Pages:
Author

Topic: PCI-E 7 slot expansion board (Read 7750 times)

hero member
Activity: 504
Merit: 500
hero member
Activity: 784
Merit: 500
May 21, 2012, 03:16:58 PM
#31
I talkedto them about gpus on that thing and they say itll work Wink

Quote
Hello,
 
Thank you for your interest in our product.
 
This splitter has 3 x1PCI express adapters for plugging add-in boards. If your GPU has x16 PCI express interface you need to use additional passive adapter for converting x16 PCI express to x1 PCI express.
 
If you have any questions please don’t hesitate to contact us.
 
Best regards.
Support Team
AMFELTEC Corp.
 
 
From: h [mailto:.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 8:18 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: GPGPU / CUDA / Stream? SKU-040-01
 
Hi,
i was wondering if this PCIe splitter (SKU-040-01) can handle some GPUs for folding and Bitcoin mining?

regards
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
January 19, 2012, 12:55:04 PM
#29
My understanding is that 2D acceleration was made possible with support from AMD.  My point was that adding OpenCL to open source drivers would require AMD assistance (assistance they have so far been unwilling to provide) not that it would be impossible.
Now that I can agree with.
The work required to add OpenCL support is pretty massive, and AFAIK there's pretty much 0 done on a open source OpenCL -> VLIWx shader asm compiler, several other large parts of the puzzle are also completely missing (runtime, runtime/opengl/driver integration/...).
But saying that the open source driver can't use shaders is wrong.
Now, for something like a dedicated miner for 5/6xxx you'd "only" have to handcraft a kernel for each arch in VLIWx ASM (fully documented in public AMD docs btw) and hack the radeon driver so it allocates input/output regions and loads/runs your shader program on command. Iirc there's still a open 200BTC bounty for a miner working like that. but it's a *lot* of work for very little benefit.

I think I understand.  So while it wouldn't be possible to implement OpenCL (which is rather expansive API) hack together low level support just for mining and implement that in a fork of OpenSource drivers?  The code wouldn't be openCL compatible but would function at a lower level.

Has anyone done a proof of concept?  Something simpler than mining maybe something as simple as loading an value, increment it in a loop and then read the output?

I never thought about doing it that way.  Hopefully someday AMD provides support for OpenCL in OpenSource drivers as that is a pretty ugly "hack".
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 257
January 19, 2012, 12:50:41 PM
#28
My understanding is that 2D acceleration was made possible with support from AMD.  My point was that adding OpenCL to open source drivers would require AMD assistance (assistance they have so far been unwilling to provide) not that it would be impossible.
Now that I can agree with.
The work required to add OpenCL support is pretty massive, and AFAIK there's pretty much 0 done on a open source OpenCL -> VLIWx shader asm compiler, several other large parts of the puzzle are also completely missing (runtime, runtime/opengl/driver integration/...).
But saying that the open source driver can't use shaders is wrong.
Now, for something like a dedicated miner for 5/6xxx you'd "only" have to handcraft a kernel for each arch in VLIWx ASM (fully documented in public AMD docs btw) and hack the radeon driver so it allocates input/output regions and loads/runs your shader program on command. Iirc there's still a open 200BTC bounty for a miner working like that. but it's a *lot* of work for very little benefit.
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
January 19, 2012, 12:39:12 PM
#27
Without AMD support it is unlikely any Open Source driver that takes advantage of shaders will ever exist.
Err, what?
Take a look at the Xorg radeon driver and how it does several parts of 2D acceleration on 5xxx and 69xx Wink

My understanding is that 2D acceleration was made possible with support from AMD.  My point was that adding OpenCL to open source drivers would require AMD assistance (assistance they have so far been unwilling to provide) not that it would be impossible.
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
January 19, 2012, 12:34:52 PM
#26
Without AMD support it is unlikely any Open Source driver that takes advantage of shaders will ever exist.
Err, what?
Take a look at the Xorg radeon driver and how it does several parts of 2D acceleration on 5xxx and 69xx Wink

Yeah, I pointed that out above but D&T is under the impression that Intel and open source ATI drivers don't support OpenCL when in fact they do ( somewhat ).

If someone could let us use the damn open source drivers that would be magical. No need to have X server running anymore !

Artz didn't say open sources drivers support OpenCL.

You claim is incorrect.
No Open Source driver supports OpenCL despite a lot of asking by the community.  
Intel has no graphical driver which support OpenCL (they only support OpenCL on CPU).

Quote
If someone could let us use the damn open source drivers
Who is stopping you?
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
January 19, 2012, 12:32:30 PM
#25
Without AMD support it is unlikely any Open Source driver that takes advantage of shaders will ever exist.
Err, what?
Take a look at the Xorg radeon driver and how it does several parts of 2D acceleration on 5xxx and 69xx Wink

Yeah, I pointed that out above but D&T is under the impression that Intel and open source ATI drivers don't support OpenCL when in fact they do ( somewhat ).

If someone could let us use the damn open source drivers that would be magical. No need to have X server running anymore !
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 257
January 19, 2012, 12:30:25 PM
#24
Without AMD support it is unlikely any Open Source driver that takes advantage of shaders will ever exist.
Err, what?
Take a look at the Xorg radeon driver and how it does several parts of 2D acceleration on 5xxx and 69xx Wink
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
January 19, 2012, 12:25:13 PM
#23
If AMD ever changed their drivers to allow 16 (or better unlimited) GPU per system well then it might make more sense.
How much worse are the open source ATI drivers for linux than the proprietary ones for mining? It seems that it should be possible to modify them to remove a limit, but if they perform badly then there may be no point.

Yeah open source drivers for mining would really be HEAVEN for me. Screw AMD and their crappy drivers and bugs.

Somebody with the skill ( like ArtForz ) needs to try and sort this out for us.

Amd doesn't provide sufficient data on internal workings of chip to write OpenSource OpenCL drivers.  Many have asked AMD claims they can't for industry trade secret and competitive advantage reasons.

Without AMD support it is unlikely any Open Source driver that takes advantage of shaders will ever exist.
rjk
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
1ngldh
January 19, 2012, 12:23:27 PM
#22
If AMD ever changed their drivers to allow 16 (or better unlimited) GPU per system well then it might make more sense.
How much worse are the open source ATI drivers for linux than the proprietary ones for mining? It seems that it should be possible to modify them to remove a limit, but if they perform badly then there may be no point.

There are no open sources drivers which are OpenCL capable.
Damn shame.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
January 19, 2012, 12:22:27 PM
#21
If AMD ever changed their drivers to allow 16 (or better unlimited) GPU per system well then it might make more sense.
How much worse are the open source ATI drivers for linux than the proprietary ones for mining? It seems that it should be possible to modify them to remove a limit, but if they perform badly then there may be no point.

Yeah open source drivers for mining would really be HEAVEN for me. Screw AMD and their crappy drivers and bugs.

Somebody with the skill ( like ArtForz ) needs to try and sort this out for us.

Look here to start :

http://dri.freedesktop.org/wiki/GalliumCompute

http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
January 19, 2012, 12:22:02 PM
#20
If AMD ever changed their drivers to allow 16 (or better unlimited) GPU per system well then it might make more sense.
How much worse are the open source ATI drivers for linux than the proprietary ones for mining? It seems that it should be possible to modify them to remove a limit, but if they perform badly then there may be no point.

There are no open sources drivers which are OpenCL capable.
rjk
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
1ngldh
January 19, 2012, 12:20:52 PM
#19
If AMD ever changed their drivers to allow 16 (or better unlimited) GPU per system well then it might make more sense.
How much worse are the open source ATI drivers for linux than the proprietary ones for mining? It seems that it should be possible to modify them to remove a limit, but if they perform badly then there may be no point.
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
January 19, 2012, 10:01:25 AM
#18
I really don't know what to do guys, LOL.

Should I buy this ?

I think this is quite good where prices of 2*5870 << price of 5970 ?

Are you sure.

Price out:
"normal" rig w/ 3x5870 (no extenders necessary)
"normal" rig w/ 4x5870 (using extenders & entry level board)
"normal" rig w/ 6x5870 (using extenders & 6x PCIe board)
"extender rig" w/ 8x5870 ( low end board & 1x extender board)

then calculate entire system cost per GH of each system.  I think you will find that it isn't as good as you think.

The problem is AMD drivers.  Currently it is easy to get 4 graphics cards on 1 board.  Getting 6 is more complicated (and expensive) but certainly possible.

So while this is a 7 slot design you aren't gaining 7 GPU.  You are gaining 2 to 4 more GPU.  $200 for 2 to 4 more slots = $50 to $100 per slot.   No rig I have ever built costs $50 to $100 per slot (excluding GPU).  If AMD ever changed their drivers to allow 16 (or better unlimited) GPU per system well then it might make more sense.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
January 19, 2012, 05:40:35 AM
#17
I really don't know what to do guys, LOL.

Should I buy this ?

I think this is quite good where prices of 2*5870 << price of 5970 ?
sr. member
Activity: 444
Merit: 254
January 19, 2012, 01:23:42 AM
#16

I'll summarise some points in that page as best as I can.

1. Prototype board.
2. It runs only 1x so it's not suitable for gaming. Cheesy
3. Only tested in Linux. But should work in windows, as there is no software to install.
4. (If I read this correctly) There is separate 12V connector to power the cards connected to this daughter board. (I think you can see it in one of the pictures)
5. Chinese will take over the world. (j/k. My own words)

That's all.
legendary
Activity: 1134
Merit: 1005
January 18, 2012, 01:02:57 PM
#15
Well, let's see...
$60 via board + $10 ram + $220 backplane for 7 cards. $41.43/slot
$50 am3 board + $30 sempron + $10 ram + $10 extender + $220 backplane for 8 cards. $40.00/slot
$80 am3 board + $30 sempron + $10 ram + $10 extender + $220 backplane for 10 cards. $35/slot (and lots of fun with 8 card driver limit)

vs.

$80 am3 board + $30 sempron + $10 ram + 2 $10 extenders for 4 cards. $35/slot.

Meh.
This. That is why I have no interest in PCI-E expansion boards.
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 257
January 18, 2012, 12:36:07 PM
#14
Well, let's see...
$60 via board + $10 ram + $220 backplane for 7 cards. $41.43/slot
$50 am3 board + $30 sempron + $10 ram + $10 extender + $220 backplane for 8 cards. $40.00/slot
$80 am3 board + $30 sempron + $10 ram + $10 extender + $220 backplane for 10 cards. $35/slot (and lots of fun with 8 card driver limit)

vs.

$80 am3 board + $30 sempron + $10 ram + 2 $10 extenders for 4 cards. $35/slot.

Meh.

Shouldn't the vs comparison use 7 cards?

i.e.,

$80 am3 board + $30 sempron + $10 ram + 5 $10 extenders for 7 cards. ~$24/slot

Which I was hoping would make the standard version look worse. *slaps forehead*

edit; I suppose the other benefit would be the ability to use an even cheaper mobo with 1x 16x slot.
That's why I put that $60 via board there, cheapest board w/ cpu and a PCIe I could come up with quickly, atom boards w/ PCIe tend to be > $80 and any cheap AMx + sempron is also > $60.
Btw, where do you find a AMx board w/ 7 PCIe slots for $80?
And yes, I left out quite a few things. But start adding stuff like PSUs, materials/time for custom racks, PDUs, ventilation, ... and the whole thing gets overly complex. and the +$/slot ends up about the same.
hero member
Activity: 504
Merit: 500
January 18, 2012, 12:16:47 PM
#13
Well, let's see...
$60 via board + $10 ram + $220 backplane for 7 cards. $41.43/slot
$50 am3 board + $30 sempron + $10 ram + $10 extender + $220 backplane for 8 cards. $40.00/slot
$80 am3 board + $30 sempron + $10 ram + $10 extender + $220 backplane for 10 cards. $35/slot (and lots of fun with 8 card driver limit)

vs.

$80 am3 board + $30 sempron + $10 ram + 2 $10 extenders for 4 cards. $35/slot.

Meh.

Shouldn't the vs comparison use 7 cards?

i.e.,

$80 am3 board + $30 sempron + $10 ram + 5 $10 extenders for 7 cards. ~$24/slot

Which I was hoping would make the standard version look worse. *slaps forehead*

edit; I suppose the other benefit would be the ability to use an even cheaper mobo with 1x 16x slot.
Pages:
Jump to: