Looking at my results and one thing, that I see all the time, all my wingmen have invalid
results.
I.m.o. a waiste of time, has this been looked into?
It's been going on for some time now.
(Sometimes even an GTX470, running a old CUDA version)
When I tried to sign up for GPUgrid, I was told, that my hardware wasn't useable.(Running a 9800GTX+GTS250)
Changed that for a GTX480 (and trying a 470 along, not working)

---

Knight Who Says Ni N!

Actually Fred the GTX 2xx GPUs are the very best for running GPUGRID.

Sad but "still" true. At this pace Fermi won't be good until Kepler comes out, & Kepler won't be good until Maxwell comes out. Can't see how this will help NVIDIA sell next generation GPUs when they are launched.

---

Fred, I think your GTX480 is doing quite well, http://www.gpugrid.net/results.php?hostid=78963.

It is averaging about 65K to 70K per day, with only one mid run error. We are all getting some immediate KKi errors (due to the automated task generation system).

Actually Fred the GTX 2xx GPUs are the very best for running GPUGRID.

But not all of the GTS 2xx series (notice the one letter difference) - some of them were built with older graphics chips that will not run GPUGRID properly. And some, but not all, of the GTX 260 model.


Three of my recent ACEMD2: GPU molecular dynamics v6.05 (cuda) workunits have terminated by telling Windows Vista, but not BOINC, that they are halting. Should I take this is meaning that these workunit types are moving away from being able to run on a 9800 GT?

http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=3171660
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=3171447
http://www.gpugrid.net/result.php?resultid=3158571

The system cannot find the path specified. (0x3) - exit code 3 (0x3)

Actually Fred the GTX 2xx GPUs are the very best for running GPUGRID.

But not all of the GTS 2xx series (notice the one letter difference) - some of them were built with older graphics chips that will not run GPUGRID properly. And some, but not all, of the GTX 260 model.

None of the GTS series cards run GPUGRID very well. All of the GTX 2xx cards run extremely well except for the early 260 models that used the flawed 65nm chip (260/192/65nm & 260/216/65nm). The GTX 260/216/55nm runs excellently, as does the GTX 275, GTX 285 & GTX 295.

Actually, the GTS 250 sports a 55nm G92b Fab. However, it is identical to a 9800 GTX+ which makes it immediately derived from the G80 architecture and therefore Compute Capable 1.1.

It should never have been placed anywhere near the GeForce 200 range, but NVidia chose to stick it in there to confuse people into buying it. It worked, but that cheap sales trick which they still employ has mainly served to diminish their credibility. Now people aren’t sure which NVidia card to buy, know they can’t trust NVidias labelling system, so they get an ATI.

Unfortunately people see the 250. Those that can count Know this is higher than 240, so presume it is a better card. They think their presumption is confirmed when they see it has an S, higher clock speeds and more shaders. What they don’t understand is that they are actually looking at a GPU from a previous generation. CC1.1 cards are now grandparents.

When it comes to crunching here there is NO reason to buy one; no matter how many or how fast the shaders are. The fact is at GPUGrid a GT240 does way more work than a GTS 250, is far more reliable, costs a lot less to buy, is smaller, quieter and cheaper to run.

Although I agree with all of skgiven's reasons for not buying an old-architecture card for crunching here, people like me who already have the older cards can still make use of them.

I did have some bad experiences recently with the KKi4 tasks (documented in that thread), I'm now having more success with my 9800GT-series cards.

The trick seemed to be some TLC attention to the software on the host:

* installed latest Windows XP security patches
* installed NVidia 260.89 WHQL driver
* reboot

In particular, rebooting after a failed task seems to help the next one.

I haven't touched the hardware in any way.

I still can't get HIVPR_n1 to run on anything less than a Fermi, but the KK14 are now running on 9800GT. The project may have changed the tasks since I hit problems, of course.