Originally posted by cutterjohn
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Linux OpenCL Performance With The Newest AMD & NVIDIA Drivers
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Calinou View PostKepler and Maxwell (600/700/800) series target gaming, not GPU computing, which is the inverse of what Fermi (400/500) did.
It is true that they removed FP64 units from Fermi to Kepler but that's because FP64 workloads are practically non-existent in the consumer space and it was a waste of die space.
Unfortunately most of the people who did benchmarks at the time of Kepler's release were idiots and don't understand GPU compute and now everyone thinks Kepler is a cripple because of it.
Nobody who does GPU compute anything is going to prefer Fermi to Kepler, especially when power requirements are taken into consideration.
Comment
-
Originally posted by johnc View PostIs there a danger that GPU-based computing (OpenCL, CUDA, HSA, etc.) is going to be replaced by FPGAs? Probably certainly not in the consumer space (where these technologies are rare anyway), but in HPC, which could lead to these technologies, in time, withering on the vine.
I'm just thinking about how quickly GPU mining collapsed based on a market need to go further than what GPUs can do. Would the same pressures apply to typical HPC markets today?
Some half-interesting viewpoints from an incorrigible crank: http://semiaccurate.com/2014/06/20/i...e-desperation/
I'm assuming Intel is going to start making these. If so I'd expect prices to come down greatly.
I've said before that including a small FPGA on embedded systems, especially industrial ones with very long life cycles, makes a lot of sense. Even on standard mobile systems I can see a use for them in accelerating media processing, aggregating/creating projections of sensor data, and, most interestingly, completely unforseen uses.
Comment
-
Originally posted by cutterjohn View PostYep, given the way that nVidia INTENTIONALLY gimps gpgpu capabilities of their consumer cards I was incredibly surprised to see 780 TI perf so close to the R9 290X and exceeding even the more modest ATI cards.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 0xBADCODE View PostI can propose couple of another benchmarks:
1) bfgminer --scrypt --benchmark (https://github.com/luke-jr/bfgminer.git) - massively parallel computations with incredibly heavy GPU memory demands. GPU should both be good at parallel computations and provide fast memory. Can be tricky a bit in sense that best results are obtained after tuning parameters for particular GPU.
2) clpeak utility (https://github.com/krrishnarraj/clpeak.git). GPU VRAM speed benchmark. While it sounds simple, it depends on both GPU and drivers so it can be quite interesting thing to compare. This one also known good way to crash MESA+LLVM OpenCL stack, at least on AMD cards .
Comment
-
Originally posted by drSeehas View PostWhat is the rationale behind testing HD 7850 AND R9 270X?
It is the same chip (Pitcairn)!
Instead why not test a card with a Cape Verde chip to complement the 740?Michael Larabel
https://www.michaellarabel.com/
Comment
-
Originally posted by Michael View PostThe cards were tested for what I had in my possession...
Originally posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post... craptastic ...
Comment
Comment