mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > Hardware

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2017-04-26, 15:04   #1
JonRussell
 
Mar 2017

32 Posts
Default Just some fun playing with a Tesla P100 plus a question...

Hi,

I had an NVidia Tesla P100 to play with this week, we were installing it in a big Hadoop cluster for a client. But I had it for the day to play with before we handed it over. I ran the mfaktc code for a few minutes.

I achieved 617 GHz d/days on the P100 (3584 cores, 4.7 TeraFLOPS DP)

Code:
Date    Time | class   Pct |   time     ETA | GHz-d/day    Sieve     Wait
Apr 26 14:57 | 4604  99.8% |  0.021    n.a. |    616.78    82485    n.a.%
Apr 26 14:57 | 4605  99.9% |  0.021    n.a. |    616.78    82485    n.a.%
Apr 26 14:57 | 4617 100.0% |  0.021    n.a. |    616.78    82485    n.a.%
found 2 factors for M3321932839 from 2^50 to 2^71 [mfaktc 0.21 75bit_mul32_gs]
tf(): total time spent: 20.802s
For comparison, I ran the same mfaktc code on my NVidia GeForce GTX 750 Ti graphics card and achieved 100 GHz d/days

Code:
Date    Time | class   Pct |   time     ETA | GHz-d/day    Sieve     Wait
Apr 26 14:50 | 4604  99.8% |  0.129    n.a. |    100.41    82485    n.a.%
Apr 26 14:50 | 4605  99.9% |  0.129    n.a. |    100.41    82485    n.a.%
Apr 26 14:50 | 4617 100.0% |  0.130    n.a. |     99.63    82485    n.a.%
found 2 factors for M3321932839 from 2^50 to 2^71 [mfaktc 0.21 75bit_mul32_gs]
tf(): time spent since restart:    1m 44.186s
      estimated total time spent:  2m  5.023s
I was surprised a £100 graphics card was only 1/6th slower that a £5,000 P100 ?

Which begs the question ... what is the difference between the Telsa card architecture and a normal NVidia graphics card, to warrant the huge price difference ?

The P100 has 3584 cores, 12GB RAM, 1328 MHz clock.
The GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is almost exactly the same spec and has 3584 cores, 11GB RAM, 1480 MHz clock.
They are both the same NVidia Pascal Architecture.

However, the P100 is about £5,000 ! and the GTX 1080 Ti is about £700 ?

Whats the difference ?

Regards,

Jon.

Last fiddled with by JonRussell on 2017-04-26 at 15:05
JonRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-26, 16:33   #2
VictordeHolland
 
VictordeHolland's Avatar
 
"Victor de Hollander"
Aug 2011
the Netherlands

32·131 Posts
Default

Tesla
pure compute card (no video output)
option to turn on ECC (you lose 1/8 of the available memory)
1/2 the DoublePrecision of their SinglePrecision performance
HBM2 memory give it 540-720GB/s of memory bandwidth (depending on whether it is a 12GB or 16GB model)

GTX1080 Ti
a consumer card (with video output)
no ECC
1/32 the DoublePrecision of their SinglePrecision performance
GDDR5X memory (484GB/s memory bandwidth)

ECC + DP performance + Memory Bandwidth is what makes Tesla cards desirable for compute. If a company is doing seismic imaging/simulations/waterflow calculations etc, with engineers costing 1000s of dollars each month, you might also give them the proper tools of a couple of $1000s.

Nvidia uses product differentiation to distinguish between different markets (and get higher profit margins):
Tesla = Server/compute
Quadro = Workstation
Geforce = Consumer/gaming
VictordeHolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-26, 16:58   #3
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
"name field"
Jun 2011
Thailand

240058 Posts
Default

As mentioned, it was not the best test you could do. Mfaktc is mostly integer math and little SP float, no DP float, neither huge memory access. You can find cards with even lower price, giving a better Mfaktc score. See here.

This card is strong at DP float (1/2 SP float performance, compared with 1/32, or 1/8, or 1/3 for top cards from the former Tesla/Fermi series, etc). You should have tried cudaLucas or other DP-heavy stuff. In this table, P100 may stay somewhere about 150 or so (unfortunately nobody reported it yet, but Oliver and others around did some tests and published the results).

Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2017-04-26 at 17:05
LaurV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-26, 17:25   #4
kladner
 
kladner's Avatar
 
"Kieren"
Jul 2011
In My Own Galaxy!

1015810 Posts
Default

Something does not seem right here. I am running a GTX 1060. With the warm weather we are having, the settings I have run it at ~2000MHz. It runs a little higher when ambient is lower. It is currently turning out 615 GHz-d/d**. It has 1280 cores.
**running mfaktc

Last fiddled with by kladner on 2017-04-26 at 17:56
kladner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-26, 17:45   #5
JonRussell
 
Mar 2017

32 Posts
Default

Shall I run the cudaLucas code and post the results somewhere to add to the database ?

Regards,

Jon.
JonRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-26, 18:13   #6
Mark Rose
 
Mark Rose's Avatar
 
"/X\(‘-‘)/X\"
Jan 2013

13·229 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kladner View Post
Something does not seem right here. I am running a GTX 1060. With the warm weather we are having, the settings I have run it at ~2000MHz. It runs a little higher when ambient is lower. It is currently turning out 615 GHz-d/d**. It has 1280 cores.
**running mfaktc
That's what I get with mine, which has a 1.61 GHz base clock. Its fan is running at 91% and the temperatures are in the low 80's, so I'm thinking of returning it and getting a model with more than one fan.
Mark Rose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-26, 18:20   #7
kladner
 
kladner's Avatar
 
"Kieren"
Jul 2011
In My Own Galaxy!

2×3×1,693 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rose View Post
That's what I get with mine, which has a 1.61 GHz base clock. Its fan is running at 91% and the temperatures are in the low 80's, so I'm thinking of returning it and getting a model with more than one fan.
I love Gigabyte coolers. Across several brands of cards, they are the quietest, with cooling as good or better than the others.
The 1060 is running at 78 C, ATM. The twin fans are at 94%, 2900 RPM.

Last fiddled with by kladner on 2017-04-26 at 18:22
kladner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-26, 22:07   #8
Mark Rose
 
Mark Rose's Avatar
 
"/X\(‘-‘)/X\"
Jan 2013

13·229 Posts
Default

I have the EVGA GeForce GTX 1060 SC GAMING, ACX 2.0 (Single Fan) I have is easily the loudest card I've ever owned. It makes the GTX 580 silent by comparison.

The two fan EVGA GeForce GTX 1070 SC GAMING ACX 3.0 produces little noise and runs cool.

Both cards are drawing almost the same amount of electricity, but the 1070 is producing a lot more TF.
Mark Rose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-27, 00:08   #9
Xyzzy
 
Xyzzy's Avatar
 
Aug 2002

3×5×569 Posts
Default

FWIW, we run our 1060 at 50% TDP. It is silent and barely breaks 60° C. We get ~430 GHz-d/day.
Xyzzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-04-27, 11:46   #10
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
"name field"
Jun 2011
Thailand

3×5×683 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonRussell View Post
Shall I run the cudaLucas code and post the results somewhere to add to the database ?
Yes please, follow the steps described here in the title. You can PM James on this forum, for details.

Edit: Optionally, you can post on this forum too, to make us envy you...

Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2017-04-27 at 11:48
LaurV is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AWS announces g3 instances with Tesla M60 GPUs and Broadwell processors Mark Rose GPU Computing 1 2017-07-16 19:52
Tesla P100 — 5.4 DP TeraFLOPS — Pascal Mark Rose GPU Computing 52 2016-07-02 12:11
Want to test drive a K80 Tesla cluster? tServo GPU Computing 8 2016-05-03 07:07
Tesla cards (specifically C1060) MacFactor GPU Computing 17 2015-02-16 07:57
Playing with different radix LoveCraft Programming 7 2005-11-14 07:59

All times are UTC. The time now is 08:03.


Sat Dec 3 08:03:31 UTC 2022 up 107 days, 5:32, 0 users, load averages: 1.24, 1.22, 1.07

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.

≠ ± ∓ ÷ × · − √ ‰ ⊗ ⊕ ⊖ ⊘ ⊙ ≤ ≥ ≦ ≧ ≨ ≩ ≺ ≻ ≼ ≽ ⊏ ⊐ ⊑ ⊒ ² ³ °
∠ ∟ ° ≅ ~ ‖ ⟂ ⫛
≡ ≜ ≈ ∝ ∞ ≪ ≫ ⌊⌋ ⌈⌉ ∘ ∏ ∐ ∑ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⨀ ⊕ ⊗ 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 ⊲ ⊳
∅ ∖ ∁ ↦ ↣ ∩ ∪ ⊆ ⊂ ⊄ ⊊ ⊇ ⊃ ⊅ ⊋ ⊖ ∈ ∉ ∋ ∌ ℕ ℤ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℵ ℶ ℷ ℸ 𝓟
¬ ∨ ∧ ⊕ → ← ⇒ ⇐ ⇔ ∀ ∃ ∄ ∴ ∵ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊨ ⫤ ⊣ … ⋯ ⋮ ⋰ ⋱
∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∯ ∰ ∇ ∆ δ ∂ ℱ ℒ ℓ
𝛢𝛼 𝛣𝛽 𝛤𝛾 𝛥𝛿 𝛦𝜀𝜖 𝛧𝜁 𝛨𝜂 𝛩𝜃𝜗 𝛪𝜄 𝛫𝜅 𝛬𝜆 𝛭𝜇 𝛮𝜈 𝛯𝜉 𝛰𝜊 𝛱𝜋 𝛲𝜌 𝛴𝜎𝜍 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔