTX 460 superclocked
Richard Haselgrove:
--- Quote from: Ghost on 31 Jul 2010, 03:56:09 pm ---Thanks Richard,
I saw the post you made to DA on the Boinc_Alpha list, from what he said it sounds like nVidia, didn't write this in to their API correctly?
--- End quote ---
It looks as if they didn't even put it into the API at all, although that's the obvious place. Instead, you have to read the printed developer guide, and hard-code the shader counts into the application. Anybody got a hot-line to the NVidia dev team?
--- Quote ---Also any idea's why Boinc would report my Gflops at 2253 Gflops?
31/07/2010 17:50:48 | | NVIDIA GPU 0: GeForce GTX 465 (driver version unknown, CUDA version 3010, compute capability 2.0, 994MB, 2253 GFLOPS peak)
31/07/2010 17:50:48 | | ATI GPU 0: ATI Radeon HD5x00 series (Redwood) (CAL version 1.4.737, 1024MB, 620 GFLOPS peak)
--- End quote ---
No idea on that one, sorry.
Ghost0210:
Ok,
Because having to hard-code something like that is the way to go obviously ::) Only nVidia........
--- Quote ---No idea on that one, sorry.
--- End quote ---
No worries, it reports correctly occasionally so its not a big issue, just a shame I don't actually get that amount
Jason G:
Hmmm, I was reading this stuff not long ago... looking
[Later:] Here's how boinc 6.10.58 sources do the estimation, which matches the technical specifications of the compute capabilities in the Cuda 3.1 reference material.
--- Quote --- // Estimate of peak FLOPS.
// FLOPS for a given app may be much less;
// e.g. for SETI@home it's about 0.18 of the peak
//
inline double peak_flops() {
// clock rate is scaled down by 1000;
// each processor has 8 or 32 cores;
// each core can do 2 ops per clock
//
int cores_per_proc = (prop.major>=2)?32:8;
double x = (1000.*prop.clockRate) * prop.multiProcessorCount * cores_per_proc * 2.;
return x?x:5e10;
}
--- End quote ---
I would suggest they are GigaFlops on the 'cold day in hell' benchmark to start with. For that outrageous Multi-TeraFop figure I suspect the clock rate or multiProcessorCount may be being misreported internally somewhere.
Richard Haselgrove:
--- Quote from: Jason G on 31 Jul 2010, 04:34:33 pm ---Hmmm, I was reading this stuff not long ago... looking
--- End quote ---
http://boinc.berkeley.edu/trac/changeset/21034
http://boinc.berkeley.edu/trac/changeset/21036
No change to http://boinc.berkeley.edu/trac/browser/trunk/boinc/lib/coproc.h since then.
Josef W. Segur:
Another issue involved is that when BOINC reads the properties, Fermi cards are usually downclocked. It's a good feature of the newer GPUs, but leads to lower GFLOPS display. BOINC isn't really using the value much now, instead relying on trying to measure actual performance, so the developers aren't highly motivated to fix it.
Joe
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version