Speed of NVIDIA GTX660

MarkJ
MarkJ
Joined: 28 Feb 08
Posts: 437
Credit: 138,937,180
RAC: 2,215

My 560Ti was averaging 45 min

My 560Ti was averaging 45 min (running 2 at a time). The 660s are doing 40 min average at the moment.

According to the Nvidia site the 560Ti has a max power of 170w and the 660 140w, so the power saving should be 30 watts.

Fred J. Verster
Fred J. Verster
Joined: 27 Apr 08
Posts: 118
Credit: 22,451,438
RAC: 0

RE: RE: From NVidia

Quote:
Quote:


From NVidia website : GTX660

GPU Engine Specs:
384 coresCUDA Cores
835 MHzGraphics Clock (MHz)
30.4Texture Fill Rate (billion/sec)
[...]

That must be cut-and-paste error, the GTX 660 has different (better) specs, see here:

http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-660/specifications

Cheers
HBE

My apollogies, those are the specs from a GTX650.

The GTX660 :[pre]

GPU Engine Specs::
960CUDA Cores
980Base Clock (MHz)
1033Boost Clock (MHz)
78.4Texture Fill Rate (billion/sec)
Memory Specs:
6.0 GbpsMemory Clock
2048 MBStandard Memory Config
GDDR5Memory Interface
192-bit GDDR5Memory Interface Width
144.2Memory Bandwidth (GB/sec)
Feature Support:
4.3OpenGL
PCI Express 3.0 Bus Support 1
YesCertified for Windows 7
3D Vision, 3D Vision Surround, CUDA, DirectX 11, PhysX, SLI, TXAA, FXAA, Adaptive VSync, GPU BoostSupported Technologies2 .[/pre]

That could happen, spending too much time behind a 'screen'.......

Shafa
Shafa
Joined: 31 May 05
Posts: 53
Credit: 627,005,014
RAC: 0

Info about the power

Info about the power consumption (from nvidia pages) is just theoretical and informational.
I did measure my PC with a couple of different GTX460, 460SE, GTS450 and GTS250.

I was very surprised, that in case of 2 concurrent unit:
- there is no big difference between GTS450 and GTX460 (or 250), even when theoretical difference is 50W; lets say we are talking about 10-20W
- 460SE had a few watts HIGHER consumption than 460

The difference is visible only when you run special tests that load your card on the max (like OCCT, etc.). Not in the case of E@H.

As for the performance, again - GTX460 overclocked from 650to 800MHz (this is a piece of cake in fact, no over-voltage) does 2 concurent unit 42-46minutes, depending on the cpu, ram, fsb, etc...
Without overclocing it is about 45-50minutes.

Therefore I am a bit surprised there is not bigger difference between GTX460 and 660...

Sid
Sid
Joined: 17 Oct 10
Posts: 160
Credit: 942,772,376
RAC: 84,719

Al last I have 560Ti and

Al last I have 560Ti and 660Ti at the same box. The results are a bit weird.
1. One 560Ti in PCI 16 slot - average time is 18.5 minutes for one WUs(For 4 WUs in parralell)
2. One 660Ti in PCI 16 slot - average time is 23.5 minutes for one WUs(For 4 WUs in parralell)
3. Both cards are installed in PCI 8 slots (motherboard is not supported more the 16 lines for two PCI slots) and running 4 WUs each:
a. 660 Ti - 21.75 minutes for one WU.
b. 560 Ti - 24.75 minutes for one WU.
All CPU cores are relatively free(not more that 20%) and are not busy with other boinc tasks.
So probably 560 Ti is still better choice.

P.S. 4 WUs simultaneously on a one card is the best in term of RAC for my box.

MAGIC Quantum Mechanic
MAGIC Quantum M...
Joined: 18 Jan 05
Posts: 1,775
Credit: 1,197,970,437
RAC: 1,862,947

RE: Al last I have 560Ti

Quote:

Al last I have 560Ti and 660Ti at the same box. The results are a bit weird.
1. One 560Ti in PCI 16 slot - average time is 18.5 minutes for one WUs(For 4 WUs in parralell)
2. One 660Ti in PCI 16 slot - average time is 23.5 minutes for one WUs(For 4 WUs in parralell)
3. Both cards are installed in PCI 8 slots (motherboard is not supported more the 16 lines for two PCI slots) and running 4 WUs each:
a. 660 Ti - 21.75 minutes for one WU.
b. 560 Ti - 24.75 minutes for one WU.
All CPU cores are relatively free(not more that 20%) and are not busy with other boinc tasks.
So probably 560 Ti is still better choice.

P.S. 4 WUs simultaneously on a one card is the best in term of RAC for my box.

Sid,which versions of the 660Ti and 560Ti are you using?

(overclocked,superclocked,or stock)

Did you just take the 560 from your other box and add it to the 660 with the i7-2600K CPU @ 3.40GHz (wish I had one of those since my processors are older versions)

And do you run any other tasks along with your cuda X4?

I was just looking at both of our boxes (I have a 550Ti OC'd and 660Ti SC'd)
Just running cuda X2 on mine along with other tasks to use all 4 cores.

I'm trying to decide if I am going to take one of my other hosts and update it with a GeForce and new PS with the older cores or just add a new host with an i7 3.4 and decide on which card and I do still like my 550Ti just because it is almost just 1/3 the cost of the 660Ti. (not to mention having a processor that I could OC too)

I still have another quad and a couple 3-core I could upgrade w/GeForce

http://einsteinathome.org/host/4109993/tasks
http://einsteinathome.org/host/4171333/tasks

Sid
Sid
Joined: 17 Oct 10
Posts: 160
Credit: 942,772,376
RAC: 84,719

RE: Sid,which versions of

Quote:

Sid,which versions of the 660Ti and 560Ti are you using?

(overclocked,superclocked,or stock)

Did you just take the 560 from your other box and add it to the 660 with the i7-2600K CPU @ 3.40GHz (wish I had one of those since my processors are older versions)

And do you run any other tasks along with your cuda X4?

I was just looking at both of our boxes (I have a 550Ti OC'd and 660Ti SC'd)
Just running cuda X2 on mine along with other tasks to use all 4 cores.



Some answers to your questions:
I'm using stock version. I was playing with OC but results are not very encouraging so I came back to the stock version.
My 560/660 Ti cards were moving from box to box but finally I guess to leave them in one box.
And I do not run any other tasks on this box (boinc or not). Maybe some Internet surfing. Most time this computer is dedicated to BRP4 WUs.

Horacio
Horacio
Joined: 3 Oct 11
Posts: 205
Credit: 80,557,243
RAC: 0

RE: Al last I have 560Ti

Quote:

Al last I have 560Ti and 660Ti at the same box. The results are a bit weird.
1. One 560Ti in PCI 16 slot - average time is 18.5 minutes for one WUs(For 4 WUs in parralell)
2. One 660Ti in PCI 16 slot - average time is 23.5 minutes for one WUs(For 4 WUs in parralell)
3. Both cards are installed in PCI 8 slots (motherboard is not supported more the 16 lines for two PCI slots) and running 4 WUs each:
a. 660 Ti - 21.75 minutes for one WU.
b. 560 Ti - 24.75 minutes for one WU.
All CPU cores are relatively free(not more that 20%) and are not busy with other boinc tasks.
So probably 560 Ti is still better choice.

P.S. 4 WUs simultaneously on a one card is the best in term of RAC for my box.

Ive read somewhere that the 192bits of the 660Ti memory bus required a tricky memory configuration to address 2Gb... i.e. there are 0.5Gb of memory that cant be used on dual channel... In the other hand the 560Ti has a memory bus of 256Bit, and while the memory is slower in this GPU compared to the 660Ti, the difference gets almost compensated by the extra bits and the full dual channel memory configuration...
I think this is why you see that the 560Ti performs better than the 660Ti doing several tasks.

The 560Tis were a kind of rare jewel, most of the new "technologies" of the Keppler GPUs were "tested" on the 560Ti. On the contrary, the 660Tis are just one step in the marketing segments...

Sid
Sid
Joined: 17 Oct 10
Posts: 160
Credit: 942,772,376
RAC: 84,719

RE: Ive read somewhere

Quote:

Ive read somewhere that the 192bits of the 660Ti memory bus required a tricky memory configuration to address 2Gb... i.e. there are 0.5Gb of memory that cant be used on dual channel... In the other hand the 560Ti has a memory bus of 256Bit, and while the memory is slower in this GPU compared to the 660Ti, the difference gets almost compensated by the extra bits and the full dual channel memory configuration...
I think this is why you see that the 560Ti performs better than the 660Ti doing several tasks.

The 560Tis were a kind of rare jewel, most of the new "technologies" of the Keppler GPUs were "tested" on the 560Ti. On the contrary, the 660Tis are just one step in the marketing segments...

Moreover as somebody has said in this discussion - 560 Ti shaders are working on the double speed but 660 Ti shaders have just core speed.

MAGIC Quantum Mechanic
MAGIC Quantum M...
Joined: 18 Jan 05
Posts: 1,775
Credit: 1,197,970,437
RAC: 1,862,947

I wonder if the GeForce GTX

I wonder if the GeForce GTX 560 Ti - 448 Cores (Fermi) has any advantage over the GeForce GTX 560 Ti with 384 cuda cores

Not sure why some are having problems with the OC'd and SC'd versions since mine have never had any problems so far (and since I am not lucky it can't be that )

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/search.asp?keywords=GeForce+GTX+560+Ti

Fred J. Verster
Fred J. Verster
Joined: 27 Apr 08
Posts: 118
Credit: 22,451,438
RAC: 0

RE: I wonder if the GeForce

Quote:

I wonder if the GeForce GTX 560 Ti - 448 Cores (Fermi) has any advantage over the GeForce GTX 560 Ti with 384 cuda cores

Not sure why some are having problems with the OC'd and SC'd versions since mine have never had any problems so far (and since I am not lucky it can't be that )

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/search.asp?keywords=GeForce+GTX+560+Ti

Weird, 2 'similar' GTX560Ti, 1 with 448CUDA-cores and 1 with 384CUDA-cores?

I still run a GTX480(480CUDA-cores/15 CUs) and a GTX470(448CUDA-cores/14CUs)
Running 2 WUs per GPU. (The first FERMI series).
Also use 2 ATI HD5870 GPUs (OpenCL) for BRP4ATI tasks.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.