GPU Folding Guide

[APOLLO]

^ Awesome, can't wait to see what the 1.08 core will bring.

Anyone know what further refinements they will introduce in the new core to be released soon?

 

[Xilikon]

^ Awesome, can't wait to see what the 1.08 core will bring.

Anyone know what further refinements they will introduce in the new core to be released soon?

Dunno... Pande Group doesn't work on weekends so we will have to wait for tomorrow at least before we get a word of a new core.

However, I can say with certitude that core 1.08 will be better than ever, along with a new driver which should fix issues and improve performance. Personnally, I'm running 177.41 and this driver seems to have fixed a issue I had with 177.35, folding and GTX 260 crashing 2-3 times a day (I'm now close to 24 hours without a single crash at all with this driver).

 

[jhartono0002]

First each card needs an output for Windoze to see it before you can start to fold on it.
So it needs to be attached to a monitor, kvm switch, VGA dummy plug, etc, etc.
This is a Windoze drivers thing, not a folding client thing.
You need to extend the desktop to the new outputs for the clients to work.

The 177.35 drivers are still the best.

Download the standard GPU2 client from stanford.
Now download the new FahCore_11.exe v1.07 fromhttp://www.stanford.edu/~friedrim/FahCore_11.exe.
Now replace the FahCore_11.exe v1.06 with the FahCore_11.exe v1.07 in the data folder.

Now make a copy of both the client folder and data folder and rename them.
Make a new shortcuts to start them.
In the first shortcuts target line add the -gpu 0 switch, in the second shortcuts target line add the -gpu 1 switch.
Make sure the start in line points to the correct data folder.
Mine would look like .....
Targets .....
C:\Program Files (x86)\Folding@home\Folding@home-gpu -gpu 0
C:\Program Files (x86)\Folding@home\Folding@home-gpu2 -gpu 1
Start in.......
C:\Documents and Settings\Nigel\Application Data\Folding@home-gpu
C:\Documents and Settings\Nigel\Application Data\Folding@home-gpu2
The first GPU2 client starts with a Machine ID of 2.
So the second clients needs to be set at 3 or higher.
Its easiest to use Windoze notepad to edit the client.cfg file if needed but don't add any spaces, etc or it wont work.

Do we need SLI compatible board to run multi GPU?

edit: nevermind found the answer here

If SLI/crossfire is enabled, this stops Windoze detecting the multi GPU cores.
This stops multi GPU folding.
So you only need the PCI-E slots for folding.

Luck ...............

will try 3x 8800GT on DFI LT P35 TR

 

[Sunin]

Do we need SLI compatible board to run multi GPU?

edit: nevermind found the answer here



will try 3x 8800GT on DFI LT P35 TR

no you do not need a SLI board to run multi GPU... I am running two GPU's on the IP35 PRO....

 

[srbarcena]

Does anyone know where i can get the GPU client for the X1k series?

 

[Pooch666]

I've been folding the last fews days with the GPU client and it's working fine. Just need to update the 8600GT. Question. I still have the 5.03 client in the machine, how do I get both of them folding at the same time? Sig shows my set up. Any help would be appreciated. Gary

 

[Xilikon]

Does anyone know where i can get the GPU client for the X1k series?

There is none. It used to have one but Stanford pulled off recently due to unreliable scientific results. Only the X2xxx series and up.

 

[Wind]

You guys should put a sticky with all the info in the video card forum and there sub-forums if you want to attract more folks!

 

[Nenu]

Hi guys, I've added my 8800GT to team 33 and I think its folding....
I say think because I'm monitoring the GPU temp and it hasnt changed at all and is still the same temp as idle.
One CPU core is maxed out and the other occasionally joins in.
The 8800GT is using 84MB of its memory which started when I started the client so it is doing something with the gfx card.

The viewer shows
Hardware: GeForce 8800 GT

Is the above normal and is it working ok as a GPU client?

 

[a5i2c]

Hi guys, I've added my 8800GT to team 33 and I think its folding....
I say think because I'm monitoring the GPU temp and it hasnt changed at all and is still the same temp as idle.
One CPU core is maxed out and the other occasionally joins in.
The 8800GT is using 84MB of its memory which started when I started the client so it is doing something with the gfx card.

The viewer shows
Hardware: GeForce 8800 GT

Is the above normal and is it working ok as a GPU client?

I have started the same thing but I really do not think this is normal. It will run fine for about a minute then it slows down and uses only one cpu core. If I move the mouse over the graphic screen, it starts using full power again, only to slow down after another minute.

I have no idea what is causing this.

 

[srbarcena]

There is none. It used to have one but Stanford pulled off recently due to unreliable scientific results. Only the X2xxx series and up.

Damn that sucks. oh well guess i gotta upgrade

 

[Garret Jax]

Previously I was running the GPU client on an overclocked NVidia 8800 GTS 640 MB and getting about 3500 PPD. I swapped out the Nvidia 8800 for an ATI 4870 512MB, reformatted the system, and I am awaiting to see my PPD. However, when I ran the 8800 with the GPU client, I was only getting about 10% CPU usage and cranking out the PPD. On the same exact hardware except for an ATI 4870 instead (with the latest Catalyst drivers) I am now seeing 50% CPU usage (one full core of my dual core 6400 cpu). Before, I didn't notice the Nvidia/GPU2 client at all, but now my PC runs pretty poorly because one core is being utilized 100% of the time by the ATI/GPU2 client.

WTF? Thanks for your help, fellow folders.

 

[Xilikon]

It's normal for ATI GPU2 to take a full core while NVIDIA use less CPU cycles

 

[Tigerbiten]

You must be running Vista.

The nVidia client under Vista only need 5-10% of a core to run.
The nVidia client under XP needs 100% of a core to run.
The ATI client under both needs 50-100% of a core to run depending on the card. The better the card, the more core is needed to keep it feed with data.

Its just how the OS-Client-Card interacts.
Nothing much you can do about it.

Luck ..........

 

[Sunin]

You must be running Vista.

The nVidia client under Vista only need 5-10% of a core to run.
The nVidia client under XP needs 100% of a core to run.
The ATI client under both needs 50-100% of a core to run depending on the card. The better the card, the more core is needed to keep it feed with data.

Its just how the OS-Client-Card interacts.
Nothing much you can do about it.

Luck ..........

Tiger,

So we could potentially install Vista, run 2x SMP at approximately 90% power and rung 2x GPU clients with the remaining 10%, thus netting from one box something like:

GPUs = 10k
SMPs = 3.3k
Total 13.3k on vista
versus 12.2k on Xp...

1.1k PPD is a lot to leave on the table.

I might just have to try this on my Quad dual 88GT box!

 

[Tigerbiten]

I agree on the ~1k Ppd difference between XP and Vista.
Running 2x VM's leaves around 3% of the cores empty.
Which under Vista should let me run a nVidia client at full speed.
So I'm hopeing to get ~9.5K off my combo of a Q6600 @3.1Ghz + 9800GTX.

I'm not sure if you could run 2x nVidua client without slowing the SMP's down.
But you will gain more from the GPU2 client then you lost from the SMP's.
Its just a question of how well the plain SMP clients run if you slow them down slightly.

Luck ..............

 

[Pocatello]

I'm downloading driver version 177.41 from the nVidia site for my brand new PNY GXT 260. Is this correct? thanks.

 

[Sunin]

Yep anything above 177.35 is solid!

 

[Xilikon]

I'm downloading driver version 177.41 from the nVidia site for my brand new PNY GXT 260. Is this correct? thanks.

Yes, I use the same for my GTX 260, great driver (177.35 is puking a lot with that card, weird).

 

[Pocatello]

Where should I have my 260. Shaders and other things. This boxen is for folding only, no gaming or anything else.

I somehow deleted or lost my default card settings. I thought that applying the default would always be an option to return to stock settings, but they seem to be gone.

Anyway... what is optimal for folding? Should I underclock some settings?

Thanks.

 

[Pocatello]

p.s. I got my GPU-2 folding on my 260.

I am running Vista 64 bit along with the SMP client.

 

[Xilikon]

Currently, I'm at 602/2052/1512 (core/mem/shaders). I overclocked the shaders since the default is 1296 iirc.

 

[Pocatello]

Currently, I'm at 602/2052/1512 (core/mem/shaders). I overclocked the shaders since the default is 1296 iirc.

Is the above correct, or are you confusing the memory and shaders? The mem clock seems to max at 1680.

 

[Xilikon]

2052 is 1026 in GDDR

 

[Pocatello]

what did you set your 260 fan? I've got mine running at 77% all the time. is that good enough?

 

[Xilikon]

what did you set your 260 fan? I've got mine running at 77% all the time. is that good enough?

Doesn't matter for me, I watercool mine However, before I watercool, I ran it at 70 percent without problems and not much noise.

 

[Pocatello]

Thanks. I will use your settings for now.

I am getting a core download error. Trying to download... but nothing is happening.

 

[APOLLO]

You must be running Vista.

The nVidia client under Vista only need 5-10% of a core to run.
The nVidia client under XP needs 100% of a core to run.
The ATI client under both needs 50-100% of a core to run depending on the card. The better the card, the more core is needed to keep it feed with data.

Its just how the OS-Client-Card interacts.
Nothing much you can do about it.

I'm not sure if there's that much actual difference between XP and Vista. Some people are suspecting it's a problem with XP's Task Manager that's reporting GPU process utilization incorrectly. On my dual quad, I have two GPU clients running on the same core with 0% slowdown. That indicates true CPU utilization is far lower than reported by TM. Hopefully, something can be done to get a more accurate reading in the future. It's very misleading.

FWIU, there might even be some advantages to XP. I have two clients running well without any monitor attached, and both can be OC using RivaTuner. I recall some people having issues with Vista and two cards fully functioning without a monitor or terminator.

 

[relic]

Apollo,
From my testing I agree that task manager is not reporting properly in XP and the GPU2 client does not actually use 100% of a core as is reported. ChesterCopperPot from OCAU has had similar results with several GPU clients assigned to one CPU core in XP producing normal PPD.

However I also have a few identical systems and Vista outproduces XP with GPU2 + SMP in my tests. None of my systems have multiple GPU2 clients, however.

All of my systems have a minimum of 4GB and from BillRs testing, memory may play a role in the Vista vs XP production and also afinity changer seems to have differing effects with different RAM configurations. With 4+ GB afinity changer seems to have little, if any effect. My own testing confirms this.

 

[Garret Jax]

You must be running Vista.

The nVidia client under Vista only need 5-10% of a core to run.
The nVidia client under XP needs 100% of a core to run.
The ATI client under both needs 50-100% of a core to run depending on the card. The better the card, the more core is needed to keep it feed with data.

Its just how the OS-Client-Card interacts.
Nothing much you can do about it.

Luck ..........

Thanks, brah!

 

[APOLLO]

Apollo,
From my testing I agree that task manager is not reporting properly in XP and the GPU2 client does not actually use 100% of a core as is reported. ChesterCopperPot from OCAU has had similar results with several GPU clients assigned to one CPU core in XP producing normal PPD.

However I also have a few identical systems and Vista outproduces XP with GPU2 + SMP in my tests. None of my systems have multiple GPU2 clients, however.

Relic,

Your findings are exactly what I have read on the FCF, that Vista outproduces XP by a certain amount. I think it's somewhere in the neighborhood of about 5% if memory serves. Not enough for me to migrate my system with the GPU clients yet, but it's interesting that Vista would show a slight advantage. I don't know if it's the drivers, client or the OS itself (or combination). Hopefully in the near future, XP will catch up with Vista performance and Task Manager accuracy.

 

[Sunin]

I know for a fact vista is out performing XP... my vista box with just 1 GPU is producing nearly 9k, similar box with actually a higher OC is only producing 7.5k...

Effective PPD:
GPU 5681
SMP1 1536
SMP2 1599

Total 8,816 PPD off my HTPC at that! LOL

 

[APOLLO]

I know for a fact vista is out performing XP... my vista box with just 1 GPU is producing nearly 9k, similar box with actually a higher OC is only producing 7.5k...

Effective PPD:
GPU 5681
SMP1 1536
SMP2 1599

Total 8,816 PPD off my HTPC at that! LOL

What is the GPU to GPU PPD comparison with those two boxes including card specs and OCs?

 

[Sunin]

Box1: (XP)
GPU = 4608 @ 700/1800/900 88GT with WU 5216
SMP = 2212 @ 3.6Ghz with WU 2665

Box2: (XP)
GPU = 4232 @ 725/1850/800 88GT with WU 5217
SMP = 2832 @ 3.4Ghz with WU 2653

Box3: (XP)
GPU = 4508 @ 700/1850/750 88GT with WU 5217
SMP = 1984 @ 3.2Ghz with WU 2665

Box4: (XP)
GPU1 = 4508 @ 700/1850/750 88GT with WU 5007
GPU2 = 5184 @ 700/1700/800 88GT with WU 5216
SMP = 2113 @ 3.6Ghz with WU 2665

Box5: (XP)
GPU = 4459 @ 700/1850/900 88GT with WU 5217
SMP = 1396.36 @ 3.2Ghz with WU 2665

Box6: (XP)
GPU = 3987.69 @ 600/1900/900 88GT with WU 5217 (note this client is lower than normal due to no WUs avail for the last couple of hrs)
SMP1 = 1882 @ 3.1Ghz with WU 2653
SMP2 = 1546 @ 3.1Ghz with WU 2665

Box7: (XP)
GPU = 4660 @ 700/1800/900 88GT with WU 5006
SMP = 1987 @ 3.2Ghz with WU 2665

Box8: (XP)
GPU1 = 5317 @ 620/1700/1050 88GTX with WU 5006
GPU2 = 2440 @ 575/1350/900 88GTX with WU 5217
SMP = 1920 @ 3.6Ghz with WU 2665

Box9: (Vista)
GPU = 5681 @ 678/1950/972 88GT with WU 5217
SMP1 = 1536 @ 3.2Ghz with WU 2665
SMP2 = 1620 @ 3.2Ghz with WU 2665

Total Effective PPD is showing 70.5k currently.


Note on the XP boxes i've experienced about 5 that bogged down to about 800PPD per SMP if I let them do their thing... thus the reason I backed down to just 1 smp on those boxes... because XP and the GPU = 80% of 1 core utilized...

 

[Garret Jax]

I am folding with two PC's. One PC uses an NVIDIA 8800 GTS 640MB, and has been getting a little over 3000 ppd. I just put together a new PC with an ATI HD 4870 512 MB GPU, and I am getting... a little over 3000 ppd. WTF? The ATI card appears to be running F@H GPU2. I am a software developer and build my own PCs, so I am not a complete noob when it comes to installing and running software

Both PC's show the F@H client as working, and they appear to be (I'll see 200/10000 one check, 3400/10000 a little later, etc.), but clearly the ppd aren't adding up. Also, the Nvidia 8800 GTS has been getting 3000 ppd since before I bought the ATI 4870, and the Nvidia setup use about 20% CPU time on one core. On my new Vista Business PC, the ATI 4870 is using up 100% of one (of two) cores, and my computer is laggy while the client is running unless I dial down CPU utilization.

I am getting excellent frame rates in Crysis and Mass Effect on the new PC, so I know that the basic GPU functions of the ATI 4870 are intact.

I've double-checked the user name and team number on both clients; they are correct.

What gives, amigos?

 

[Kendrak]

On the 8800, seems a bit low. A driver update and some mild OC should get you over 4k.

The ATI sounds right. The client is not optimised for ATI cards yet.

 

[Sunin]

Keep in mind that version of the 8800GTS only had 96 Stream processors if my memory is correct. I'm not saying those #s are what you should be getting, but I think you should be in the low 4k... (very low) maybe even only high 3's...

It all depends on the Shader OC as well... I have one box that I've managed to hit 2000 on the shader stable... seeing 6k off a 8800GTS (G92) is amazing!

 

[Xilikon]

The 8800GTS 640MB can get to the 4300 ppd area with the 177.35 driver and shader domain overclocked to 1700 MHz. I have one currently running

 

[Garret Jax]

Well, I may not have been clear in my last post. Sorry.

Prior to building my new PC, I was getting 3000+ ppd with an NVIDIA 8800 on Vista. Now I have the NVIDIA 8800 on XP and I also have a new PC with an ATI 4870 on Vista. I am only getting about 3000 ppd - so either the 8800 has slowed and the 4870 is slow as well, or somehow one or the other card says it's crunching but in fact is not.

Both of these PCs are finely tuned (no e-penis) so I think I should be getting at least 6000 ppd, if not more.

Does anyone run a single 4870 on Vista? What's your ppd at?

Thanks guys and gals

-Garret

 

[Xilikon]

Well, I may not have been clear in my last post. Sorry.

Prior to building my new PC, I was getting 3000+ ppd with an NVIDIA 8800 on Vista. Now I have the NVIDIA 8800 on XP and I also have a new PC with an ATI 4870 on Vista. I am only getting about 3000 ppd - so either the 8800 has slowed and the 4870 is slow as well, or somehow one or the other card says it's crunching but in fact is not.

Both of these PCs are finely tuned (no e-penis) so I think I should be getting at least 6000 ppd, if not more.

Does anyone run a single 4870 on Vista? What's your ppd at?

Thanks guys and gals

-Garret

What nvidia driver are you using ?