HD6790 x17 issue.

Post requests to add new GPUs to the official whitelist here.

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

Post Reply
wraithguard
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2014 3:59 pm

HD6790 x17 issue.

Post by wraithguard »

Hi guys great work on the 7.4.4 Client, at last my GPU actually folds the only issue I'm having is that there is no way any of the x17 WUs will finish in the allotted time.

Are there any flags I could use to avoid x17 WUs for the time being as the HD6790 is just not up to the task :(

Thanks in advanced.
ImageImageImage
P5-133XL
Posts: 2948
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 4:36 am
Hardware configuration: Machine #1:

Intel Q9450; 2x2GB=8GB Ram; Gigabyte GA-X48-DS4 Motherboard; PC Power and Cooling Q750 PS; 2x GTX 460; Windows Server 2008 X64 (SP1).

Machine #2:

Intel Q6600; 2x2GB=4GB Ram; Gigabyte GA-X48-DS4 Motherboard; PC Power and Cooling Q750 PS; 2x GTX 460 video card; Windows 7 X64.

Machine 3:

Dell Dimension 8400, 3.2GHz P4 4x512GB Ram, Video card GTX 460, Windows 7 X32

I am currently folding just on the 5x GTX 460's for aprox. 70K PPD
Location: Salem. OR USA

Re: HD6790 x17 issue.

Post by P5-133XL »

The only way to avoid Core_17 projects is to run v6 of the client.
Image
wraithguard
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2014 3:59 pm

Re: HD6790 x17 issue.

Post by wraithguard »

Sorry I should have mentioned my HD6790 will not fold at all with either v6 or v7, it only started working with the recent v7.4.4 Client.
ImageImageImage
PantherX
Site Moderator
Posts: 7020
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 9:33 am
Hardware configuration: V7.6.21 -> Multi-purpose 24/7
Windows 10 64-bit
CPU:2/3/4/6 -> Intel i7-6700K
GPU:1 -> Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti
§
Retired:
2x Nvidia GTX 1070
Nvidia GTX 675M
Nvidia GTX 660 Ti
Nvidia GTX 650 SC
Nvidia GTX 260 896 MB SOC
Nvidia 9600GT 1 GB OC
Nvidia 9500M GS
Nvidia 8800GTS 320 MB

Intel Core i7-860
Intel Core i7-3840QM
Intel i3-3240
Intel Core 2 Duo E8200
Intel Core 2 Duo E6550
Intel Core 2 Duo T8300
Intel Pentium E5500
Intel Pentium E5400
Location: Land Of The Long White Cloud
Contact:

Re: HD6790 x17 issue.

Post by PantherX »

Welcome to the F@H Forum wraithguard,

Unfortunately, FahCore_17 is the only way that AMD GPUs can contribute now. FahCore_16 has reached end of life (https://folding.stanford.edu/home/core1 ... d-of-life/) and thus, once FahCore_16 Projects are stopped, you will only get FahCore_17 WUs on the supported GPUs. Are you using the latest AMD Drivers or not?
ETA:
Now ↞ Very Soon ↔ Soon ↔ Soon-ish ↔ Not Soon ↠ End Of Time

Welcome To The F@H Support Forum Ӂ Troubleshooting Bad WUs Ӂ Troubleshooting Server Connectivity Issues
bruce
Posts: 20910
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: HD6790 x17 issue.

Post by bruce »

My HD 5450 has only 80 shaders and my HD 8338 has 128 so it's not surprising that neither will finish the assigned WUs. I do understand what you're saying.

According to my information, the HD6790 has 800 shaders which means it should finish in time. Are you stopping and starting the client frequently or does it run 24x7?
wraithguard
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2014 3:59 pm

Re: HD6790 x17 issue.

Post by wraithguard »

PantherX wrote:Welcome to the F@H Forum wraithguard,

Unfortunately, FahCore_17 is the only way that AMD GPUs can contribute now. FahCore_16 has reached end of life (https://folding.stanford.edu/home/core1 ... d-of-life/) and thus, once FahCore_16 Projects are stopped, you will only get FahCore_17 WUs on the supported GPUs. Are you using the latest AMD Drivers or not?
Yes I have the latest drivers and CCC I've even gone as far as rolling back through the last 4 drivers and still nothing.
bruce wrote:My HD 5450 has only 80 shaders and my HD 8338 has 128 so it's not surprising that neither will finish the assigned WUs. I do understand what you're saying.

According to my information, the HD6790 has 800 shaders which means it should finish in time. Are you stopping and starting the client frequently or does it run 24x7?
I am shocked at the poor performance of this GPU I've had 2 WUs time out now I even leave a CPU core available for it.
They are left to run 24/7 it averages 12k PPD but yet the estimate on the jobs are like 20+ days... I think it might just be that the "Barts LE" is not up to handling these tasks.
ImageImageImage
Joe_H
Site Admin
Posts: 7857
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 4:41 pm
Hardware configuration: Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp4
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp2
Location: W. MA

Re: HD6790 x17 issue.

Post by Joe_H »

Post your log, the time estimates might be off in the client. The most recent version of the folding client does have improved estimates on time to completion, but they are still not accurate in all cases. Older versions were worse on the estimates. I have done some test runs on a 5870 installed in my son's Mac Pro when it was booted into Windows 7, and it would complete WU's with plenty of time left until the deadlines. Your 6970 should process at about half the speed of the 5870, but that should still be good enough to complete WU's with time to spare.

I have not been able to test with the most recent Core_17 WU's, but might be able to in a week and a half when my son is away for the weekend. But my observations from the prior WU's tested should still hold.
Image

iMac 2.8 i7 12 GB smp8, Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp6
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp3
wraithguard
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2014 3:59 pm

Re: HD6790 x17 issue.

Post by wraithguard »

This is where I got to with it, if you think this is normal I'll leave it running.
Image
ImageImageImage
7im
Posts: 10189
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:30 pm
Hardware configuration: Intel i7-4770K @ 4.5 GHz, 16 GB DDR3-2133 Corsair Vengence (black/red), EVGA GTX 760 @ 1200 MHz, on an Asus Maximus VI Hero MB (black/red), in a blacked out Antec P280 Tower, with a Xigmatek Night Hawk (black) HSF, Seasonic 760w Platinum (black case, sleeves, wires), 4 SilenX 120mm Case fans with silicon fan gaskets and silicon mounts (all black), a 512GB Samsung SSD (black), and a 2TB Black Western Digital HD (silver/black).
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: HD6790 x17 issue.

Post by 7im »

Without posting a log, we can't see details that we would need to determine if you are getting a good PPD or not.
How to provide enough information to get helpful support
Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.
Joe_H
Site Admin
Posts: 7857
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 4:41 pm
Hardware configuration: Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp4
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp2
Location: W. MA

Re: HD6790 x17 issue.

Post by Joe_H »

A screen capture of FAHControl is not useful for determining actual ETA's. The log file would be. You can find information on posting logs here in the Welcome to the F@H Forum topic. There are separate directions for the different OS's.
Image

iMac 2.8 i7 12 GB smp8, Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp6
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp3
Post Reply