View Single Post
  #36 (permalink)  
Old March 12, 2013, 08:57 AM
sswilson's Avatar
sswilson sswilson is offline
Moderator
F@H
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Moncton NB
Posts: 14,535

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by muziqaz View Post
HI there. As I was a part of the core pre beta testers group I would like to clear some thing up and give you guys some pointers about this new core.

This core uses OpenCL, not closed CUDA, but OpenCL. nVidia have their baby, which at this moment is not OpenCL, so their support for it is way lacking. This is one of the reasons 6 series are doing quite bad with this core. AMD is giving their best efforts to optimise their hardware for OpenCL, as this is becoming industries standard and it is open, that is why we see such improvement with their hardware on this core.
As you can see from release notes at proteneer's blog, titan cannot even run this core because nVidia lack of dedication to OpenCL.

As we all know 4 and 5 series (Fermi) cards were developed as compute beasts by nVidia and you should remember a lot of people ridiculed them and gave grief about it, as it was too hot, too big, too expensive and very late. Now nVidia released gamers card which is 6 series with most of the compute stuff cut out. Thus we have small, cold GPU core which is excellent for gamers, BUT is lacking in compute department, so again this is the second reason why 6 series is doing so 'badly'. It is capable to be as powerful as Fermi in compute perhaps, but this requires major dedication from nVidia to optimise drivers and API.

Now you might ask why proteneer went OpenCL way instead of CUDA with this core. Answer is simple: to make code as unified as possible and to make the code run on both nVidia and AMD gpus. It is pretty incredible that now we have two completely different architectures being able to run the same exact WU.
Also to note: this core at this development stage was being pushed to make it just work. Performance optimisations according to dev will come later. Now we sorted out most of the bugs and errors, so dev can dedicate his effort in performance optimisations. Now we get around 45k PPD on 7970s, but according to dev there is still plenty of optimisations for either nvidia and AMD. I cannot say any numbers, but the potential is quite huge.

So as this core is still in beta, I would urge everyone to calm down and give proteneer a chance to optimise this sucker, as he already made miracles with making this core run.

Most of you are moaning about 6 series running this core slow. In order to run this core on 6 series you have to use beta argument, and unless all of you who moan are in beta testing team, I don't see the reason why would you run beta argument if you are not in the beta tester team and moan. Running beta WUs while not on beta testing team is damaging to project, as problems are not being reported and in a way that is why we have this situation with core 17 and Keplers, because you guys are running what you are not really supposed to run in the 1st place. Those who run beta on 4 and 5 series and are not in beta team, just drop beta argument and enjoy fahcore 16.

In the end, I should give you guys a lot of credit, as you took this news way better than say EVGA folder forum people :D Remember Pande Group's main objective is science. They write scientific papers not on how many points does Kepler lose but what has been done scientifically with the project.

And you have to agree fahcore 17 is pretty amazing as it managed to bring AMD back into folding, and that on its own is absolutely great news
Sorry, but no... this isn't my issue with the current state of Nvidia folding, I stopped using beta / adv flags when they snuck the V2.25 core 15 in under the -advmethods setting.

The problem isn't -beta folding, it's with any WU other than the core 15 7XXX WUs. They aren't using kepler hardware to it's fullest extent as they only peg GPU power @ 80%. There's no doubt in my mind that the problem could very well be on Nvidia's end, but the continuing claims that these particular issues are related to lower compute ability seem to be misplaced if not outright dishonest.
__________________
MSI Z87I Gaming AC / i5 4670K / 2X 4G Gskill 1866 DDR3 / XFX XTR 750 / EVGA GTX 680 SC+ 2GB / Intel DC S3700 200G / random 160G Sata HDD
Inwin 904 / Swiftech MCP655-b / Alphacool NexXxos XT45 120 Rad / 2X Scythe GT AP-15 / EK Supreme HF / Dell UltraSharp U2412M

Asrock AM1H-ITX / AM1 Athlon 5350 / 2X4G Gskill PC3-14900 / Intel 6235 Wi-Fi / 90W Targus Power Brick / 320G Seagate Momentus / Mini-Box M350 / 1X 22" Dell IPS / 1X 22" HP

Last edited by sswilson; March 12, 2013 at 12:10 PM.
Reply With Quote