I hate being tied to AMD and having to deal with each driver update introducing performance loss and craploads of fail.
With shader clocks significantly lowered, however, I just don't expect competitive performance from Kepler
Topic: . (Read 4038 times)
Don't get me wrong, I want to have a choice when it comes to mining card manufacturers.
I hate being tied to AMD and having to deal with each driver update introducing performance loss and craploads of fail.
With shader clocks significantly lowered, however, I just don't expect competitive performance from Kepler
I hate being tied to AMD and having to deal with each driver update introducing performance loss and craploads of fail.
With shader clocks significantly lowered, however, I just don't expect competitive performance from Kepler
I'm sorry to barge in and spoil your party guys, but did you per chance miss the fact that Kepler's shaders will be running at core speed?
Fermi-based cards run their shaders at twice the core speed.
GTX 580's shader clock is 1544 MHz. Let's optimistically assume 1 GHz stock clock speed for Kepler (that translates to 65% of a GTX 580's shader speed).
Therefore, a better estimate might be
Let's assume that Kepler will overclock to 1200 MHz, what results in a = 1.2.
Since integer operations efficiency has long played second fiddle to floating-point operations, there is no reason to expect huge gains. Let's assume b = 1.1, i.e. Kepler being 10% better at integer operations than Fermi.
A stock Kepler running its 1536 shaders at 1 GHz would achieve 300 MHash/s.
Overclocking the card to 1200 MHz would boost the hash rate to 360 MHash/s - that's uncomfortably close to a stock VLIW4-based hd6950.
While half of a 7970's hashing speed is far less embarrassing than nVidia's previous generation of GPUs, it's still pretty underwhelming for an expensive and power hungry card a 1536 SP Kelper running at 1 GHz will have to be.
Fermi-based cards run their shaders at twice the core speed.
The new kepler gk104 will have 1536 cuda cores. That is 3 times the gtx 580. The gtx 580 gets 140 mhash/s so wouldn't the new kepler card get 420 mhash/s give or take, or at least 6970 territory?
Unfortunately, I don't think so.GTX 580's shader clock is 1544 MHz. Let's optimistically assume 1 GHz stock clock speed for Kepler (that translates to 65% of a GTX 580's shader speed).
Therefore, a better estimate might be
Code:
3 * 140 * 0,65 * a * b
where a is overclockability modifier and b is architecture modifier.Let's assume that Kepler will overclock to 1200 MHz, what results in a = 1.2.
Since integer operations efficiency has long played second fiddle to floating-point operations, there is no reason to expect huge gains. Let's assume b = 1.1, i.e. Kepler being 10% better at integer operations than Fermi.
A stock Kepler running its 1536 shaders at 1 GHz would achieve 300 MHash/s.
Overclocking the card to 1200 MHz would boost the hash rate to 360 MHash/s - that's uncomfortably close to a stock VLIW4-based hd6950.
While half of a 7970's hashing speed is far less embarrassing than nVidia's previous generation of GPUs, it's still pretty underwhelming for an expensive and power hungry card a 1536 SP Kelper running at 1 GHz will have to be.
I guess we will see. Until now all this is speculation on our part until the official details are announced.
I still think they COULD become competitive if they wanted to with a 4608 shader dual GPU moster that is GTX790 but as I said, we will see ...
I'm sorry to barge in and spoil your party guys, but did you per chance miss the fact that Kepler's shaders will be running at core speed?
Fermi-based cards run their shaders at twice the core speed.
GTX 580's shader clock is 1544 MHz. Let's optimistically assume 1 GHz stock clock speed for Kepler (that translates to 65% of a GTX 580's shader speed).
Therefore, a better estimate might be
Let's assume that Kepler will overclock to 1200 MHz, what results in a = 1.2.
Since integer operations efficiency has long played second fiddle to floating-point operations, there is no reason to expect huge gains. Let's assume b = 1.1, i.e. Kepler being 10% better at integer operations than Fermi.
A stock Kepler running its 1536 shaders at 1 GHz would achieve 300 MHash/s.
Overclocking the card to 1200 MHz would boost the hash rate to 360 MHash/s - that's uncomfortably close to a stock VLIW4-based hd6950.
While half of a 7970's hashing speed is far less embarrassing than nVidia's previous generation of GPUs, it's still pretty underwhelming for an expensive and power hungry card a 1536 SP Kelper running at 1 GHz will have to be.
Fermi-based cards run their shaders at twice the core speed.
The new kepler gk104 will have 1536 cuda cores. That is 3 times the gtx 580. The gtx 580 gets 140 mhash/s so wouldn't the new kepler card get 420 mhash/s give or take, or at least 6970 territory?
Unfortunately, I don't think so.GTX 580's shader clock is 1544 MHz. Let's optimistically assume 1 GHz stock clock speed for Kepler (that translates to 65% of a GTX 580's shader speed).
Therefore, a better estimate might be
Code:
3 * 140 * 0,65 * a * b
where a is overclockability modifier and b is architecture modifier.Let's assume that Kepler will overclock to 1200 MHz, what results in a = 1.2.
Since integer operations efficiency has long played second fiddle to floating-point operations, there is no reason to expect huge gains. Let's assume b = 1.1, i.e. Kepler being 10% better at integer operations than Fermi.
A stock Kepler running its 1536 shaders at 1 GHz would achieve 300 MHash/s.
Overclocking the card to 1200 MHz would boost the hash rate to 360 MHash/s - that's uncomfortably close to a stock VLIW4-based hd6950.
While half of a 7970's hashing speed is far less embarrassing than nVidia's previous generation of GPUs, it's still pretty underwhelming for an expensive and power hungry card a 1536 SP Kelper running at 1 GHz will have to be.
If this is true then I am in heaven 
Sadly, I still think we have to put up with AMD's BS drivers and bugs
Yeah, come to think of it I still think they need to implement something like bitalign and BFI_INT to be able to compete with 5870s and 7970s etc.
I think in this game the more shaders you have the more MHash/s you get.
Nvidia fail again.
Sadly, I still think we have to put up with AMD's BS drivers and bugs
Yeah, come to think of it I still think they need to implement something like bitalign and BFI_INT to be able to compete with 5870s and 7970s etc.
I think in this game the more shaders you have the more MHash/s you get.
Nvidia fail again.
1536 < 2048 for 7970s
Also just the mid end card. The 680 will probably hit that number. We still don't know for sure if it will hash well
Don't get me wrong. I am literally praying that Nvidia come out with 2048 shader monster of hashing but without BFI_INT and bitalign I really doubt it.
The other thing that could happen is Nvidia owns 7970s and prices come way down for AMD cards.
If this is true then I am in heaven
Sadly, I still think we have to put up with AMD's BS drivers and bugs
Yeah, come to think of it I still think they need to implement something like bitalign and BFI_INT to be able to compete with 5870s and 7970s etc.
I think in this game the more shaders you have the more MHash/s you get.
1536 < 2048 for 7970s
Nvidia fail again.
Sadly, I still think we have to put up with AMD's BS drivers and bugs
Yeah, come to think of it I still think they need to implement something like bitalign and BFI_INT to be able to compete with 5870s and 7970s etc.
I think in this game the more shaders you have the more MHash/s you get.
1536 < 2048 for 7970s
Nvidia fail again.
Definitely a possibility. Still not in the MH/$ range of 5870s or 5970s, but once the Kepler cards come down in price somewhat, they could become popular.
I think we may be on the verge of the GPU compute wars. Quite exciting, in a way, and disturbing, in another...
I think we may be on the verge of the GPU compute wars. Quite exciting, in a way, and disturbing, in another...
Expected by Internet rumor mills to cost $350-400 (ETA: source of first OP article suggests MSRP of $299), TDP of 225W. 6970 costs ~$300-400, TDP of 250W.
... But if ATI loses at Bitcoin mining.... what else is left for it? Will be interesting to see specs when card is released.
... But if ATI loses at Bitcoin mining.... what else is left for it? Will be interesting to see specs when card is released.
Jump to: