• We've upgraded our forums. Please post any issues/requests in this thread.

WCG GPU Crunching: Performance/Value

Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Messages
4,527 (1.12/day)
Likes
6,075
Location
Washington, US
System Name Lappy
Processor i7 6700k
Motherboard Sager NP9870
Cooling A lot smaller than I'd like
Memory Samsung 4x8GB DDR4-2133 SO-DIMM
Video Card(s) GTX 980 (MXM)
Storage 2xSamsung 950 Pro 256GB | 2xHGST 1TB 7.2K
Display(s) 17.3" IPS 1080p G-SYNC
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster X-FI MB 5, Foster 2.1 channel integrated
Mouse Razer Deathadder
Keyboard 3-zone RGB integrated
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores Not slow
#1
What/Why?
I've spent some time trying to research GPU crunching performance and had made myself a chart to help visualize this. I pulled the only somewhat trustworthy performance numbers I could find and tossed a few simple functions on it to breakdown things like raw performance and value. The results are the following.


Raw Performance
First is a raw "more is better" chart based on the inverse of of the average time to complete a WU in seconds. Given that some of the names provided are nondescript, I've made assumptions based on the given performance. For example, two "Radeon HD 7900 Series" cards with obvious steps in performance are assumed to be the HD 7970 and the HD 7950. This will be verified/updated when user-submitted results come in.


Price per Performance (Value)
If something's not good value, it just rubs me the wrong way. This chart takes GPU performance and divides that by the street value as determined by retail price for latest-generation GPUs or eBay price for older GPUs. This chart answers the question "How many points can I get for X amount of dollars?"
As stated above, given that some of the names provided are nondescript, I've made assumptions based on the given performance.
(The chart will be put back in order in the next update.)


Help improve the charts!
If you'd like to contribute, I'd appreciate submissions. You can find GPU your GPU Work Unit completion time here as long as you know the result name that correlates with your GPU. You're looking for elapsed time in hours.
Please fill out the following:
Code:
WCG Username: <If different than forum>
CPU Model/Speed:
GPU 0 Model:
GPU 0 Time per WU:
GPU 0 Clock Speed: <If overclocked>
GPU 0 Work Unit Completion Time:
GPU 0 GPU Result Name: <optional>
Add additional GPUs as needed
To Do List:
  • Update prices for all cards
  • Come up with better pricing strategy for old cards (Worthmonkey not accurate, eBay fluctuates)
  • Add performance per watt charts (just declared TDP?)
  • Research/Create CPU charts
  • Fix price/performance graph
  • Make charts prettier
Changelog:
2/13/13: Initial release! WYSIWYG!
 
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Messages
4,527 (1.12/day)
Likes
6,075
Location
Washington, US
System Name Lappy
Processor i7 6700k
Motherboard Sager NP9870
Cooling A lot smaller than I'd like
Memory Samsung 4x8GB DDR4-2133 SO-DIMM
Video Card(s) GTX 980 (MXM)
Storage 2xSamsung 950 Pro 256GB | 2xHGST 1TB 7.2K
Display(s) 17.3" IPS 1080p G-SYNC
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster X-FI MB 5, Foster 2.1 channel integrated
Mouse Razer Deathadder
Keyboard 3-zone RGB integrated
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores Not slow
#2
<Reserved>
 
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Messages
4,527 (1.12/day)
Likes
6,075
Location
Washington, US
System Name Lappy
Processor i7 6700k
Motherboard Sager NP9870
Cooling A lot smaller than I'd like
Memory Samsung 4x8GB DDR4-2133 SO-DIMM
Video Card(s) GTX 980 (MXM)
Storage 2xSamsung 950 Pro 256GB | 2xHGST 1TB 7.2K
Display(s) 17.3" IPS 1080p G-SYNC
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster X-FI MB 5, Foster 2.1 channel integrated
Mouse Razer Deathadder
Keyboard 3-zone RGB integrated
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores Not slow
#3
<Also Reserved>
 

[Ion]

WCG Team Assistant
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
13,391 (4.44/day)
Likes
14,251
Location
Raleigh, North Carolina, United States
System Name Niedersachsen / Ribe / Minsk
Processor i3 3240 / i7-3520M / 4x Opteron 6376 @ 2.86GHz
Motherboard BIOSTAR H61M / HP Q77 / Supermicro H8QG7
Cooling Stock / Stock / 4x 1U G34
Memory 1x8GB / 2x4GB / 4x4GB
Video Card(s) GTX260 / Intel HD 4000 / nVidia GT310
Storage 80GB Intel SSD / 256GB Intel SSD / 2x 60GB SSD (RAID1)
Display(s) Dell 3007 + HP 2245w / 12.1" 1366x768 / None
Case Antec NSK3480 / HP / Supermicro 1U
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Enermax 500W / HP 130W / Supermicro Gold 1400W
Keyboard IBM Model M
Software Windows 7 (Niedersachsen/Ribe) / Linux Mint 17.2 (Minsk)
#4
I appreciate the work that you've put into this, but I must say I'm a bit surprised/suspicious of some of the results. You have the HD7950 doing 1.85x the output of the GTX470, but I can state from personal experience that's not true. My GTX470s are each slower than a HD7770, and my system with two GTX470s does just under half what my single-HD7950 setup did.

This is a really cool idea! :respect:
 

Norton

Moderator & WCG-TPU Captain
Staff member
Joined
Dec 21, 2011
Messages
12,693 (5.80/day)
Likes
36,306
Location
USA
System Name My Fortress/Trish (WCG)/Julia (WCG)/Ella (WCG)/Junior(WCG)/Cruncher 1 & 2/Kreij (WCG)
Processor Ryzen 1700X/i7-970/2600K/i7-980X/3930k/Opteron 6168x4/Ryzen 1600X/FX-8350
Motherboard X370 Taichi/ ASUS R3E/Asus P8P67 Pro/P9X79 Pro/EVGA X58 SLI 3/SuperMicro 4P
Cooling NH-D14/Phanteks/NH-U14S/H70/DeepCool/CM 212+ (x4)/NH-U14S/CM212
Memory 16GB GSkill TridentZ-3200 (1700X), 16GB GSkill FlareX-2400 (1600X),... various...., 4P- 16x1GB
Video Card(s) RX 580/HD 4670/HD 7770/HD 7770/HD 7770/onboard/HD 7770/onboard
Storage WD 500GB SSD/Seagate 2TB SSHD, everything else is Western Digital (mostly)
Display(s) Dell U2414H & 2409W / Dell 2208WFP (shared)
Case Silverstone FT01B/Source 530/Corsair 230T/Define XL R2/Silverstone FT05/Define R4/custom
Audio Device(s) on board (All)
Power Supply Corsair HX850/TX650/CS650M/X Gold 750/EVGA P2 850/X Gold 1050/HX650
Mouse Logitech G300s
Keyboard Thermaltake Challenger Prime (Great for $30!!!)
Software Win 7 Home 64 (Win 10 Pro 64)/Win Pro 64 or Ubuntu 12.04 LTS/14.04 LTS/17.04
Benchmark Scores Why sit on the Bench when you can get in the game and Crunch!!!
#5
Pretty cool setup! :toast:

FYI- the Radeon (unknown) is likely the 7850/70's iirc my 7870's show up as unknown and they should fall into that place on the chart- they both do around 70k ppd each ;)
 
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Messages
4,527 (1.12/day)
Likes
6,075
Location
Washington, US
System Name Lappy
Processor i7 6700k
Motherboard Sager NP9870
Cooling A lot smaller than I'd like
Memory Samsung 4x8GB DDR4-2133 SO-DIMM
Video Card(s) GTX 980 (MXM)
Storage 2xSamsung 950 Pro 256GB | 2xHGST 1TB 7.2K
Display(s) 17.3" IPS 1080p G-SYNC
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster X-FI MB 5, Foster 2.1 channel integrated
Mouse Razer Deathadder
Keyboard 3-zone RGB integrated
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores Not slow
#6
This started as a "I want a new video card. What should I buy?" sort of thing and just took off a little more than I expected.

I appreciate the work that you've put into this, but I must say I'm a bit surprised/suspicious of some of the results. You have the HD7950 doing 1.85x the output of the GTX470, but I can state from personal experience that's not true. My GTX470s are each slower than a HD7770, and my system with two GTX470s does just under half what my single-HD7950 setup did.

This is a really cool idea! :respect:
All performance numbers were pulled from a post from a self-proclaimed WCG tech on the WCG forums completing unknown work units on an unknown client with an unknown config. I'm using those numbers because I can't find anything else as complete. The only GPU I know is correct is a yet-to-be-added-to-the-chart HD 5770 which comes out to roughly the same performance as the "Radeon 5700 Series (Juniper)". Based on that, I assumed all the other results were roughly accurate. I figure they should be a decent placeholder until I get some more verifiable results.

While I will admit to preferring AMD over nVidia, I wouldn't intentionally skew results either way. I'll happily take donations of cards for independent (and indefinite) testing though.:laugh:

Pretty cool setup! :toast:
FYI- the Radeon (unknown) is likely the 7850/70's iirc my 7870's show up as unknown and they should fall into that place on the chart- they both do around 70k ppd each ;)
That's enough proof for me. I'll add it. :toast: Keep in mind that "XVI's Magical Performance Units" aren't currently based on points whatsoever (although they might be in the future).
 

[Ion]

WCG Team Assistant
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
13,391 (4.44/day)
Likes
14,251
Location
Raleigh, North Carolina, United States
System Name Niedersachsen / Ribe / Minsk
Processor i3 3240 / i7-3520M / 4x Opteron 6376 @ 2.86GHz
Motherboard BIOSTAR H61M / HP Q77 / Supermicro H8QG7
Cooling Stock / Stock / 4x 1U G34
Memory 1x8GB / 2x4GB / 4x4GB
Video Card(s) GTX260 / Intel HD 4000 / nVidia GT310
Storage 80GB Intel SSD / 256GB Intel SSD / 2x 60GB SSD (RAID1)
Display(s) Dell 3007 + HP 2245w / 12.1" 1366x768 / None
Case Antec NSK3480 / HP / Supermicro 1U
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Enermax 500W / HP 130W / Supermicro Gold 1400W
Keyboard IBM Model M
Software Windows 7 (Niedersachsen/Ribe) / Linux Mint 17.2 (Minsk)
#7
Oh, I'm certainly not accusing you of biasing the results. I'm just curious where the numbers came from and how they were calculated, that's all :toast:
 
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Messages
4,527 (1.12/day)
Likes
6,075
Location
Washington, US
System Name Lappy
Processor i7 6700k
Motherboard Sager NP9870
Cooling A lot smaller than I'd like
Memory Samsung 4x8GB DDR4-2133 SO-DIMM
Video Card(s) GTX 980 (MXM)
Storage 2xSamsung 950 Pro 256GB | 2xHGST 1TB 7.2K
Display(s) 17.3" IPS 1080p G-SYNC
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster X-FI MB 5, Foster 2.1 channel integrated
Mouse Razer Deathadder
Keyboard 3-zone RGB integrated
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores Not slow
#8
Oh, I'm certainly not accusing you of biasing the results. I'm just curious where the numbers came from and how they were calculated, that's all :toast:
Like I say, just the first thing I managed to grab. I'm not sure how consistent the results will be across different work units and especially across different WCG projects, so I think I'll have to convert to a PPD-based scoring. I just haven't quite figured out an easy way to find the PPD of just the GPU.
 

Norton

Moderator & WCG-TPU Captain
Staff member
Joined
Dec 21, 2011
Messages
12,693 (5.80/day)
Likes
36,306
Location
USA
System Name My Fortress/Trish (WCG)/Julia (WCG)/Ella (WCG)/Junior(WCG)/Cruncher 1 & 2/Kreij (WCG)
Processor Ryzen 1700X/i7-970/2600K/i7-980X/3930k/Opteron 6168x4/Ryzen 1600X/FX-8350
Motherboard X370 Taichi/ ASUS R3E/Asus P8P67 Pro/P9X79 Pro/EVGA X58 SLI 3/SuperMicro 4P
Cooling NH-D14/Phanteks/NH-U14S/H70/DeepCool/CM 212+ (x4)/NH-U14S/CM212
Memory 16GB GSkill TridentZ-3200 (1700X), 16GB GSkill FlareX-2400 (1600X),... various...., 4P- 16x1GB
Video Card(s) RX 580/HD 4670/HD 7770/HD 7770/HD 7770/onboard/HD 7770/onboard
Storage WD 500GB SSD/Seagate 2TB SSHD, everything else is Western Digital (mostly)
Display(s) Dell U2414H & 2409W / Dell 2208WFP (shared)
Case Silverstone FT01B/Source 530/Corsair 230T/Define XL R2/Silverstone FT05/Define R4/custom
Audio Device(s) on board (All)
Power Supply Corsair HX850/TX650/CS650M/X Gold 750/EVGA P2 850/X Gold 1050/HX650
Mouse Logitech G300s
Keyboard Thermaltake Challenger Prime (Great for $30!!!)
Software Win 7 Home 64 (Win 10 Pro 64)/Win Pro 64 or Ubuntu 12.04 LTS/14.04 LTS/17.04
Benchmark Scores Why sit on the Bench when you can get in the game and Crunch!!!
#9
Like I say, just the first thing I managed to grab. I'm not sure how consistent the results will be across different work units and especially across different WCG projects, so I think I'll have to convert to a PPD-based scoring. I just haven't quite figured out an easy way to find the PPD of just the GPU.
I don't know about the other generations or NVidia but the Radeon 7xxx series seems to scale pretty close to linear based on # of stream processors... gpu speed, memory size, cpu type/speed have a lesser impact.

Helpful for your project? Dunno :eek:
 
Joined
Nov 7, 2009
Messages
2,712 (0.92/day)
Likes
1,781
Location
Denmark
System Name The work PC / Folder 1 & 2 (+3 on/off)
Processor W3670 4.00 GHz/ W3670 3.8 / 4790K 4.4/ i7 920
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD5/UD7/Maximum Hero/ UD5
Cooling Custom WC/Noctua NH-D14/Noctua NH-D15/D14
Memory 6 GB A-Data/6 GB Mushkin /8 GB Corsair Vengance/ Mus
Video Card(s) 1070 X MSI/ 970 ASUS / 2x970 MSI/970 MSI
Storage 480 GB SSD / 480 GB SSD /480 GB SSD, all EVO 840
Display(s) Dell UltraSharp 2408WFP
Case Corsair 800D / Fractel R4 /none
Power Supply Enermax 87+ 600 W/ 500 W / AX 860/700 W Enermax
Software WIN7 64 bit
Benchmark Scores Cherry pie at one point ;)
#10
You input template does not take into consideration that a GPU can do 1, 2, 3...16 WU at the time. Personally I prefer number of WU in a day taken over a few days to even out weekend fluctuations in amount of PVs. The original data was compiled before the WU got double in size and people in general found out that they could run more then one at the time.

My data:

7970 @ 1045 MHz 1900/day (12 WU)
7950 @ 1100 MHz 1600/day (10 WU)
7770 @ 1100 MHz 730/day (5 WU)
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
5,627 (2.38/day)
Likes
2,986
Processor Intel I7 4790k (stock)
Motherboard ASRock H97M-ITX/ac LGA 1150 Intel H97
Cooling Prolimatech megahalem
Memory Crucial 2x4gb 1600mhz
Video Card(s) EVGA 1060 3gb
Storage OWC Mercury SSD 240 GB
Display(s) Asus 144hz
Case Raijintek Metis
Power Supply Corsair SF600 600w psu
Software Windows 10 64 Bit
#11
This is interesting. You might want to do a performance/watt graph also. Edit: Ah that is in the to do list. Maybe you should use wizz's reviews to find watts used. Maybe just use reference.


WCG Username: <jjames888>
CPU Model/Speed: 2500k 4.4ghz
GPU 0 Model: 7970 (16 WU's)
GPU 0 Time per WU: ?
GPU 0 Clock Speed: <1200/1600>
GPU 0 Work Unit Completion Time: .2 hours (720 seconds, or 12 minutes) I do range from .16 - .22 hours elapsed time (about 10-13 minutes)
GPU 0 GPU Result Name: X0930110551170200907070826
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 3, 2010
Messages
3,443 (1.29/day)
Likes
1,685
Location
NL, Europe
Processor Intel Core i5-4460
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-Z97-D3H
Cooling Arctic Freezer i11
Memory Crucial Ballistix Sport, DDR3-1600, 2x4 GB kit
Video Card(s) Sapphire Radeon R9 270X Vapor-X
Storage Kingston SSDNow V300 (120GB) + Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 (1TB)
Display(s) AOC G2260VWQ6 | Acer AL1916 (in reserve)
Case Cooler Maste Centurion 5
Audio Device(s) integrated
Power Supply Seasonic G450
Mouse Logitech G500
Keyboard Qpad MK-50
Software Windows 10
#12
WCG Username: Chevalr1c
CPU Model/Speed: Core 2 Duo E8400
GPU 0 Model: Radeon HD 6670 DDR3 (Turks XT)
GPU 0 Time per WU: 0.04 - 0.05 hours (I assumed that the "CPU time" values have to be used here)
GPU 0 Clock Speed: <If overclocked>
GPU 0 Work Unit Completion Time: 0.18 - 0.24 hours (I used "elapsed time" here)
GPU 0 GPU Result Name: I looked a a batch of 3 pages on the "Results status" page and noted minima and maxima.
 

brandonwh64

Addicted to Bacon and StarCrunches!!!
Joined
Sep 6, 2009
Messages
19,518 (6.45/day)
Likes
6,938
Location
Chatsworth, GA
System Name The StarCrunch Defender! | X58 Cruncher!
Processor I7 6700K @ STOCK | Intel I7-920
Motherboard Gigabyte Z170X-UD5 | Alienware MS-7543 X58
Cooling Corsair A70 Push/Pull | Corsair H50
Memory Crucial Ballistix DDR4 2400 MHz | Pereema 3x2GB DDR3
Video Card(s) Gigabyte Gaming G1 GTX 1070 | Gigabyte 7970 3GB
Storage 2x Samsung Pro 256GB M.2 SSD's in Raid 0 | 4TB Western Digital SATA drive
Display(s) ViewSonic VG2227wm 1080P | OLD viewsonics
Case NZXT Tempest 410 Elite | NZXT Source 210
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Corsair 750TX | Enermax Liberty 500W
Mouse MX518 | MX502
Keyboard TESORO Mechanical | ANZO Mechanical
Software Windows 10 Pro on both
#13
what is AMD Radeon HD (Unknown)? Since it was third on the list for higher PPD output is what made me curious.
 
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
1,127 (0.29/day)
Likes
651
Location
Repentigny, QC, CANADA
System Name CTG Computer
Processor Intel i7 4770k @ 4.3ghz 1.264v
Motherboard Asus Maximus VI Formula
Cooling Noctua NH-U12S
Memory 2x 8gb Mushkin Blackline 2133mhz@2400mhz 11-13-13-31-1T 1.65v
Video Card(s) Gigabyte RX580 Gaming 4GB
Storage Samsung 850 Pro 256gb (OS) | Crucial MX100 256gb (games) | Silicon Power S55 240gb (Games)
Display(s) Asus vg248qe
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Creative SoundBlaster Z PCI-E
Power Supply eVGA SuperNova 750w G2
Mouse CM Mizar
Keyboard Logitech G110
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
#14
so HD6950 does a better job than the GTX 680 xD
 

Norton

Moderator & WCG-TPU Captain
Staff member
Joined
Dec 21, 2011
Messages
12,693 (5.80/day)
Likes
36,306
Location
USA
System Name My Fortress/Trish (WCG)/Julia (WCG)/Ella (WCG)/Junior(WCG)/Cruncher 1 & 2/Kreij (WCG)
Processor Ryzen 1700X/i7-970/2600K/i7-980X/3930k/Opteron 6168x4/Ryzen 1600X/FX-8350
Motherboard X370 Taichi/ ASUS R3E/Asus P8P67 Pro/P9X79 Pro/EVGA X58 SLI 3/SuperMicro 4P
Cooling NH-D14/Phanteks/NH-U14S/H70/DeepCool/CM 212+ (x4)/NH-U14S/CM212
Memory 16GB GSkill TridentZ-3200 (1700X), 16GB GSkill FlareX-2400 (1600X),... various...., 4P- 16x1GB
Video Card(s) RX 580/HD 4670/HD 7770/HD 7770/HD 7770/onboard/HD 7770/onboard
Storage WD 500GB SSD/Seagate 2TB SSHD, everything else is Western Digital (mostly)
Display(s) Dell U2414H & 2409W / Dell 2208WFP (shared)
Case Silverstone FT01B/Source 530/Corsair 230T/Define XL R2/Silverstone FT05/Define R4/custom
Audio Device(s) on board (All)
Power Supply Corsair HX850/TX650/CS650M/X Gold 750/EVGA P2 850/X Gold 1050/HX650
Mouse Logitech G300s
Keyboard Thermaltake Challenger Prime (Great for $30!!!)
Software Win 7 Home 64 (Win 10 Pro 64)/Win Pro 64 or Ubuntu 12.04 LTS/14.04 LTS/17.04
Benchmark Scores Why sit on the Bench when you can get in the game and Crunch!!!
#15
what is AMD Radeon HD (Unknown)? Since it was third on the list for higher PPD output is what made me curious.
At the time the original list was made it was the Radeon 7850/7870 (the older BOINC Manager couldn't pick up the specs on the card). The 7.0.40 and up revisions seem to pick up the specs my 7870 just fine now.
 

JNUKZ

New Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2012
Messages
185 (0.10/day)
Likes
87
Location
Portugal
System Name NUK Little Machine
Processor Pentium G850 > I5 3570k
Motherboard AsRock Z77 PRO3
Cooling Intel Stock > TR True Spirit 140
Memory 8Gb Kingston 1600MHz
Video Card(s) MSI HD7770
Storage WD blue 500gb
Display(s) Asus VW222U/Samsung BX2235
Case CoolerMaster K350
Audio Device(s) OnBoard
Power Supply Corsair CX430 V2
Software Windows 7 64Bits
#16
Looks like any HD7xxx are a beast even my 7770 is better than GTX 680.
 
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Messages
4,527 (1.12/day)
Likes
6,075
Location
Washington, US
System Name Lappy
Processor i7 6700k
Motherboard Sager NP9870
Cooling A lot smaller than I'd like
Memory Samsung 4x8GB DDR4-2133 SO-DIMM
Video Card(s) GTX 980 (MXM)
Storage 2xSamsung 950 Pro 256GB | 2xHGST 1TB 7.2K
Display(s) 17.3" IPS 1080p G-SYNC
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster X-FI MB 5, Foster 2.1 channel integrated
Mouse Razer Deathadder
Keyboard 3-zone RGB integrated
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores Not slow
#17
You input template does not take into consideration that a GPU can do 1, 2, 3...16 WU at the time. Personally I prefer number of WU in a day taken over a few days to even out weekend fluctuations in amount of PVs. The original data was compiled before the WU got double in size and people in general found out that they could run more then one at the time.

My data:

7970 @ 1045 MHz 1900/day (12 WU)
7950 @ 1100 MHz 1600/day (10 WU)
7770 @ 1100 MHz 730/day (5 WU)
The only card I've managed to test is a HD 5770 and it seemed to match the original data somewhat closely. The (admittedly old, but statistically sound) data I've used is more of a placeholder until I can get some more recent results. Again, I think a system based on PPD would be better, but it's harder to implement with WCG than it is with Folding@Home.

You're right about the multiple WUs thing though. Unfortunately for this comparison, yes, multiple running multiple WUs at once can get more performance out of a card, but it makes a royal mess of things when trying to compare cards. Again, working off of PPD would help even this out, but it would still create some dirty data until a good number of results came in and everything can average out. Unless I can reliably calculate the increase in performance divided by the number of WUs running at once, results running multiple WUs might have to wait. I suppose the big question is whether or not Card X benefits more from that than Card Y, in which case single WU results should be thrown out completely and multi-WU results should be used.

I guess I'm forced to buy a new video card so I can test this out. Oh the drudgery. :laugh:

This is interesting. You might want to do a performance/watt graph also. Edit: Ah that is in the to do list. Maybe you should use wizz's reviews to find watts used. Maybe just use reference.
Yep! Already in the to-do list. I'd very much prefer actual power consumption rather than what it says on the box. Wizzard does a pretty good job of calculating consumption as does Anandtech. Sadly, the power draw will be under full gaming and not actual crunching, but it should be a very good indicator regardless. All of this is in the works though.

WCG Username: <jjames888>
CPU Model/Speed: 2500k 4.4ghz
GPU 0 Model: 7970 (16 WU's)
GPU 0 Time per WU: ?
GPU 0 Clock Speed: <1200/1600>
GPU 0 Work Unit Completion Time: 720 seconds (12 minutes)
GPU 0 GPU Result Name: X0930110551170200907070826
WCG Username: Chevalr1c
CPU Model/Speed: Core 2 Duo E8400
GPU 0 Model: Radeon HD 6670 DDR3 (Turks XT)
GPU 0 Time per WU: 0.04 - 0.05 hours (I assumed that the "CPU time" values have to be used here)
GPU 0 Clock Speed: <If overclocked>
GPU 0 Work Unit Completion Time: 0.18 - 0.24 hours (I used "elapsed time" here)
GPU 0 GPU Result Name: I looked a a batch of 3 pages on the "Results status" page and noted minima and maxima.
Dangit, you're right. "GPU 0 Time per WU" and "GPU 0 Work Unit Completion Time" are supposed to be the same thing. I was obviously asleep while writing that up.

In my testing, "Elapsed time" was what correlated with the results I've scavenged, but "CPU time" would probably be more accurate while running multiple units. I assume by "CPU time" they mean "GPU time". If not, my scavenged results will not (easily) compare with new results.

About 20 seconds longer than single wu's (appr. 01:45 vs 01:25 to 99.415%)
This still true, Norton? 1WU at 85 sec vs 3WU at 105 sec (/3 = 35 sec per WU?). That's a 243% increase. o.0
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 7, 2009
Messages
2,712 (0.92/day)
Likes
1,781
Location
Denmark
System Name The work PC / Folder 1 & 2 (+3 on/off)
Processor W3670 4.00 GHz/ W3670 3.8 / 4790K 4.4/ i7 920
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD5/UD7/Maximum Hero/ UD5
Cooling Custom WC/Noctua NH-D14/Noctua NH-D15/D14
Memory 6 GB A-Data/6 GB Mushkin /8 GB Corsair Vengance/ Mus
Video Card(s) 1070 X MSI/ 970 ASUS / 2x970 MSI/970 MSI
Storage 480 GB SSD / 480 GB SSD /480 GB SSD, all EVO 840
Display(s) Dell UltraSharp 2408WFP
Case Corsair 800D / Fractel R4 /none
Power Supply Enermax 87+ 600 W/ 500 W / AX 860/700 W Enermax
Software WIN7 64 bit
Benchmark Scores Cherry pie at one point ;)
#18
At one point I did some timing of different numbers of WUs on the same rig:

7770 - 3 each took 6:55, 4 took 8:31 each
7950 - 4 each took 4:34, 6 took 6:25 each and I ended up with 10 since it produced the highest points wise

I think that you should stay with your original data set and just normalize them with 7970 being 100 % and then add that you can run multiple WU. We can input the most used number : i.e 7970 is 12 but the range is 10-16. The optimal number will differ from rig to rig so a little trial and error is required. Best of luck with whatever solution you chose.
 
Joined
Apr 23, 2005
Messages
307 (0.07/day)
Likes
187
Location
Neuchâtel, Switzerland
Processor AMD FX-8350 "Vishera"
Motherboard Asus M5A99X EVO
Cooling Noctua NH-D14
Memory G.Skill DDR3 2133MHz 16GB
Video Card(s) CrossfireX Asus 5850
Storage Crucial C300 128GB
Display(s) Samsung SA950
Case Coolermaster Storm Sniper
Power Supply Corsair AX850
Software Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit
#19
So you got me curious too, and I recorded a few results...

This is with 4 WUs: 2 CPU WUs and 2 GPU WUs (each GPU: 1CPU + 1 ATI GPU)

Note: No screensaver.

WCG Username: AnnCore
CPU Model/Speed: QX9770
GPU 0 Model: ATI Radeon HD 5850
GPU 0 Time per WU: 8:36
GPU 0 Clock Speed: <If overclocked>
GPU 0 GPU Result Name: <optional>

GPU 1 Model: ATI Radeon HD 5850
GPU 1 Time per WU: 8:45
GPU 1 Clock Speed: <If overclocked>
GPU 1 GPU Result Name: <optional>

And then this is with 4 WUs: 2 CPU WUs and 2 GPU WUs (each GPU: 1CPU + 1 ATI GPU)

Note: With screensaver.

WCG Username: AnnCore
CPU Model/Speed: QX9770
GPU 0 Model: ATI Radeon HD 5850
GPU 0 Time per WU: 9:17
GPU 0 Clock Speed: <If overclocked>
GPU 0 GPU Result Name: <optional>

GPU 1 Model: ATI Radeon HD 5850
GPU 1 Time per WU: 9:22
GPU 1 Clock Speed: <If overclocked>
GPU 1 GPU Result Name: <optional>

Last I tried only GPU WUs (1.0 CPU + 0.5 ATI GPU)

This is with 4 WUs: 2 CPU WUs and 2 GPU WUs (each GPU: 1CPU + 1 ATI GPU)

Note: No screensaver.

WCG Username: AnnCore
CPU Model/Speed: QX9770
GPU 0 Model: ATI Radeon HD 5850
GPU 0 Time per WU: 14:25
GPU 0 Clock Speed: <If overclocked>
GPU 0 GPU Result Name: <optional>

GPU 1 Model: ATI Radeon HD 5850
GPU 1 Time per WU: 13:57
GPU 1 Clock Speed: <If overclocked>
GPU 1 GPU Result Name: <optional>

For all times per WU I took the average of 5 consecutive results.

I haven't tried 4 WUs with screensaver on.

Bottom line, 4 WUs in about 14:11 > 4 WUs in about 17:20 (2 x 2 WUs in about 8:40).

Edit:

4 GPU WUs with screensaver (1 CPU + 1 ATI GPU)

4 WUs every 14:05. (the average of 20 consecutive results)

Not sure what happens with the screensaver on with only 2 GPU WUs...

My son's rig:

WCG Username: AnnCore
CPU Model/Speed: AMD Phenom II X6 1090T
GPU 0 Model: ATI Radeon HD 5850
GPU 0 Time per WU: 8:02 (the average of 10 results)
GPU 0 Clock Speed: <If overclocked>
GPU 0 GPU Result Name: <optional>
 
Last edited:

topry

New Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2013
Messages
8 (0.00/day)
Likes
4
#20
Thanks for doing this, I've been researching the same info. Following are my stats:

CPU Model/Speed: i7 960/3.2
GPU 0 Model: GTX 660 'SuperClocked' model
GPU 0 Time per WU: 11-14 (1CPU + 1GPU)

GPU 1 Model: GTX 550Ti
GPU 1 Time per WU: 16-18 (1CPU + 1GPU)

Running 2WU at .5 + .5 gives a much broader range, with an average of 30% increase for each card.

Attempts to run 3WU with latest nVidia drivers resulted in driver crash within 15 minutes.