I currently have a 3080. I am starting to think about what my next upgrade will be sure to go for either a 4080/5080 if they are out sometime next year or should I change and go with a 7900 XT? (AMD)
I don't think it will make a difference but I am running Windows 11 pro
For me the easy answer is to stick with Nvidia as it's essentially plug and play, the other reason is because there are only a couple of Boinc Projects that won't let you use an Nvidia gpu and the FP32/64 advantage that AMD had in the past is about gone now.
Interesting feedback. I have to agree there is a handful of projects that AMD performed better with, would have thought this would have been one but sounds like it's not the case
When looking at benchmarks are there particular benchmarks I can pay attention to to see how the GPU performs?
I am a bit confused by your term "benchmark" when applied to BOINC projects like Einstein@Home.
Benchmarks are utilizing Frames per Second, or FPS, essentially for gaming, where at BOINC you are more interested in the calculation potential of your GPU.
Since you are running Windows 11, my recommendation would be to use Afterburner by MSI.
There you can preset your GPU to whatever you need or want to and monitor your BOINC output by the daily stats in BOINCstats or Free-DC.
I'm unsure if there is any other 'benchmarking' tool to use for what you want for BOINC projects.
If you ARE interested in gaming benchmarks, there is a plethora of them available. But the most important thing to monitor is GPU temperature. Here's a simple list for you.
When looking at benchmarks are there particular benchmarks I can pay attention to to see how the GPU performs?
I am a bit confused by your term "benchmark" when applied to BOINC projects like Einstein@Home.
I used the word "benchmarks" because of the link you provided at the bottom of your original post.
I appreciate the links you have provided. I have MSI afterburner
For me the easy answer is to stick with Nvidia as it's essentially plug and play
With Windows 11 it doesn't matter at all.
As for what card to get, in general at the moment the AMD cards offer more performance for the money. If you need cuda for some projects obvsiously NVIDA is the only choice. Other than that - unless we go really into the details - go with whatever brand you like more.
Just don't get the 4090 that power connector doesn't seem to be made to endure that power draw and if under heavy load 24/7 I wouldn't trust it without a fire alarm next to the computer.
For me the easy answer is to stick with Nvidia as it's essentially plug and play
B.I.G wrote:
With Windows 11 it doesn't matter at all.
As for what card to get, in general at the moment the AMD cards offer more performance for the money. If you need cuda for some projects obvsiously NVIDA is the only choice. Other than that - unless we go really into the details - go with whatever brand you like more.
Just don't get the 4090 that power connector doesn't seem to be made to endure that power draw and if under heavy load 24/7 I wouldn't trust it without a fire alarm next to the computer.
Thanks. Yes I agree in the 40 series I will certainly be staying away from the 90 card
MAGIC Quantum Mechanic wrote:
YOW if I had that 3080 it would be here running MeerKat 24/7
My card runs them in approximately 5 minutes running 1 task at a time
My card runs them in approximately 5 minutes running 1 task at a time
Kind of insane how computing power increases, my Radeon Pro W7600 runs them in 12 minutes, but uses only 100 watts average for that.
The consumer version of that card, the RX7600 is a bit more powerful so probably 10 minutes.... and you can get that card for 280€. Compare the price of 2 of them with the price of the 3080 when it was new...
The RX7800 XT costs about 600€ here and has almost double the performance of the 7600.
Both of those cards seem to be a sweet spot when it comes to performance for money.
I currently have a 3080. I am starting to think about what my next upgrade will be sure to go for either a 4080/5080 if they are out sometime next year or should I change and go with a 7900 XT? (AMD)
Ah I missed that specific question. If you think 4080 why not go for the 7900xtx which is about 200€ cheaper than the 4080 and outperforms it?
But unless money is no issue and you just want to buy it because you can afford it. I'd wait for the next generation and then see how the two brands compare 6 months after launch. AMD usually has bad drivers in the beginning but does a great job in updating them to get the max out of the cards while nvidia has good drivers right from the start but you don't get the improvements later. For example when the 7900xtx launched it was about as good as the 4080, 6 months later with the latest drivers it got ahead to the point where depending on what you do it is as good as the 4090, in gaming the Nvidia is still clearly ahead but in productivity the AMD card often enough is equal, sometimes even faster. And costs 600$ less... or at the moment a whole whooping 1000$ less.
But for that knowledge to crystalise you have to wait a while and it's different with every card generation.
Speedy wrote: I currently
)
For me the easy answer is to stick with Nvidia as it's essentially plug and play, the other reason is because there are only a couple of Boinc Projects that won't let you use an Nvidia gpu and the FP32/64 advantage that AMD had in the past is about gone now.
Thanks for your
)
Thanks for your feedback.
When looking at benchmarks are there particular benchmarks I can pay attention to to see how the GPU performs?
Interesting feedback. I have
)
Interesting feedback. I have to agree there is a handful of projects that AMD performed better with, would have thought this would have been one but sounds like it's not the case
Speedy wrote: When looking
)
I am a bit confused by your term "benchmark" when applied to BOINC projects like Einstein@Home.
Benchmarks are utilizing Frames per Second, or FPS, essentially for gaming, where at BOINC you are more interested in the calculation potential of your GPU.
Since you are running Windows 11, my recommendation would be to use Afterburner by MSI.
https://www.msi.com/Landing/afterburner/graphics-cards
There you can preset your GPU to whatever you need or want to and monitor your BOINC output by the daily stats in BOINCstats or Free-DC.
I'm unsure if there is any other 'benchmarking' tool to use for what you want for BOINC projects.
If you ARE interested in gaming benchmarks, there is a plethora of them available. But the most important thing to monitor is GPU temperature. Here's a simple list for you.
https://www.howtogeek.com/784198/how-to-monitor-your-computers-gpu-temperature/
Proud member of the Old Farts Association
GWGeorge007 wrote: Speedy
)
I used the word "benchmarks" because of the link you provided at the bottom of your original post.
I appreciate the links you have provided. I have MSI afterburner
There are a few open-source
)
There are a few open-source compute benchmarks available to profile gpus.
OpenCL-Benchmark
One that does not need any compiling is the Geekbench OpenCL benchmarks.
https://www.geekbench.com/
You can run your own benchmark against your own hardware.
Or here is the link to the Geekbench browser OpenCL Compute database to look up where your hardware stands.
This shows results for all cards, Nvidia, AMD and Intel.
https://browser.geekbench.com/opencl-benchmarks
But PrimateLabs dropped the CUDA benchmarks in Geekbench6. That was available in the previous 4 and 5 versions.
mikey wrote: For me the easy
)
With Windows 11 it doesn't matter at all.
As for what card to get, in general at the moment the AMD cards offer more performance for the money. If you need cuda for some projects obvsiously NVIDA is the only choice. Other than that - unless we go really into the details - go with whatever brand you like more.
Just don't get the 4090 that power connector doesn't seem to be made to endure that power draw and if under heavy load 24/7 I wouldn't trust it without a fire alarm next to the computer.
mikey wrote: For me
)
Thanks. Yes I agree in the 40 series I will certainly be staying away from the 90 card
Speedy wrote: My card runs
)
Kind of insane how computing power increases, my Radeon Pro W7600 runs them in 12 minutes, but uses only 100 watts average for that.
The consumer version of that card, the RX7600 is a bit more powerful so probably 10 minutes.... and you can get that card for 280€. Compare the price of 2 of them with the price of the 3080 when it was new...
The RX7800 XT costs about 600€ here and has almost double the performance of the 7600.
Both of those cards seem to be a sweet spot when it comes to performance for money.
Speedy wrote:I currently
)
Ah I missed that specific question. If you think 4080 why not go for the 7900xtx which is about 200€ cheaper than the 4080 and outperforms it?
But unless money is no issue and you just want to buy it because you can afford it. I'd wait for the next generation and then see how the two brands compare 6 months after launch. AMD usually has bad drivers in the beginning but does a great job in updating them to get the max out of the cards while nvidia has good drivers right from the start but you don't get the improvements later. For example when the 7900xtx launched it was about as good as the 4080, 6 months later with the latest drivers it got ahead to the point where depending on what you do it is as good as the 4090, in gaming the Nvidia is still clearly ahead but in productivity the AMD card often enough is equal, sometimes even faster. And costs 600$ less... or at the moment a whole whooping 1000$ less.
But for that knowledge to crystalise you have to wait a while and it's different with every card generation.