|
Title: supercomputer GPUs vs consumer GPUs? Post by: keten on June 11, 2011, 07:38:56 PM So take a look at the
http://www.nvidia.com/docs/IO/105880/DS_Tesla-M2090_LR.pdf M2050: 1030 single precision GFLOPs 448 CUDA cores 3 GB GDDR5 148 GB/s memory bandwidth cost: $2400 vs. http://www.geeks3d.com/20110324/nvidia-geforce-gtx-590-officially-launched-specifications-and-reviews-hd-6990-is-still-faster/ GeForce GTX 590 2486 single precision GFLOPs 1024 CUDA cores 3 GB GDDR5 327 GB/s memory bandwidth cost: $699 So why do people use supercomputer GPUs? They seem worse in every way specification wise. Is there any way it'd be better than the consumer one for bitcoin mining? Title: Re: supercomputer GPUs vs consumer GPUs? Post by: Basiley on June 11, 2011, 07:53:13 PM Single Precision shaders==fail.
scalar arch==fail. so, in short, nothing interesting in NVidia, except easy-to-start/use SDK. but this rolled around proprietary/slowly-advancing API, called CUDA, which isn't point to invest developing around/for. Title: Re: supercomputer GPUs vs consumer GPUs? Post by: Rob P. on June 11, 2011, 07:53:30 PM No one serious is using an nVidia to mine. There's no point, nVidia's blow at mining compared to ATI cards of the same cost.
SHA256 is an Integer operation, which ATI cards excel at doing. nVidia cards are better at floating point operations, which mapping polygons on a screen requires lots of... Basically, neither of those cards are great at mining. Title: Re: supercomputer GPUs vs consumer GPUs? Post by: bcpokey on June 11, 2011, 07:56:29 PM Is OP asking about use of these cards for mining or for general usage? No one mines on nvidia cards regardless of their specs.
In general however people use the supercomputer GPUs for non-single precision calcs. Title: Re: supercomputer GPUs vs consumer GPUs? Post by: Basiley on June 11, 2011, 08:00:20 PM using supers for SP computation is joke, sure. watch for usual LINPACK/LIVERMORE lib usage, for example ;)
even DP isn't enough anymore and new, quad-presision, FP-format introduced both for Fortran[in 2003]and other languages. Title: Re: supercomputer GPUs vs consumer GPUs? Post by: keten on June 11, 2011, 08:07:02 PM Hmmm, are nvidias really that bad?
I have the opportunity to use a setup with 22 GB RAM, 2 x NVIDIA Tesla “Fermi” M2050 GPU. Is there really no way to get any kind of comparable mining performance from that compared to just any old ATI card? Title: Re: supercomputer GPUs vs consumer GPUs? Post by: Basiley on June 11, 2011, 08:10:04 PM Hmmm, are nvidias really that bad? they Good for rendering, ie in games.I have the opportunity to use a setup with 22 GB RAM, 2 x NVIDIA Tesla “Fermi” M2050 GPU. Is there really no way to get any kind of comparable mining performance from that compared to just any old ATI card? esp in complex scenes with cool light and huge viewdistance. but for GPGPU usage they sucks. and stay in this biz, only because ATI/AMD doing it wrong. Title: Re: supercomputer GPUs vs consumer GPUs? Post by: bcpokey on June 11, 2011, 08:11:53 PM You might be looking at about 100MHash/sec per card? Not sure. But that's about the equivalent mhash of an old 4850 ($50 AMD)
|