![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
InvisiBill
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Messages
- 2,608
I asked the HD5XXX owners to do the same thing when I was looking at switching to ATI. Now I'd like to compare my numbers to the new Nvidia cards.
You should end up with something like this:
For some frame of reference, the GTX285 is listed in their database as doing 325mkeys/sec, which is right around what mine did. The 9800GT does around 130mkeys/sec.
- Go to the Pre-Release Clients page and download the [x86/CUDA-2.2] client.
- Unzip the file somewhere.
- Run dnetc.exe -runoffline -l benchmark.txt -cpuinfo
- Run dnetc.exe -runoffline -l benchmark.txt -bench
- Post your results here. "CODE" tags will keep it a manageable size.
You should end up with something like this:
Code:
dnetc v2.9107-516-GTR-09122714 for CUDA 2.2 on Win32 (WindowsNT 6.1).
[Mar 31 15:40:29 UTC] nvcuda.dll Version: 8.17.11.9716
Automatic processor identification tag: 8192
name: Quadro NVS 160M (1 MPs)
Estimated processor clock speed (0 if unknown): 1450 MHz
Number of processors detected by this client: 1
Number of processors supported by this client: 128
dnetc v2.9107-516-GTR-09122714 for CUDA 2.2 on Win32 (WindowsNT 6.1).
[Mar 31 15:40:32 UTC] nvcuda.dll Version: 8.17.11.9716
[Mar 31 15:40:32 UTC] RC5-72: using core #0 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd).
[Mar 31 15:40:51 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #0 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd)
0.00:00:16.52 [6,410,666 keys/sec]
[Mar 31 15:40:51 UTC] RC5-72: using core #1 (CUDA 1-pipe 128-thd).
[Mar 31 15:41:10 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #1 (CUDA 1-pipe 128-thd)
0.00:00:16.38 [8,615,123 keys/sec]
[Mar 31 15:41:10 UTC] RC5-72: using core #2 (CUDA 1-pipe 256-thd).
[Mar 31 15:41:32 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #2 (CUDA 1-pipe 256-thd)
0.00:00:16.30 [9,823,934 keys/sec]
[Mar 31 15:41:32 UTC] RC5-72: using core #3 (CUDA 2-pipe 64-thd).
[Mar 31 15:41:52 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #3 (CUDA 2-pipe 64-thd)
0.00:00:17.75 [8,775,579 keys/sec]
[Mar 31 15:41:52 UTC] RC5-72: using core #4 (CUDA 2-pipe 128-thd).
[Mar 31 15:42:16 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #4 (CUDA 2-pipe 128-thd)
0.00:00:18.06 [8,881,913 keys/sec]
[Mar 31 15:42:16 UTC] RC5-72: using core #6 (CUDA 4-pipe 64-thd).
[Mar 31 15:42:40 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #6 (CUDA 4-pipe 64-thd)
0.00:00:19.26 [10,039,487 keys/sec]
[Mar 31 15:42:40 UTC] RC5-72: using core #7 (CUDA 4-pipe 128-thd).
[Mar 31 15:42:43 UTC] RC5 CUDA ERROR [0]: 'the launch timed out and was terminated' (cudaEventSynchronize)
[Mar 31 15:42:44 UTC] RC5-72 benchmark summary :
Default core : #0 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd)
Fastest core : #6 (CUDA 4-pipe 64-thd)
[Mar 31 15:42:44 UTC] Core #6 is significantly faster than the default core.
The GPU core selection has been made as a tradeoff between core speed
and responsiveness of the graphical desktop.
Please file a bug report along with the output of -cpuinfo
only if the the faster core selection does not degrade graphics performance.For some frame of reference, the GTX285 is listed in their database as doing 325mkeys/sec, which is right around what mine did. The 9800GT does around 130mkeys/sec.
