• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

9600GT ppd not right?

C

crazjayz

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,093
So I'm running an EVGA 9600GT (yeah, I know, no it's not much) clocked at 700 core, 950 mem, and 1825 shaders. I'm working on the 5780 project right now and accord to FahMon, last 3 frames are saying that I'm getting 3221 ppd. How are some of you getting more ppd (closer to 4k) with lower clocks? FWIW, the rest of the system is s939 4400+ at 2.2Ghz with 2gig ram. Can anyone tell me how to push my ppd higher? I only want to use the gpu client to keep my Ebill down, and to keep my system relatively quiet. Thanks!
 
Which driver version are you using? The 180.xx series might be great for gaming, but cost PPD avg vs. the 178.xx for me.
 
Actually, I just downloaded the newest CUDA driver (180.60) for Vista 32-bit.
 
shader processors.. the gpu client is a gpu/shader dependent program.. so the people running lower clocks getting better PPD is due to the shader processor amount.. the bigger the WU's get the more shaders it requires thus the cards lacking tend to lose points.. for example my 8800GT runs the same speeds as the 9800GTX except the memory but the 9800GTX has 128 shader processors while my 8800GT has 112.. so if both cards are running the same shader clock.. the 9800GTX will out perform my 8800GT PPD wise.. and thats why the 9600GT is suffering since it only has 96 shader processors..

though if im wrong about this.. some one correct me.. but i think im pretty close to the exact answer..
 
I'm running 280s, so I can't give a avg on a 9600.
I see much better ppd on either the 178.13s or 178.24s vs. any of the 180.xxs.
The 180.xxs give up about 400-500 ppd avg on the 511 point 57xx wu and about the same on the 384 point 57xx wu.

The new wu's along with a new core cost us all using nVidia GPU clients. With the different wu out now, it's up and down for daily avg depending on how many of each you get in a 24hr period. :eek:
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
shader processors.. the gpu client is a gpu/shader dependent program.. so the people running lower clocks getting better PPD is due to the shader processor amount.. the bigger the WU's get the more shaders it requires thus the cards lacking tend to lose points.. for example my 8800GT runs the same speeds as the 9800GTX except the memory but the 9800GTX has 128 shader processors while my 8800GT has 112.. so if both cards are running the same shader clock.. the 9800GTX will out perform my 8800GT PPD wise.. and thats why the 9600GT is suffering since it only has 96 shader processors..

though if im wrong about this.. some one correct me.. but i think im pretty close to the exact answer..
Click to expand...

I understand that folding is shader dependent, but why are most 9600GTs getting close to 4k ppd and I'm not. It may be what Kowan suggested with the drivers. Where do I get the older 178.XX drivers?
 
crazjayz said:
I understand that folding is shader dependent, but why are most 9600GTs getting close to 4k ppd and I'm not. It may be what Kowan suggested with the drivers. Where do I get the older 178.XX drivers?
Click to expand...
My BFG 9600GT OC2 overclocked at 729 core 1836 shader 1035 memory on WU 5764 which are the 384 point WU's gets 3385 ppd with 178.24 drivers in Vista32.
I think what ppd your getting is correct if that WU is worth 384 points.

 
I think your right in line with what the current WU are doing. any card that has 96 shaders is not doing as well as the ones with 112+

 
Well, Razor_FX_II gave me the best comparison thus far, and I'll agree and say that my ppd is in line with what he has. Thanks guys for all the comments, and FOLD FOR THE [H]ORDE!!!
 
btw who ever said drivers was right.. the 180.xx drivers are borked.. totally forgot about it wasnt even watching my PPD since i updated.. screwed me over big time.. sure it gained me 10 fps in GTA4.. but now i cant friggin play left 4 dead and my PPD has dropped about 200-300 points on all WU's running the same overclock ive always been running..
 
I used the 180.48s for a few days and finished COD5 with them. I then went back to the 178.24s for the lost PPD. :p
 
Yeah, I know, thanks to you guys. Switching over to the 178.24 driver (and sligntly OCing) has yielded me on average +500 ppd. I wish I did this for the past 2 months, when I actually had it running 24/7. Ah well, what can you do!

BTW, would it be worth it for me to sell my 9600GT and get a 9800GT? I have no idea what the "used but it perfect condition" price for a 9600GT is.
 
nah save the 9600GT.. not worth selling.. plus ya never know when you will regret selling that 9600GT.. always good to have a semi decent back up card..
 
Very Interesting, I'll have to switch back to the 178.xx drivers.
Thanks for the heads up, and I thought it was just me.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top