Advanced search

Message boards : Number crunching : Non-GPU Factors

Author Message
Keegan
Send message
Joined: 25 Feb 14
Posts: 15
Credit: 53,918,886
RAC: 0
Level
Thr
Scientific publications
watwatwatwat
Message 39321 - Posted: 27 Dec 2014 | 23:13:19 UTC

I was wondering how factors such as ram speed, channels, pcie bandwidth, solid state drives, processor/chipsets effect our GPU crunching speed.

Any thoughts?

Jim1348
Send message
Joined: 28 Jul 12
Posts: 819
Credit: 1,591,285,971
RAC: 0
Level
His
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 39324 - Posted: 28 Dec 2014 | 16:52:16 UTC - in response to Message 39321.

I moved my GTX 660s from a P45 motherboard with an E8400 dual-core (3 GHz) to a Haswell i7-4790 on a Z97 motherboard with no observable change in speed (both with SSDs), if that gives you any indication. I think if you went to a x4 PCIe slot you might see some reduction, but otherwise any differences would be hard to find.

Profile Beyond
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Nov 08
Posts: 1112
Credit: 6,162,416,256
RAC: 0
Level
Tyr
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 39333 - Posted: 29 Dec 2014 | 18:43:59 UTC - in response to Message 39321.
Last modified: 29 Dec 2014 | 19:00:54 UTC

I was wondering how factors such as ram speed, channels, pcie bandwidth, solid state drives, processor/chipsets effect our GPU crunching speed.

Any thoughts?

ram speed: not much if any
channels: no
pcie bandwidth: PCIe 2.0 x8 or above = no difference, x4 = a little slowdown (PCIe 3.0 x4 should be full speed)
solid state drives: not at all
processor/chipsets: lets just say that a 1.8GHz dual core Celeron on a cheapo mini ITX MB runs a 750Ti at full speed with 2 CPU apps running (on a PCIe 2.0 x8 slot no less)

Keegan
Send message
Joined: 25 Feb 14
Posts: 15
Credit: 53,918,886
RAC: 0
Level
Thr
Scientific publications
watwatwatwat
Message 39418 - Posted: 8 Jan 2015 | 9:53:15 UTC
Last modified: 8 Jan 2015 | 9:55:26 UTC

Update: I upgraded my computers memory from 1333Mhz to 1600Mhz, my cpu from a fx-6300 to an i7-4790k, and my motherboard from a MSI GD80 (chipset 990fx) To MSI Gaming 7 (chipset z97), I went from pcie 2.0 x16 to 3.0 x16.

My graphics card remained a 780ti and my hard drive a Sandisk Extreme II ssd.

I notice a reduction of a few minutes on long runs. In comparison Overclocking my card to 1256Mhz and offsetting the memory to +84Mhz will shave about 45 minutes off a 7 hour run (with Kboost enabled).

Profile skgiven
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Apr 09
Posts: 3968
Credit: 1,995,359,260
RAC: 0
Level
His
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 39420 - Posted: 8 Jan 2015 | 13:02:26 UTC - in response to Message 39418.

Your hardware performance gain (of around 10%) was lost when you went from XP to W8.1.

____________
FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

Keegan
Send message
Joined: 25 Feb 14
Posts: 15
Credit: 53,918,886
RAC: 0
Level
Thr
Scientific publications
watwatwatwat
Message 39451 - Posted: 10 Jan 2015 | 22:38:12 UTC
Last modified: 10 Jan 2015 | 22:38:31 UTC

My computer is primarily a gaming rig :D. As much as I would like to load a second os system and let it run all the time while I'm away, my parents would freak out about the power bill. Once I'm off to college living in a dorm room, I'll be sure to run it all the time.

Profile Chilean
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 8 Oct 12
Posts: 98
Credit: 385,652,461
RAC: 0
Level
Asp
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 39456 - Posted: 11 Jan 2015 | 5:24:16 UTC - in response to Message 39420.

Your hardware performance gain (of around 10%) was lost when you went from XP to W8.1.


Why exactly is XP faster than Win 8.1 (or 7...)?
____________

ExtraTerrestrial Apes
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 17 Aug 08
Posts: 2705
Credit: 1,311,122,549
RAC: 0
Level
Met
Scientific publications
watwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwatwat
Message 39459 - Posted: 11 Jan 2015 | 20:54:40 UTC - in response to Message 39456.

With Vista MS introduced a new display driver model, which encapsulates the GPU more. It makes it easier to avoid crashing the whole GUI or system in case of a graphics error, but this also means the GPU driver is "further away" from the actual hardware. Or put another way: the overhead for some GPU driver functions increased to gain stability.

MrS
____________
Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

Post to thread

Message boards : Number crunching : Non-GPU Factors

//