New, 50 series mid to low end cards won't be seen in the market for 3-6 months after release of 5080 and 5090 at CES next month.

You'll have a bit of a wait.

But benefit will be lower 40 series pricing over that time period.

I like my 4060 Ti's bang for the buck. It's a 3 fan card. There's no room for a second 3 fan card. If I got a 2 fan option of the same card, would boinc recognize both? If this is too far off topic, please just PM me.

Sure, no problem for BOINC. As long as you have configured

<use_all_gpus>1</use_all_gpus>

in the <Options> section of your cc_config.xml file and re-read your config files

in the Manager.

May not even be necessary as long as BOINC interprets both cards to be 4060 Ti's.

But sometimes same model card from different vendors don't get picked up as the same.

The statement in the cc_config.xml ensures both will be seen.

Verify they are both seen in the coproc_info.xml file to be sure.

Thanks Keith. Always a wealth of information. I will wait for MSI pricing to get real again. I found a site that compares cards for gaming:
https://www.techspot.com/review/2685-nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-ti/

That has the 3070 beating it more times than not. Maybe everyone else knows it but it surprised me. Also not sure of "game vs. coprocessor" differences. I do like that the 4060 Ti runs at 98% on less than 120W.

bonjour
tgp rtx 4060ti est de 160 watts.


https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-rtx-4060-ti-8-gb.c3890

---

You can't really compare gaming benchmark table performance with how we use gpus in BOINC crunching.

Gaming is all about rasterization performance. With BOINC crunching we don't even use the rasterization portion of the gpu at all.

We only use the compute part of the gpu and in that regard, # of CUDA cores and memory bandwidth trump all.

So that is why the old 3070 is actually a better performer compared to the 4070 Ti with respect to BOINC gpu crunching.

The clocks got higher in the 4000 series, the core counts basically always stay the same in each generations echelon, but Nvidia keeps gimping the memory bandwidth each generation because of use of faster memory.

The rasterization bandwidth stays the same or improves, but it doesn't help the memory bandwidth of moving data into and out of the gpu when fed by the cpu.

Some projects could care less what the memory bandwidth is because a single task loads and unloads from the gpu in one shot. But some projects like this one and Einstein for example move a ton of data into and out of the gpu constantly.

In general, for BOINC gpu crunching you want to have at minimum PCIE X4 slots in use, X8 preferred, and have as wide a memory architecture in the card as possible.

The cards with 512, 384 or 256bit memory widths perform the best. HBM memory trounces GDDR memory completely. So the professional cards with that type of memory architecture perform the best and they also don't have gimped FP64 performance that Nvidia forces onto all the consumer cards.

All I can say is that the 4060 Ti is a more efficient card compared to a 3070. Each new generation of gpu silicon is always more efficient in power usage. So that helps out with the power bill.

My $0.02 of historical observation. Take it as you may.

Thanks pascal for confirming that the 3070 does beat the 4060 and 4060 Ti. Very interesting.

KeithM makes me think about and look up things that I never knew existed. I like dell's HBM card: NVIDIA® RTX™ A800, 40 GB HBM2, full height, PCIe 4.0x16, Graphics Card save the price. 18,000 USD. It runs on 240 Watts!

Fascinating about the memory swapping. I'm a snow bird and will likely build another system in Colorado and cart my gpu(s) with me. Current box is a resurrected 11yo i5 with ddr3 memory. For CO, I was considering an AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 6-core which of course would need ddr5 memory. I could also spring for a Ryzen 5 7600 or faster memory or both something else altogether?

Roughly what would a 40% increase in CPU and memory speed translate to for GPU coprocessing? It sounds like memory speed after the ACTUAL GPU is 2nd priority.

bonjour
je suis passé d'un i5 11400f avec 32 gigas de ddr4 2666 a un i9 14900 avec 96 gigas de ddr5 5600,je n'ai pas vu beaucoup de différences au niveau performance si ce n'est le nombre de thread du cpu.
la grosse différence de mon nouveau pc se trouve dans les 3 rtx 4000 sff ada qui ,je pense ,auraient fonctionner de la meme maniere avec mon ancien i5 et mon i9.
meme le changement de carte mere n'a pas beaucoup améliorer les performances(passage de pci express 4 en pci express 5).
Personnellement,je vous conseillerais d'investir surtout sur la carte graphique et moins sur la partie cpu-ram-carte mere sans tomber dans l'exces inverse.
N'importe quel pc milieu de gamme en ddr 5 devrait faire l'affaire.

hello
I went from an i5 11400f with 32 gigas of ddr4 2666 to an i9 14900 with 96 gigas of ddr5 5600, I did not see many differences in performance but the number of threads of the cpu.
the big difference of my new pc is in the 3 rtx 4000 sff ada which I think would work the same way with my old i5 and my i9.
even the change of mere card did not improve much performance (change from pci express 4 to pci express 5).
Personally, I would advise you to invest mainly on the graphics card and less on the cpu-ram-card part mere without falling into the opposite extreme.
Any mid-range pc in ddr 5 should do the trick.

---

This website collects GPU/CPU statistics from Folding at Home
https://folding.lar.systems/gpu_ppd/overall_ranks
I think it's only from their alternative client users and of course FAH points system is different than what we have here, but still gives you a sense of performance difference between GPUs for similar scientific application.

For CO, I was considering an AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 6-core which of course would need ddr5 memory. I could also spring for a Ryzen 5 7600 or faster memory or both something else altogether?

I would buy a 7600 (or another 7 series) just because of the AM5 socket, which AMD has promised to keep ‘alive’ for a few more years.

Roughly what would a 40% increase in CPU and memory speed translate to for GPU coprocessing? It sounds like memory speed after the ACTUAL GPU is 2nd priority.

Very little. (depending on the application and the workunit)
They were talking about the memory on the GPU itself.
For GPU crunching the ACTUAL GPU and its memory is the 1st priority.

With Einstein and to some extent here, the cpu core clocks matter for dropping the compute time down. The faster the memory load/unloads are the faster the task runs.

At Einstein for example on the O3AS gpu work units, a significant portion of runtime is accrued on the cpu when the gpu moves its 99% completed calculation results back onto the cpu because the FP64 gpu precision is insufficient for the science results to be validated.

So the faster cpu core clocks the better for that app. I can really see the difference between the same tasks run on 3080's between the slow 2Ghz clocks of the Epyc servers and the 5Ghz clocks of the Ryzen 9950X hosts.

But it always depends on how the application is written how it handles task computation on various types and classes of hardware.

Sorry for the delay. Was out of pocket. Thanks for all the help! I think I'm clear now. I hope others are aided as well. I'm looking forward to assembling a system in April in Colorado.

It is not possible to win always

In mid-november last year, one of my hosts started to restart spontaneously.
First every other day, then daily, and finally several times a day.

I first checked electrical contacts for every computer components, with no result.

I usually have a spare PSU.
I replaced it, but problem reproduced with the new one.
I reverted the new PSU to its original package, and reinstalled the previous one.

Suspecting of some RAM module intermittently failing, I ordered at local market two new 16 GB modules.
When I received them and replaced, the problem persisted.

Affected system is a twin GPU host.
I tested with one only GPU, and then only with the other one, with no effect.
Computer continued to restart randomly.

I replaced the original 8-core CPU by an spare confident 6-core CPU I keep for tests, and nothing changed.

Then I suspected of something going wrong on the disk.
I purchased a new SATA SSD, cloned the original disk, and replaced it and SATA data cable by new ones.
The problem didn't solve!

I know what you're thinking of...
"He is being lazy to replace the motherboard"
Yes, you're right!
I usually keep this as the last resource, for being the most laborious task.
You have to remove every components from old motherboard, unfix it, fix the new one, rebuild every connections, reinstall components, renew thermal paste for CPU, config BIOS parameters...
I didn't find a compatible motherboard for my setup at local market, so I ordered a new one from abroad.
After a two-weeks pause I received it, I replaced, I installed every components, I started the system for the first time, and...
Computer restarted with no time enough to configure all BIOS parameters!!!
And then, it kept restarting every few seconds.

The first I thought was: "This system is haunted". But it is not very scientific
The second I thought was: "Well I've replaced EVERYTHING and the problem is unsolved. It is not possible to win always"

But then: "Hey!!! Really EVERYTHING?"
Wait a minute...
What's the problem?... The system is spontaneously restarting = resetting
It was a flash. I disconnected RESET terminals coming from computer case to motherboard.
And the system has not restarted a single time since then, more than two weeks past.
Conclusion: RESET line coming from chassis was producing the problem.
Measuring statically its impedance, it is as expected to be: short circuit when RESET button is pressed, and open circuit when it is not.
It must have been catching some kind of electrical interference strong enough to randomly activate motherboard's RESET input.
Amazing.

The mentioned system is this twin GPU host #557889

Additionally, with some of the components recovered from this affair, and few others, I was able to renew an old retired system to this new twin GPU host #604216

It is not possible to win always... But this time I did!

🤗️

I had similar experience many years before. The microswitch was faulty in my case.
Beside electrical faults, or static electricity the deterioration and abrasion of the plastic buttons and button holes can make the button stuck in midway, causing random restarts or switch-offs.
Recently a DELL OptiPlex 3060 started acting weird. It took me a while to realize that I should not put the blame on Windows this time, so I run a RAM test. The original RAM stick made by SKhynix turned out to be faulty. It worked for 6 years. The other RAM stick (Kingston) is still working fine. I didn't have a failed RAM module in the last 10+ years, though I manage 100+ computers.
Back in the 80286 era we shipped a PC for a cheese wholesale company. We tested the PC thoroughly before we shipped it. They asked us to put it in the chilled area of their store-house. It worked for a day, then started acting weird. We moved it back to our office for testing, it worked fine. We put it in their office, it worked fine. We put it back to the chilled store-house, after a day it started acting weird again. We thought that it must be condensation, but there wasn't any. We spent at least a week swapping parts in and out, the problem persisted. We tested the AC input power and the DC output voltages with an oscilloscope for spikes, there wasn't any. We gave up, they gave up, and we put the PC in their office. It worked fine for 4 years then they've bought an upgrade. The upgrade showed similar symptoms in their chilled store-house. :) We never figured out what caused this behavior there.