|
|
Author
|
Topic: GPU client (Read 30589 times)
|
|
Devaster
|
bob: yes stil 100% CPU usage not all things are on gpu and i dont use for now async acces ....
for now i am working on chirp routine ....
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Macbeth
|
Out of curiosity, what RAC would you expect to get from say a Geforce 8800 series card? Cheers. 
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Radiohead
|
I learned to run Knabench  ....but received a very very strange results: WinXP 32. testWU-1 - testWU-7 C2D E6600 (2.4GHz), default-515.exe, one core in knabench vs 8800GTS 320Mb and last sahcuda.exe 1 - all 7 results - DIFFERENT!  2 - 8800GTS slower than one core E6600!!!  This is as it should be? Quick timetable WU : testWU-1.wu default-515.exe : 304 seconds sahcuda.exe : 499 seconds Speedup: -64.14%, Ratio: 0.61 x WU : testWU-2.wu default-515.exe : 496 seconds sahcuda.exe : 590 seconds Speedup: -18.95%, Ratio: 0.84 x WU : testWU-3.wu default-515.exe : 541 seconds sahcuda.exe : 657 seconds Speedup: -21.44%, Ratio: 0.82 x WU : testWU-4.wu default-515.exe : 125 seconds sahcuda.exe : 123 seconds Speedup: 1.60%, Ratio: 1.02 x WU : testWU-5.wu default-515.exe : 499 seconds sahcuda.exe : 596 seconds Speedup: -19.44%, Ratio: 0.84 x WU : testWU-6.wu default-515.exe : 823 seconds sahcuda.exe : 943 seconds Speedup: -14.58%, Ratio: 0.87 x WU : testWU-7.wu default-515.exe : 361 seconds sahcuda.exe : 376 seconds Speedup: -4.16%, Ratio: 0.96 x
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 15 Dec 2007, 09:25:42 am by Radiohead »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Devaster
|
lol nice times by knabech - by me my 8500 gives not only 19 % but 100% slowdown .....
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Radiohead
|
and yes its still slower than any CPU version ....
Strangely.... I always thought that Nvidia 8 Series faster than Intel C2D http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLOPS"As of 2007, the fastest PC processors perform over 30 GFLOPS.[8] GPUs in PCs are considerably more powerful in terms of pure FLOPS. For example, in the GeForce 8 Series the nVidia 8800 Ultra performs around 576 GFLOPS on 128 Processing elements. This equates to around 4.5 GFLOPS per element, compared with 2.75 per core for the Blue Gene/L. It should be noted that the 8800 series performs only Single precision calculations, and that while GPUs are highly efficient at calculations they are not as flexible as a general purpose CPU."And Nvidia promises that the new card (GeForce 9800) will be even faster. 1 or 3 (!!!!) Tflops.... http://www.nordichardware.com/index.php?news=1&action=more&id=6911I understand that this performance is not at all the tasks... Perhaps the algorithm sahcuda can optimize computing? seti_britta mathematician  It can help? 
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 16 Dec 2007, 03:41:43 pm by Radiohead »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Radiohead
|
lol nice times by knabech - by me my 8500 gives not only 19 % but 100% slowdown .....
8500 - 16/16 processors 8800 GTS - 96/96 processors
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Radiohead
|
something wrong is on your computer ......  Again, I launched the knabench. Now all results - strongly similar 
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Devaster
|
this code is not optimized ... there are a lot mem transfers that can be avoided for example and so on ... next there is mixed the CPU and GPU code in 95:5 .... and not used async access to device ....
first it mus be validated then optimized
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Gecko_R7
|
Mimo,
In what order does clock speed impact GPU performance as far as S@H is concerned? CPU clock, memory clock, shader clock? Also, do I understand correctly that the G92 8800GT has 12 FPU processors in the GPU? Do the shaders provide any benefit?
Sorry for the questions. Just tying to understand this better.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Devaster
|
yes . for example 8500 GPU have two multiprocessors where every multiprocessor has 8 unified shaders, every shader can work with 4 floats at one instruction - you may imagine that your cpu has 16*4 cores .... instructions are very effective - low clocks time, for example MADD - multiply and add have only 4 clocks. cache is extremely effective in contignous reads/writes - called coalescing
clocks speed havent so great impact on gpu performance as count of shaders
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Gecko_R7
|
yes . for example 8500 GPU have two multiprocessors where every multiprocessor has 8 unified shaders, every shader can work with 4 floats at one instruction - you may imagine that your cpu has 16*4 cores .... instructions are very effective - low clocks time, for example MADD - multiply and add have only 4 clocks. cache is extremely effective in contignous reads/writes - called coalescing
clocks speed havent so great impact on gpu performance as count of shaders
Thanks Mimo! Very interesting. So, higher shader count and faster shader clock will actually have better impact on crunching speed/potential for our purposes? In the case of a new G92 based 8800GT, 112 stream processors, each that can process 4 floats in 1 instruction. Wow! The interest in this becomes very clear. G80/G92 stream processors are scaler units, not vector processors?
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 18 Dec 2007, 05:53:19 pm by Gecko_R7 »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote!
The enemy of my enemy is not quite as much of an enemy as my enemy if they ask, and in either case, I will play nice to the enemy of my enemy only so far as it hurts my enemy for real.- 13th century Mongol warlord trying to describe the current semiconductor marketplace after dining on tainted cheese
|
 |  |  |
| |
| Site Statistics |
| Total Members: | 1,187 |
| Total Posts: | 12,411 |
| Total Topics: | 482 | | Downloads |
| Apps |
| Windows R-1.x | 25,177 |
| Windows R-2.0 | 20,387 |
| Windows R-2.2 | 36,768 |
| Linux 32bit 1.x | 6,589 |
| Linux 32bit 2.2 | 4,472 |
| Linux 64bit 2.2 | 1,839 |
| Alpha/IA64 | 216 |
| FreeBSD | 655 |
| HPUX | 355 |
| Subtotal: | 95,232 |
| Source packs: | 4,173 |
| Tool/WU packs: | 8,146 |
| Total: | 162,734 | | GBs dl'd: | 284.02 | | Pages served |
| Today: | 3,326 |
| Total: | 3,577,146 |
| (since 6/26/2006) |
| 173 Donations to S@H |
| U.S. Dollars: | 3,196.59 |
| Euros: | 863.90 |
| Last 24h: | $ 0.00 |
| Avg./24h: | $ 6.18 |
| Estim. total: | $ 4,319.66 |
Latest Member: phod |
| |
 | |  |
 |  |  |
| |
Online users/last 15m
14 Guests, 1 User
Maik 42 Members/last 24hMaik, Archangel999, _heinz, [B^S] zioriga, jlongden, Gecko_R7, Herus, Geek@Play, Pizzadude, Haselgrove, Devaster, Josef W. Segur, Macbeth, Raistmer, dayo21, sunu, Jason G, corsair, The Grinch, Bluesilvergreen, Claggy, KarVi, ppppgabor, Arnulf, clk, Crunch3r, Yurik, Morten, tfp, hwddawg, WHRoeder, Urs Echternacht, Vyper, arkayn, Alex Kraft, ajs, Hiroharu, firefox, Garry W, Vol-Phil, phod, peppe987
| |
 | |  |
|