There is a new driver available for nvidia Gpu`s named 334.89 at this day.

Have a good time
Eckbert

thx :-)

My first impression is that 334.89 (on Win7) is similar to its Beta predecessor.

---

FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

Just updated to 334.89 from 332.21. I'm now seeing that ACEMD tasks are no longer using a full core each. Is this normal?

In Windows' Resource Monitor in the CPU usage it used to read 12 (1 full HT thread) on each ACEMD task. It now reads 3.

---

Just updated to 334.89 from 332.21. I'm now seeing that ACEMD tasks are no longer using a full core each. Is this normal?

Yes, that's as expected with 334. Might see a minimal drop in performance for some WU, but offset that with greatly reduced CPU load.

Matt

Excellent. Thank you for the quick reply.

---

I like the 334.89 driver for my 680/460 XP machines. Just a couple percent lower GPU utilization (dropped from 97/99% down to 95%/98%). But a whole lot lower CPU use for the 680. The 460 was already low to begin with.

I tried the 334.89 driver on my 780Ti machine back went back to the 331.82 driver. The GPU utilization dropped by 10-20% depending on WU. Dropped so low, the card was no longer running at maximum boost. Once I switched back, GPU utilization went back up.

Anyone else with 780Ti on Win7 see a big GPU utilization drop (as reported by EVGA Precision) when they enabled the 334.89?

Thanks for this useful information Jeremy. I have downloaded the latest driver and was planning in installing, but reading your post I won't. My 780Ti is already in low GPU use, I like it higher not lower. Tried all your settings but the card will not boost, despite 70-72°C.

---

Greetings from TJ

Good to know about the 780Ti. I'm about to switch my 680s out for two of those.

---

Good to know about the 780Ti. I'm about to switch my 680s out for two of those.

My 780Ti is still fast, twice as fast as my 660 but it can be faster if compared with Jeremy results, same OS as I have, or with XP or Linux.
I will switch my two 660 for one 790 or a 780Ti.

---

Greetings from TJ

Matt, if this new driver causes such a performance hit on faster cards I can think of two things to do:

- post a news item, maybe also via the BOINC messages, to warn power crunchers of this new driver (and to inform people who'd rather free a CPU core)

- bring back the option to disable swan sync, if this mechanism still works - for people who'd rather dedicate a core for maximum GPU throughput

MrS

---

Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

With the same or similar CPU usage settings (75% in my case)I find no issues with the 334.89 driver. On my W7 system the apps are either the same speed or slightly faster. GTX670 and GTX770's only though (no GK110 cards). So perhaps it's just an issue on GK110 cards? I would want to see it tested by several others, and hear about the Boinc settings, before announcing it as a bad-egg (and then only for Win7 and GK110).

---

FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

I haven't noticed any difference on my Windows 7 computer with EVGA 780TI SC

With the same or similar CPU usage settings (75% in my case)I find no issues with the 334.89 driver. On my W7 system the apps are either the same speed or slightly faster. GTX670 and GTX770's only though (no GK110 cards). So perhaps it's just an issue on GK110 cards? I would want to see it tested by several others, and hear about the Boinc settings, before announcing it as a bad-egg (and then only for Win7 and GK110).

I'm also running at 75% CPU usage with my 680s but will be upgrading to 780Tis either today or tomorrow. I'll report afterward and let you know what I find. I haven't noticed any difference in speed with the 680s running 334.89.

---

On a GT640 DDR3 I'm seeing a SR runtime increase from 34440s to 36270s, i.e. a 5% throughput reduction. I switched from WHQL 327 to 334.89. CPU usage is set to 100%, but actually running at about 7 of 8 cores loaded due to my app_configs.

In both directly comparable configs I have run 2 full WUs. That's not much, but statistical fluctuation on this box uses to be far less than the differences I'm seeing here.

Credit-wise that's not very much.. but still, a loss far greater than what another HT-core can gain in throughput. And it's not exactly a high performance card.

MrS

---

Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

I recently updated my GTX 650Ti drivers to 320.57. I am curious and would like an explanation as to why my tasks are all CUDA 4.4 while everyone else appears to be processing CUDA 5.5 tasks. The CPU utilization and Run Time for all my tasks are too high. Can anyone help?

Thanks, John

CUDA 5.5 work is distributed from a higher driver version onwards, if I remember correctly. The older ones support it officially, but it didn't work properly. The WHQL 327 or 332 driver should be fine, 334 as discussed here. For optimal runtimes your CPU should not run at 100% load.

Regarding CPU load: for a Kepler GPU (almost all series 600 and 700) it's normal that 1 logical CPU core is used all the time. Exception: the new driver discussed here.

MrS

---

Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002

Thanks for the information: I will install new drivers shortly.

CUDA 5.5 work is distributed from a higher driver version onwards, if I remember correctly. The older ones support it officially, but it didn't work properly. The WHQL 327 or 332 driver should be fine, 334 as discussed here. For optimal runtimes your CPU should not run at 100% load.

Regarding CPU load: for a Kepler GPU (almost all series 600 and 700) it's normal that 1 logical CPU core is used all the time. Exception: the new driver discussed here.

MrS

The Windows app versions are 8.15 (cuda42) and 8.15 (cuda55).

Even with the latest WHQL drivers I still get both versions,

383x-SANTI_MARwtcap310-13-32-RND9504_0 5210585 26 Feb 2014 | 20:35:04 UTC 27 Feb 2014 | 7:01:14 UTC Completed and validated 32,363.52 10,592.70 115,650.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v8.15 (cuda42)

I'm not sure if the WU's actually use 4.2 or not; the run times are very similar. A few % either way could easily be down to other factors (system usage, CPU apps...). Anyway, the apps are both v8.15 for Windows. I expect 5.5 just removes a few bugs

211x-SANTI_MARwtcap310-26-32-RND6477_0 5208701 26 Feb 2014 | 8:51:09 UTC 26 Feb 2014 | 22:01:34 UTC Completed and validated 32,019.34 11,711.09 115,650.00 Long runs (8-12 hours on fastest card) v8.15 (cuda55)

On Linux I also get both 5.5 and 4.2 WU types, but the apps are 8.03 (cuda42) and 8.03 (cuda55).

I thought the Server was supposed to assign app versions to be used based on drivers (and possibly performance under each app type). Maybe it's not working quite right?

---

FAQ's

HOW TO:
- Opt out of Beta Tests
- Ask for Help

Just got my 780Tis in and running on 334.89. One is running SANTI_MAR at 71 - 73% utilization and the other is running NOELIA_FXA averaging around 79% utilization.

These are my first runs on these cards. Anyone else running on 780Ti with 334.89? I'm curious how my numbers compare. The GPU utilization dropped as compared against the 680 but I think that was to be expected.

I'm also still running CPU tasks at 75%. I checked at 50%, 62.5%, 75% and there does not seem to be an effect on the GPU tasks.

---