![]() |
|
|
#67 |
|
Mar 2003
Melbourne
20316 Posts |
I wish you all the best. I couldn't get any of the linux cuda code to compile for me so when the cuda windows binaries came out - the choice was a no brainer for me.
-- Craig |
|
|
|
|
|
#68 |
|
I quite division it
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England
207710 Posts |
Hopefully it won't be too bad. I probably won't be attempting anything cuda until I've found my way around and llrCuda has matured. Then I'll need a cuda capable gpu.
There is still the possibility that I'll go running back to Windows.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#69 |
|
Nov 2010
22×19 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#70 |
|
P90 years forever!
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL
19×397 Posts |
Installed new video card and CPU cooler (the cheap CoolerMaster).
With stock cooler at 3.8 GHz temps reached as high as 87C. Now running at 4.1 GHz with temps reaching only 67C. I haven't even tried to see how high this thing will overclock. It is stable at 4.1 GHz. |
|
|
|
|
|
#71 | |
|
I quite division it
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England
31·67 Posts |
Quote:
I'm at 4hr-stable, 4.3GHz (i7 2600k) with a Noctua cooler. Just fits in the case! Last fiddled with by Flatlander on 2011-01-30 at 20:00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#72 |
|
P90 years forever!
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL
11101011101112 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#73 |
|
Nov 2010
22·19 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#74 | |
|
I quite division it
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England
31×67 Posts |
Quote:
![]() I think the mobo isn't supported yet. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#75 | |
|
Nov 2010
22×19 Posts |
Quote:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/lm-sensors/msg30887.html |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#76 |
|
I quite division it
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England
1000000111012 Posts |
That worked. Thank you!
Cores are around 71 degrees @4.4Ghz. Stable for 2hrs
|
|
|
|
|
|
#77 |
|
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)
3·2,083 Posts |
Looking at Chris's output on NPLB's port 9000 server, I see he's cranking out 40 tests/hour, which is just about exactly twice what my Q6600 can do (16 tests/hour at stock and 20 tests/hour at 2.8GHz)!
![]() Gary a.k.a. gd_barnes, also from NPLB, mentioned to me that his i7 (pre-Sandy Bridge, not sure of the exact model) running at stock speeds is worth about 5 cores of a stock Q6600 doing LLR on typical NPLB work (k*2^n-1 with n<1M). Since the pre-SB i7 can do about 20 tests/hour on similarly sized numbers, and Chris's SB can do 40 pairs/hour, that makes for a 100% speed gain! Granted, the SB is overclocked a fair amount while the pre-SB is not (and had a lower stock speed to boot IIRC), but this is still quite a significant boost. What's interesting is that, based on George's finding that his SB gets about a 25% boost over a similarly-clocked pre-SB i7, small FFTs (64K in this case) seem to benefit the most. Now I'm definitely reconsidering some earlier statements I made elsewhere on the forum that a Sandy Bridge i5 < an AMD Phenom II X6 in terms of total throughput. That may be the case for GIMPS (and other large-FFT work) but not so for NPLB and the like. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| So Sandy Bridge Xeons are now launched | fivemack | Hardware | 6 | 2012-03-14 11:27 |
| Overclocking, Sandy Bridge-E : Don't | firejuggler | Hardware | 6 | 2012-03-08 19:38 |
| 2 disabled cores in new Sandy Bridge-E :( | stars10250 | Hardware | 8 | 2011-11-16 13:55 |
| Sandy Bridge CPU Usage only 50 percent | dmoran | Software | 3 | 2011-06-14 21:21 |
| Sandy Bridge benchmarks are out. | nucleon | Hardware | 0 | 2011-01-04 11:41 |