• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

TPU's F@H Team

If the RX480 is as good as AMD says it is, used GTX 980's should end up under $200. :clap:
 
Hmmm, so the 1070 and 1080 is not much of a upgrade in folding depart compare to a 980Ti with a high OC.

At least now I can easily wait out till big Pascal. Maybe I nab a RX480 or if I can get this one peep to sell his R9 380 to me will keep me a bit busy with tinkering until then.
 
Good news. Talked (PM) to TeXBill ! He's been real busy the last couple of years. Did not ask him about F@H, just glad to know that he's still kicking.
 
thebluebumblebee said:
Good news. Talked (PM) to TeXBill ! He's been real busy the last couple of years. Did not ask him about F@H, just glad to know that he's still kicking.
Click to expand...


That is great news man!!!! I've wondered about him several times in the last couple of years. :oops:
 
Anyways, going to bug a bit. Trying to get some data on the cards. Especially the several PPD and on what cores.

So far I only have a bit from the guys over on OCN since we have a spreedsheet that being built up.

For some ideas on what I am doing with the data. Here some charts for ye eyes.

topamd.JPG

topn.JPG

TXc1080.JPG


Kind of want more data points. The more the better the charts can reflect F@H performance for the cards.
 
290 outperforming a 290x? Not from my testing. Avg 60 to 70k more from a 290x over a 290 both Windforce OC editions. Good Idea though.
 
That the reason I need more data points.

I am trying myself to get a R9 290X to put into a build. When I do, I plan to fold on it to get more data points for the spreed sheet.

So, if peeps can post some data points on their cards. I can get those in and recalculate the charts.

Ok. Made a form.

http://goo.gl/forms/UQOZuhQ9k3daQazx2

Anything not working right post here.

Chart on nVidia. Still working on getting as much data.
Only a few data points on the 1070 and 1080.
Would like some more data points on the Titan X. These are a bit older data points from it.
nvidiagpu.JPG
 
Last edited:
I haven't updated the Nvidia driver on the 980 since installing it several months back. Any urgency on that regarding folding, or can I simply let it chug along til I need to update?
 
I'm still using an older driver on my 980. I think it is a 358.xx. The GTX 980 is the only card I have folding right now and it is the TC over at OCN.
 
What are respectable folding numbers these days? My 660ti puts out between 60 and 90k depending on the unit. My i5 2400, by contrast, only puts out 4k. Seems not worth the energy at all. Does anyone even do CPU folding anymore?
 
Not many I think most switch CPU to boinc.we have a team for that too:)
 
I'm well aware of that. At some point I switched to WCG exclusively, dropping FAH for a number of reasons (namely power, heat, and the fact that FAH eats a CPU core anyways, so robbing peter to pay paul as it were). Now, for other reasons (power, heat, evil data cap), I've almost left the scene completely (not that I really wanted to make that choice, but it had to be done).

I remember when we first started FAH, before the SMP client even came out. People with dual cores or better could run multiple instances of the single core client simultaneously, and then SMP came along and showed massive gains over running even multiple instances of the single core client. Then GPU folding came along and totally crushed CPU folding, until CPU folding made a major comeback with i7 chips running -bigadv units. Then, that went away and now it seems GPU performance skyrocketed while CPUs have been left in the dust. I see -bigadv is still possible with 16 threads, but such requirements are seriously out of range for even the majority of us here on the tech forums... and even if one had such a machine (5960x/6900k/6950x/super xeon) would it even be worth it in the face of GPU folding today?
 
Stanford stopped the big work units in early in 2015. Back then you still needed a 2P or 4P rig to get things done with the short time limit to get the QRB.
 
hertz9753 said:
Stanford stopped the big work units in early in 2015. Back then you still needed a 2P or 4P rig to get things done with the short time limit to get the QRB.
Click to expand...
So bigadv is just plain dead now?
 
thebluebumblebee said:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1vcVoSVtamcoGj5sFfvKF_XlvuviWWveJIg_iZ8U2bf0/pub?gid=0
From what I'm seeing there, it looks like the 1080 does about the same as the 980 Ti, but uses about 60 watts less. Am I seeing that right?
I was aiming to get a 980, but I might aim a little higher. There's a EVGA GeForce GTX 980 Ti Hydro Copper for $300 on CL. Or Asus GTX 980 Ti Poseidon Platinum for $350
Click to expand...
As I see it a 1070 trades blow with the 980 Ti on same projects (11429, 11706, 11707). There is so big difference between different projects on the same GPU that you need to compare it project by project . I see anything between 220 and 360K on my 970s during the past year. If/when I replace any of my GPUs it will be with a 1070.
 
Yeah, 1070, 1080, and 980Ti trade blows.

Reason I have not bother with Pascal considering both my Tis can fold at 1519MHz. On super rare occasions I get those lovely WUs that give me 950k+ PPD.
 
they really need to work on the point guestimates.
that's on my 1060.
upload_2016-9-11_23-56-15.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top