• 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.

GTS 450 folding

musky said:
I am going to give Dookey a big kiss....14.5K ppd from a GTX 460 at 1780 shaders... :)
Click to expand...

Well, I may have to hold off on the kiss for Dookey. They GPU client is up by 3500 ppd, but mu bigadv ppd is still falling. We'll have to see where it stops.

Edit: almost a complete wash - the GPU client gained 3500 ppd, the SMP client lost 3500 ppd...bummer...
 
Last edited:
musky said:
Well, I may have to hold off on the kiss for Dookey. They GPU client is up by 3500 ppd, but mu bigadv ppd is still falling. We'll have to see where it stops.

Edit: almost a complete wash - the GPU client gained 3500 ppd, the SMP client lost 3500 ppd...bummer...
Click to expand...

Tobit posted a warning in his thread about increased cpu usage, he recommmends not using these wu if you are running -bigadv
 
Nathan_P said:
Tobit posted a warning in his thread about increased cpu usage, he recommmends not using these wu if you are running -bigadv
Click to expand...

This isn't one of the new units...the particular one the card is working on now is a P11239. I think those have been around for fermi cards for a while. I am not close on the deadline, so no harm no foul. I was just all excited when I saw an increase of 3500 ppd on the card...
 
Up we go.

So after getting a L5640 chip to replace my 920, I'm starting to plan my next upgrade for my little farm.

Now my file server is getting a tad old and it's folding away with a power hungry and hot 8800GTX. The CPU is an E4300 and that produces around 1K PPD so I gave up on that. It just seems way too inefficient.

With a spare 920, I plan to find a cheap X58 board and some DDR3 to upgrade my file server but the question is, how many PPD will I get from the boxen if I have 3 GTS450s and bigadv running? I figure the CPU will be around 3.6-4 GHz. Not sure how GPU folding goes with bigadv though since I'm not doing that currently with my POS 5870....

Also, what power figures am I looking at?
 
flyz said:
Now my file server is getting a tad old and it's folding away with a power hungry and hot 8800GTX. The CPU is an E4300 and that produces around 1K PPD so I gave up on that. It just seems way too inefficient.
Click to expand...
The E4300 is too slow at stock. If you have it OCed it's still disadvantaged by only being a dual-core, so it's not surprising you saw very little production with it. All my systems have a minimum of 4 cores. Anything less and production is very low unless there is at least one GPU client. GPU is probably the best use for older computers with minimal CPU resources.

With a spare 920, I plan to find a cheap X58 board and some DDR3 to upgrade my file server but the question is, how many PPD will I get from the boxen if I have 3 GTS450s and bigadv running? I figure the CPU will be around 3.6-4 GHz. Not sure how GPU folding goes with bigadv though since I'm not doing that currently with my POS 5870....
Click to expand...
You might find you're going to be brushing against the -bigadv bonus deadline with 3 GPU clients in one system and only a 920. With 3 Fermis and the new GPU WUs, I doubt it could make good PPD with -bigadv. These GPU WUs have high CPU utilization. You can try it out and let us know what you get, but my initial advice is to stick with standard SMP WUs if you want to run three GPU clients.
 
Are gts 450's still a good alternative to gtx 460's if all I'm doing is folding? Are you guys still getting over 10k ppd from the wu's? I'm thinking of adding 2x gts 450's to my desktop mainly for folding to replace my HD 4830.
 
You guys ever think we'll get to the point where the GPU side of folding will be completely handled on the GPU without having to steal any cycles from the CPU?
 
Zink said:
Are gts 450's still a good alternative to gtx 460's if all I'm doing is folding? Are you guys still getting over 10k ppd from the wu's?
Click to expand...
I haven't heard of any changes. The productive WUs are still relatively new and I expect them to continue. You will see the occasional slower WUs from what I understand, and these WUs could drop PPD under 10k. I believe it's true for both the 450 and 460 depending on OC, but don't quote me on that because I don't have either card yet to confirm it. As always, YMMV.

TYoda said:
You guys ever think we'll get to the point where the GPU side of folding will be completely handled on the GPU without having to steal any cycles from the CPU?
Click to expand...
Not within the foreseeable future and by that I mean at least through 2011. I could be wrong, maybe Tobit who is a beta tester for the GPU client can shed some light on CPU usage. I doubt things will change much in that respect.
 
I hadn't realized there are really only two unit sizes that fermi is getting right now and that they perform so similarly. Are the 611pt units being phased out or are they new ones?

Factory overclocked cards running at 925 on the core are getting between 13500 and 14500ppd on the 912 and 925pt wu's, about 1kppd behind GTX 460's but while using much less power. The one person who ran one of the 611 pointers only got 9000ppd vs 11000ppd on a gtx 460.

I wish AMD cards folded well, then I would go with an HD 6850 now instead. Pande didn't seem certain about the new clients release date and meanwhile I'm burning natural gas to heat the house :eek:, I need some folding hardware in here to harvest that wasted heat energy. I'm going to be water cooling my sli GTS 450's with two old Swiftech mcw60's i got used so I'll have to figure out what max save folding voltages are and just set them to that. How high do you guys think it is safe to go if I want to run the cards 24/7?
 
On water I would go as high as msi afterburner will go!

The 450 really is the ultimate folding card now. Even the gtx 470 and 480 don't really produce much more.
Posted via [H] Mobile Device
 
spitter said:
And check out this.....

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=0AvwcERBMjd6scmIzS3Z5UFZIcVBOTGNYV0k2Z01jQmc&gid=0
Click to expand...
Thanks for the link. Excellent chart. :cool:

Zink said:
Factory overclocked cards running at 925 on the core are getting between 13500 and 14500ppd on the 912 and 925pt wu's, about 1kppd behind GTX 460's but while using much less power. The one person who ran one of the 611 pointers only got 9000ppd vs 11000ppd on a gtx 460.
Click to expand...
Yep, the differences are really negligible at this point with the possible exception of the 611s.

jebo_4jc said:
On water I would go as high as msi afterburner will go!
Click to expand...
I'd still be wary of going too high.

The 450 really is the ultimate folding card now. Even the gtx 470 and 480 don't really produce much more.
Click to expand...
Totally agreed. What a boon for GPU folding this card has been.
 
Last edited:
i have been stuck with the 611 pointers for 2 days on my 450. ppd is right around 8100 sometimes a little more sometimes a little less. card runs nearly 10c warmer than the 912's and really works the cpu.

920/1840/4050 (2025) are my clocks right now, ill see how much more its got with the factory cooler some time before i swap it over to water. on these 611's overclocking has not done much for ppd, i really think its shader limited. with default clock speeds i was around 7700 ppd. that was at 789/1579/3760.
 
Zink said:
Thanks! That saves me $20 after tax and $30 if the rebates come over the stock EVGA's I was going to order from the egg.

8kppd is still fine compared to a gtx 260 etc and maybe more heat means more science?
Click to expand...

Lucky you, looks like they raised the price on the card!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top