Re: Cuda client
Mike <[email protected]> Thu, 31 Jan 2013 21:05:19 -0700
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.distributed-net.rc5 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
In bug 4507 which was referenced earlier in this thread, Lars states "They added more cores but removed hot clocks (shader twice as fast as core) in sake of energy consumption and more cores." So to me, this means that the reason the 6xx cards are slower at dnet is due to an architectural change on Nvidia's part, to me it sounds like they are going green and trying to save energy and in the process they have hurt the performance of dnet. Other types of compute projects or video may not have been affected or gained performance by these changes so Nvidia saw this as a good move since more cores probably helped actual video processing. They sell far more video cards to gamers for video processing than to guys like us who crunch. And game :) As also mentioned, this is similar to what happened in the early P4's from Intel, they removed ROT in hardware which took 1 cpu cycle and the replacement took like 5 or 6 cycles if I remember right so the faster GHZ P4's actually had poorer performance per GHZ for a while. I believe there was a bug or emails here on the list about all that back in 2004 or 5. And the only solution was to get a newer processor, the first P4's still kinda suck at dnet, there is no software fix. So my point is this: The dnet crew didn't do anything to hurt performance, the hardware manufactures can do that to themselves. Check out the CUDA forums sometime, there are some great rants.. I'm not current on CUDA programming (been a few years since I played with it), but there may be no advantage to upgrading to the latest version 5. If all they did was add more gee-whiz options that dnet doesn't use or would not benefit from , there is no reason to upgrade. Cuda is backwards compatible so there is no need to maintain multiple versions if there is no gain. That being said, I'm not sure why the 2.2 client is still on the download page, probably some people refuse to upgrade drivers and 2.2 was the first CUDA release. The Beta Stream client is 10 whole days newer than the official release of the CUDA client. The OpenCL client is fairly new but there are some long bugzilla entries about the development of that. And I'm guessing the driving force there was that the Stream client would not run on the 7000 series cards and there were many filed bugs. So I can see how it looks like Stream and OpenCL have been getting some love, but the CUDA is stable and works on all new CUDA platforms where as there where some challenges with the newer Stream cards and the developers rose to the challenge. I'm probably the last guy running dnet on an SGI Irix machine and would LOVE an OGR client for it, but it's happily been chugging away at RC5 for about 8 years now, and that was about the last time a new client was released for it. Mike On 1/31/2013 7:19 PM, bert wrote: > So are you at this moment working on a newer updated CUDA client that > will take advantage of the GTX 600 series and beyond? Judging by your > response to me earlier I don't think that's going to happen anytime soon > and as I said I would be more than shocked if that is ever going to > happen. I love distributed.net and this has been my main client I've > used for 13 years(with brief stops to check out other projects but > always came back here) ever since I stumbled upon it from a friend on a > forum long ago. > On 1/31/2013 8:59 PM, Mike Reed wrote: >> Hi Bert, >> >> Why do you think we have stopped development (on either platform)? I'm >> not aware that we have... >> >> Kind regards, >> Mike >> >> On 1 February 2013 01:51, bert <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Right now I am very disillusioned with Distributed.net ,and I do think my >>> assessment is fair. I've been doing this project either with RC5 or OGR for >>> 13 years and this is the first time I've actually seen a road block that I >>> feel will never be broken any time soon(with the GTX 600 and newer cards). >>> I'm not a coder and never will be,and I would be very shocked if there ever >>> was a newer client to support the never cards.So Nvidia client development >>> dead in the water and AMD full steam(no pun) ahead? >>> Bert >> _______________________________________________ >> rc5 mailing list >> rc5-Ra3b/QYEcJ3d140v2zMXi0fjHoOT/h/[email protected] >> http://lists.distributed.net/mailman/listinfo/rc5 > _______________________________________________ > rc5 mailing list > rc5-Ra3b/QYEcJ3d140v2zMXi0fjHoOT/h/[email protected] > http://lists.distributed.net/mailman/listinfo/rc5 > > _______________________________________________ rc5 mailing list rc5-Ra3b/QYEcJ3d140v2zMXi0fjHoOT/h/[email protected] http://lists.distributed.net/mailman/listinfo/rc5