Consensus on most efficient GPU in terms of hashes per kw? - page 2.

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: Transisto on December 17, 2011, 03:01:16 AM

Quote from: cicada on December 16, 2011, 05:50:16 PM

...
Space being a concern for you, however, means 5970's are a better buy. They're also more widely available, 5870's are a bit hard to come by these days.

5970 being easier to find than 5870 ?
Dont' think so.

If you are in the US and willing to buy used (ebay has a 30 day guarantee) there is essentially an unlimited low cost supply of 5970s. Yeah I know some people are afraid of buying used GPU but 30 day return policy cuts the risk. If some fail you have to factor that in compared to the higher price of new units.

phelix

legendary

Activity: 1708

Merit: 1020

underclock to become more energy efficient.... I think 3MH/W for a whole rig might be possible. use a low power cpu and as many underclocked (double) GPUs as possible

my cards run at 3MH/W, whole rig at 2.7MH/W https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/high-efficiency-gpu-mining-3-mhashj-40056

it would be very interesting to see how far you can underclock a gpu... below bios limit I mean

P4man

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

5850s, 5870 and 5970 will all be very very close, particularly if you tweak clocks and voltages (5970s are clocked and volted lower by default, making them more energy efficient, but you can do that with the other cards as well).
The 5970 will clearly give you the best density, but particularly if electricity is almost free, purchase price is also a big factor and I find 5850s hard to beat in that area; 1/3 the price of a 5970 for roughly half the hashrate (assuming a very mild overclock). They are also relatively easy to keep cool.

Last point, if a dual card fails, you will (usually) lose both cores, making single cards "more reliable".

In short; if density is more important than cost, or ultimate power efficiency is your goal, 5970 is the way to go. otherwise, 5850 gets my vote.

Transisto

donator

Activity: 1731

Merit: 1008

Quote from: cicada on December 16, 2011, 05:50:16 PM

...
Space being a concern for you, however, means 5970's are a better buy. They're also more widely available, 5870's are a bit hard to come by these days.

5970 being easier to find than 5870 ?
Dont' think so.

cicada

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on December 16, 2011, 04:28:01 PM

Quote from: yochdog on December 16, 2011, 03:58:47 PM

Do you think the efficiency would hold using 5870's? I imagine it would be similar since the GPU's are identical.....

It likely is very similar. The 5970 likely is slightly ahead because there is some de-duplication of minor components. Also to avoid thermal overload it is my understanding that AMD takes chips from the top(most efficient) bin when building 5970s.

Still although I don't have any specific stats I would figure a rig based on 5870s should get pretty close to 2.5 MH/W.

I'd expect a 5870 may make up for the minor power difference with a higher per-core hashrate, at least at stock clocks. 5970's are clocked down a bit for the same thermal concerns.

Space being a concern for you, however, means 5970's are a better buy. They're also more widely available, 5870's are a bit hard to come by these days.

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on December 16, 2011, 03:18:42 PM

From a MH/W basis it is hard to beat 5970.

My rigs pull about 250W per card (memory underclocked to 160Mhz).
I run 3x5970 per rig.
Using usb key for OS, underclocked sempron, and MB w/ everything unecessary turned off the entire system pulls ~860W at the wall.

Rigs get ~2.2GH to 2.3GH on 860W or ~2.5 to 2.7 MH/W.

I don't think it is possible to do much better than that unless you go FPGA or wait for 7800 series cards.

that's pretty awesome!

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

Quote from: yochdog on December 16, 2011, 03:58:47 PM

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on December 16, 2011, 03:18:42 PM

From a MH/W basis it is hard to beat 5970.

My rigs pull about 250W per card (memory underclocked to 160Mhz).
I run 3x5970 per rig.
Using usb key for OS, underclocked sempron, and MB w/ everything unecessary turned off the entire system pulls ~860W at the wall.

Rigs get ~2.2GH to 2.3GH on 860W or ~2.5 to 2.7 MH/W.

I don't think it is possible to do much better than that unless you go FPGA or wait for 7800 series cards.

Do you think the efficiency would hold using 5870's? I imagine it would be similar since the GPU's are identical.....

It likely is very similar. The 5970 likely is slightly ahead because there is some de-duplication of minor components. Also to avoid thermal overload it is my understanding that AMD takes chips from the top(most efficient) bin when building 5970s.

Still although I don't have any specific stats I would figure a rig based on 5870s should get pretty close to 2.5 MH/W.

yochdog

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1000

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on December 16, 2011, 03:18:42 PM

From a MH/W basis it is hard to beat 5970.

My rigs pull about 250W per card (memory underclocked to 160Mhz).
I run 3x5970 per rig.
Using usb key for OS, underclocked sempron, and MB w/ everything unecessary turned off the entire system pulls ~860W at the wall.

Rigs get ~2.2GH to 2.3GH on 860W or ~2.5 to 2.7 MH/W.

I don't think it is possible to do much better than that unless you go FPGA or wait for 7800 series cards.

Do you think the efficiency would hold using 5870's? I imagine it would be similar since the GPU's are identical.....

DeathAndTaxes

donator

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1079

Gerald Davis

From a MH/W basis it is hard to beat 5970.

My rigs pull about 250W per card (memory underclocked to 160Mhz).
I run 3x5970 per rig.
Using usb key for OS, underclocked sempron, and MB w/ everything unecessary turned off the entire system pulls ~860W at the wall.

Rigs get ~2.2GH to 2.3GH on 860W or ~2.5 to 2.7 MH/W.

I don't think it is possible to do much better than that unless you go FPGA or wait for 7800 series cards.

jjshabadoo

hero member

Activity: 535

Merit: 500

I am running two 5970's on a linux rig with an amd sempron cpu. Linux on a flash drive and all extra motherboard options turned off in bios. I have them clocked at 850/300 and the rig draws between 575 and 600 watts at the wall.

hash rate is about 800 mhash per card. so for both cards I would say 1.5 to 1.6 GH/s for 600 watts max. 2.5 mh/watt

yochdog

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1000

Quote from: RaggedMonk on December 16, 2011, 01:54:08 PM

Quote from: yochdog on December 16, 2011, 12:40:20 PM

Is there a consensus on what the most efficient GPU's are in terms of hashing power per kw consumed, as well as hashing density?

There is an answer, but definitely not a consensus.

lol.....care to take a stab?

RaggedMonk

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 250

Quote from: yochdog on December 16, 2011, 12:40:20 PM

Is there a consensus on what the most efficient GPU's are in terms of hashing power per kw consumed, as well as hashing density?

There is an answer, but definitely not a consensus.

yochdog

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1000

Quote from: molecular on December 16, 2011, 12:44:14 PM

Quote from: yochdog on December 16, 2011, 12:40:20 PM

My farm is now nearing physical capacity, both in terms of space and power load.

It is readily apparant that the only way to push my hash rate beyond 14,000 MH/s will be through more efficiently utilizing space/power.

Is there a consensus on what the most efficient GPU's are in terms of hashing power per kw consumed, as well as hashing density?

I know that 5830's are awful, and that 5970's are pretty awesome. Beyond that I am having trouble finding information.

Any help is greatly appreciated!

I had a 5970 doing 799 MH/s (stably for months), while whole rig drew 385W from socket. Whenever I've seen people report similar efficiency, they used 5970.

I'm guessing other tech is excluded here, GPU only, right?

Yes, I am not willing to take the plunge on FPGA yet. I have access to VERY cheap electricity, so I am most concerned with getting the most hashing density within a defined amount of power.

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

Quote from: yochdog on December 16, 2011, 12:40:20 PM

My farm is now nearing physical capacity, both in terms of space and power load.

It is readily apparant that the only way to push my hash rate beyond 14,000 MH/s will be through more efficiently utilizing space/power.

Is there a consensus on what the most efficient GPU's are in terms of hashing power per kw consumed, as well as hashing density?

I know that 5830's are awful, and that 5970's are pretty awesome. Beyond that I am having trouble finding information.

Any help is greatly appreciated!

I had a 5970 doing 799 MH/s (stably for months), while whole rig drew 385W from socket. Whenever I've seen people report similar efficiency, they used 5970.

I'm guessing other tech is excluded here, GPU only, right?

pirateat40

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

"Yes I am a pirate, 200 years too late."

Wait for the 7x series.

yochdog

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1000

My farm is now nearing physical capacity, both in terms of space and power load.

It is readily apparant that the only way to push my hash rate beyond 14,000 MH/s will be through more efficiently utilizing space/power.

Is there a consensus on what the most efficient GPU's are in terms of hashing power per kw consumed, as well as hashing density?

I know that 5830's are awful, and that 5970's are pretty awesome. Beyond that I am having trouble finding information.

Any help is greatly appreciated!

Topic: Consensus on most efficient GPU in terms of hashes per kw? - page 2. (Read 4047 times)