Topic: [ANN] cudaMiner & ccMiner CUDA based mining applications [Windows/Linux/MacOSX] - page 136. (Read 3426944 times)

50% than 780ti? would be good in mining, 4.5x for 200w

^ ^ THIS ^ ^

Any way we could get djm's latest contributions (xcn, etc) up on the release page at http://cudamining.co.uk?

With this thread growing so fast, I think the importance of cudamining.co.uk only will increase as a place where miners easily can find the latest releases (but also relevant donation addresses for devs).

If it's to much work for the devs and bigjme, perhaps a trusted third party in the community could help out to keep it updated.

I would add that for someone that mostly cares for rendering performance (and I'll assume that your rendering work translates to raw compute performance), you should really look at Titan and/or Quadro cards. The 690 has a lot more cores than the regular Titan, yet the compute performance of the Titan is way ahead.

You might find some useful data on this review:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6774/nvidias-geforce-gtx-titan-part-2-titans-performance-unveiled

On the other hand, the typical replacement candidate for any Nvidia, is the same performance reference @ 2 gen's upwards. As we're apparently skipping the 800 convention for the high end desktop series: if you have a 690, you'll be looking for a 990 once it's out, if you have a 670, a 970, and so on... Personally, I find that most times a single generation bump is not worth the cost or bother for the little performance gains one will have.

~ Myagui

If you don't have the need don't buy... that's all I can really tell you.....

I encountered a problem trying to use Splitscreen (latest version available from cudamining.co.uk, 2.0.5)


Then when I ran debug in MSVS, it gave me these details:

Hope this helps!

I wonder what the best investment would be between the new 980/Titan II , TITAN Z , TESLA K40, or Quadro K6000.
So much variety of high end GPUs , but I dont know which will be better. We'll see afret 900 series arive...

I will most certainly buy 1 or 2 GTX980 when they are out. But that's not my point. I have not planed to use them for mining so it's almost irrelevant how they perform there. Also Gameing performance is not a big criteria for me. If anything than the rendering performance is what I am most interested in.

However 1000 cuda cores are still 1000 cuda cores and I want to have more cuda cores than the card I last bought.
Same as with CPU. Yes a 1GHz CPU can be faster than a 2GHz one. But still it's strange to buy a 1GHz once you had 2 GHz.

^^ That nick serves you right sir! 

uhhh... you can not compare maxwell cuda cores vs kepler cuda cores.
"Nvidia claims a 128 CUDA core SMM has 90% of the performance of a 192 CUDA core SMX" see http://web.archive.org/web/20140221105651/http://anandtech.com/show/7764/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-750-ti-and-gtx-750-review-maxwell/3
So 128 maxwell cores are equal to roughly 0.9*192 = 172.8 kepler cores.

now while you still can not not compare the two architectures on just cores, we can at least try:

gtx 690
cuda cores: 3072 (kepler)

gtx 980
cuda cores: 2560 (maxwell) which is roughly 2560 * (172.8/128) = 3456 (kepler)

What sucks, is that a lot of people are still buy into the obvious marketing moves and don't really take the time to learn the differences in fine print. You are comparing two very distinct architectures on a single metric, and one that does not even translate directly into any absolute benchmark reference point. Manufacturers take advantage of this to squeeze every last bit of profit that they can with each product generation...

Let me put this in other words: How performing/fast are the individual units of cuda cores for each card? What's their relative memory bandwidth? What are the base & boost clocks? What's the overclocking headroom? How tolerant is the cooling design towards sustained usage at max TDP? Are there any hardware instructions exclusive to either architecture? What are their respective compute levels? What are their relative efficiencies?

I could go on and on, and these are just the most basic specifications, most of which are certain to be listed on any product page (once a product actually exists).

I for one, am very interested in the 800/900 series, as these will be super at dual duties. A pair/trio of these in SLI will be a massive game setup, and even if we're stuck with 28nm, the Maxwell generation is well proven to be efficient at mining. The 750TI might even continue to be the most cost effective choice for mining (or perhaps the most efficient in pure W/hash), but it is really just for the casual, low-res gamer as it is entry level and has no SLI support.

For mining alone, density should be an important factor, but only for those that might call themselves "farmers". I have a single game PC/rig, and a spare PC that I can assign to mining duties if I need to move some 750TI's around. So personally, I don't care for density all that much (yet?).

~ Myagui

just comparing the core, doesn't necessarily help here.
If you compare for example the 2880 core of the 780ti to the 640cores, the 780ti has 4.5x more cores.

However in terms of performance in crypto it is rather 2.5x  the hashrate of the 750ti.
So basically it is like the 750ti had 1150core Kepler core
So the card with 2500 would rather be in kepler equivalent core something like 4492core (at this is what I hope...)
ie 50% faster than a 780ti

The 690 is a very .. very old card already ..  and I didn't buy it for crypto mining but rendering.

My point is that it sux that my old card has after so much time till more cuda cores than any new you can buy.

And the Titan Z.. well ..who in the right mind will buy that one!?  I wonder if they every sell one such card for the price they dream. So forget about that one.
The 690 was in the price range of a normal card back then.

err, you are comparing some overpriced dual gpu to a single gpu  
(I thought people buying those sort of card had some idea...)
So your 690 is rather 1536cores by 2 and first gen kepler (if not fermi)

actually 2560 isn't a lot considering the 780ti has 2880core
(I won't mention the titan Z here    oh no I can't believe that a serie 700 has 5760cores (and cost 3000euros) way more core than a serie 800  )

Actually I am a bit disappointed that Christian bought a Xeon Phi rather than a Titan Z  

GTX 690
GPU MODEL: 2 x Kepler GK104
FABRICATION PROCESS: 28nm
CUDA CORES: 3072

GTX 980
GPU MODEL:Maxwell GM204
FABRICATION PROCESS: 28nm
CUDA CORES: 2560


I don't like it. Where is the improvement to my old old GTX 690 except of course the lesser energy consumption.
To buy a card with less cudas cores than my old card is somehow so unattractive. (yes I know it's 2 gpu vs 1 gpu)

edit: hopefully this GTX690 specs are wrong

funny, I need 2 more to finish my first 750ti rig. 

My 290s are selling for $315 AUD... I just put the 280x's up, no where near as popular as the 290s...

And there's me struggling to get even 90 euro

same as for the 800 series

they said that a 980 is slightly faster than a 780ti and around 200w of consumption, maybe less

actually i'm not selling to buy 980, well unless the mining profit don't rise again, i'm not buying anything(maybe just one 980 for gaming), thus i'm selling for good