RC5 key rates...?

[Bender10]

Could we get some 'key rate' info from those that have run RC5 CUDA..?

Include :

GPU description
OS
which 'core' you are running
key rate

and/or a '-bench' output...

My info:
9800GX2
Linux 64
Core 9
585 M/keys/s

Thanks

[liuqyn]

9800GTX+
windows 64
core 9
340 Mkeys/s

[vaughan]

8800GT
Linux Ubuntu 8.10 (64 bit)
Core 9
278 Mkeys / sec

[[NGS]Cpt00Kirk]

Zotac 8800GT AMP Edition
windows XP SP3
core 9
335 Mkeys/s

[vaughan]

Zotac 8800GT AMP Edition
windows XP SP3
core 9
335 Mkeys/s

Wow that's better than 20 percent higher. Nice going [NGS]Cpt00Kirk.

I'd better take a look at why that is and as Captain Jean-Luc Picard says to Number One: 'Make it so'.

[AMDave]

9600GT
Linux Ubuntu 8.10 (64 bit)
Core #0 1-pipe (previous version)
170 Mkeys / sec (previous version)

(previous version - something has gone haywire - I cannot run the bench with the last client - getting fatal errors now - possibly a driver config issue - I mess with stuff a lot - I think the key rate was about 173 to 175 Mkeys/sec before it went phut! - working on a fix will post new bench if I can)

[[NGS]Cpt00Kirk]

Wow that's better than 20 percent higher. Nice going [NGS]Cpt00Kirk.

I'd better take a look at why that is and as Captain Jean-Luc Picard says to Number One: 'Make it so'.

its a factory standard overclock card : http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/126...ion/index.html

[Brucifer]

ubuntu-64 8.10
260GTX
409
core 9

[Bender10]

@AmDave...I know. These rates are just ballpark numbers. Due to the changes from the first client to the one that just expired. I just wanted to get some of this down for basic information.

The next client should provide different rates (faster we hope..).

[AMDave]

[Jan 23 12:03:53 UTC] RC5-72: using core #0 (CUDA 1-pipe 128-thd).
[Jan 23 12:04:12 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #0 (CUDA 1-pipe 128-thd)
0.00:00:16.19 [172,894,645 keys/sec]
[Jan 23 12:04:12 UTC] RC5-72: using core #1 (CUDA 2-pipe 64-thd).
[Jan 23 12:04:30 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #1 (CUDA 2-pipe 64-thd)
0.00:00:16.17 [174,743,283 keys/sec]
[Jan 23 12:04:30 UTC] RC5-72: using core #2 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd).
[Jan 23 12:04:50 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #2 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd)
0.00:00:16.93 [173,218,809 keys/sec]
[Jan 23 12:04:50 UTC] RC5-72: using core #3 (CUDA 1-pipe 256-thd).
[Jan 23 12:05:09 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #3 (CUDA 1-pipe 256-thd)
0.00:00:16.85 [169,830,487 keys/sec]
[Jan 23 12:05:09 UTC] RC5-72: using core #4 (CUDA 2-pipe 128-thd).
[Jan 23 12:05:29 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #4 (CUDA 2-pipe 128-thd)
0.00:00:16.85 [143,337,669 keys/sec]
[Jan 23 12:05:29 UTC] RC5-72: using core #5 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep 100us).
[Jan 23 12:05:48 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #5 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep 100us)
0.00:00:16.98 [172,703,159 keys/sec]
[Jan 23 12:05:48 UTC] RC5-72: using core #6 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep dynamic).
[Jan 23 12:06:07 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #6 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd sleep dynamic)
0.00:00:16.93 [173,240,612 keys/sec]
[Jan 23 12:06:07 UTC] RC5-72: using core #7 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd busy wait).
[Jan 23 12:06:27 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #7 (CUDA 1-pipe 64-thd busy wait)
0.00:00:16.93 [173,161,770 keys/sec]
[Jan 23 12:06:27 UTC] RC5-72: using core #9 (CUDA 4-pipe 64-thd).
[Jan 23 12:06:46 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #9 (CUDA 4-pipe 64-thd)
0.00:00:16.42 [174,584,661 keys/sec]
[Jan 23 12:06:46 UTC] RC5-72: using core #10 (CUDA 4-pipe 128-thd).
[Jan 23 12:07:04 UTC] RC5-72: Benchmark for core #10 (CUDA 4-pipe 128-thd)
0.00:00:16.49 [147,781,319 keys/sec]