Post Your GPU Folders and their PPD!
Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee
-
- *Lifetime Patron*
- Posts: 4284
- Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2003 6:21 pm
- Location: Undisclosed but sober in US
I have 8800GS cards, the 511 pointers take close to 4 hours to complete. We're talking like 3000 PPD, I used to get 4800.
Yes it's true you should use identical GPUs in the same box, they do not have to be from the same company.
I found one of the new GREEN 9600GT cards, it folds pretty cheap, but the card is at NewEgg and like $140. Forget that. 'Egg also has an Apollo 9600GT with only 256MB of memory, this card may also be good for PPW.
Yes it's true you should use identical GPUs in the same box, they do not have to be from the same company.
I found one of the new GREEN 9600GT cards, it folds pretty cheap, but the card is at NewEgg and like $140. Forget that. 'Egg also has an Apollo 9600GT with only 256MB of memory, this card may also be good for PPW.
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 6:01 am
- Location: Sydney
-
- *Lifetime Patron*
- Posts: 4284
- Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2003 6:21 pm
- Location: Undisclosed but sober in US
I'd love to find a good one for that kind of money. If anything the price on the good ones is starting to rise. I don't want to pay over $100 for one of these cards. And 9600GTs are no bargain lately either.ShadowFaith wrote:^ I still find my 9600GSO alot cheaper. Got it for $50 USD after MIR.
My 9600GSO does 3000-4800PPD depending on the WU...
Just to update this, I reverted back to version 178.24 of the drivers, and although they soak up CPU cycles, they now permit both cards to run at nearly full speed. Since I stopped doing CPU folding on this box anyway, the CPU usage isn't a big deal. It draws more power, yes, but still has a net gain in PPD/watt.AZBrandon wrote:Case in point, I had two 9800GT's doing 32-3500ppd on the 511's. I replace the slower of the two 9800GT's with the GTX+ and suddenly the GT that was doing 3500 drops to 2200. I check on folding forum and find out after the fact that it's a known problem.
-
- Posts: 323
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:56 am
- Location: USA
-
- Posts: 323
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:56 am
- Location: USA
You can find a GTX 260/ 216 55nm pretty easily, and many of themare labelled. the GTX285 is,well, a different model...aristide1 wrote:If I knew for a fact that the one I'd buy is a 55nm one I'd buy it ASAP.warriorpoet wrote:Heh. The GTX is cruising at 5580 PPD on a 511 point WU as we speak
Palit is making many 55nm cards, but they are not labeled. Idiots!
...or are you referring to the 9800GTX? All of the 9800GTX+ cards are 55nm. Those without the "+" are 65nm.
-
- *Lifetime Patron*
- Posts: 4284
- Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2003 6:21 pm
- Location: Undisclosed but sober in US
Are you sure about that? I'll check the reviews cause I'm a nervous nelly.All of the 9800GTX+ cards are 55nm.
They are kinda pricey.
This page would suggest otherwise.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/ ... html#sect0
-
- Posts: 323
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:56 am
- Location: USA
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2 ... 55nm-g92/1aristide1 wrote:Are you sure about that? I'll check the reviews cause I'm a nervous nelly.All of the 9800GTX+ cards are 55nm.
They are kinda pricey.
This page would suggest otherwise.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/ ... html#sect0
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/amd ... e_9800_gtx+/
http://www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=1297&pageID=5005
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/731/1/
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=58 ... pert&pid=1
hm. all the other places I've been to suggest the "+" is the designation for the smaller process (and accompanying higher clocks). It's what makes the plus a plus.
-
- *Lifetime Patron*
- Posts: 4284
- Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2003 6:21 pm
- Location: Undisclosed but sober in US
http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=80445
WP, you're probably right, the argument above has been going on a while.
I did note before than it seemed that the GTX+ used less power overall, but just barely.
WP, you're probably right, the argument above has been going on a while.
I did note before than it seemed that the GTX+ used less power overall, but just barely.
-
- Posts: 323
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:56 am
- Location: USA
Yup. Same with GTX 260 55nm and GTX285. A half-node transition usually doesn't net much in terms of either performance or power consumption gains. That's one reason I bought a GTX280 for ~$300 rather than a GTX285 for $385; the advantages for the new part simply weren't worth the $ nor the added hassle of waiting for new H2o parts to become available.aristide1 wrote:http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=80445
WP, you're probably right, the argument above has been going on a while.
I did note before than it seemed that the GTX+ used less power overall, but just barely.
-
- *Lifetime Patron*
- Posts: 4284
- Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2003 6:21 pm
- Location: Undisclosed but sober in US
Another problem is that xbitlabs shows the 9800GTX+ using appx 76 watts while legoman666 on his spreadsheet shows it using 117 watts. Thats a pretty big difference.
Added - And more confusion:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/disp ... ology.html
DUH!
Added - And more confusion:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/video/disp ... ology.html
DUH!