![]() The calculation is not correct since the Titan X on paper has a boost clock of 1075 (your 1215 is already an overclocked product). (04-08-2016, 02:44 AM)epixoip Wrote: Ok, let's compare factory specs to factory specs then: I'm analyzing the big picture here, not just what's immediately on paper. But that still leaves doubts about how much power the chip will draw when all the cores are enabled.Īnyway, my point is, you have to take all the factors into consideration. So maybe it only draws like 250W and there is indeed some overclocking potential. Now maybe the GTX variant with 3584 cores doesn't draw 300W since it likely wont have all the FP64 cores the Tesla has. That's only 14% faster in the real world. So even if the card does have 2x 8pin instead of 8pin+6pin, it won't make any difference in dense enterprise applications (which is obviously what I care about), we'll have to do everything we can to keep power consumption 300W, then the real-world picture is quite a bit different: If we're already at 300W at 1480 Mhz with 256 cores disabled, then there's zero room for overclocking assuming this has a 25A power feed (kind of hard to tell since it's not a standard PCI-e card, and I don't know anything about this proprietary connector.) We can reasonably assume though that the GTX variant will have 6pin + 8pin power which means it will not be able to draw more than 300W without violating the PCI-e spec (and Nvidia is not AMD, so that won't happen.) So if the 300W TDP for this chip is accurate, the GTX variant will have zero overclocking potential unless it has 2x 8pin power.Īnd there's another problem as well: 300W TDP is a big deal since the Tyan FT77, Supermicro 7048GR-TF, etc. ![]() Pretty much splits the difference between your 75% estimate and my 16% estimate. Ok, let's compare factory specs to factory specs then: The latter also saw a small die shrink after the production process had been optimised. They did the same with the GK110, where the first series had 2688 cores and the B-version 2880 (Titan and Titan Black). They want to be able to get more usable GPUs out of one wafer, so they disable one of the 15 SMX wether it's broken or not. That's not too shabby.Īs I mentioned, they disabled a few cores to get a better yield rate. You have to see it like that: double the transistors and ramp up clock rate only draw 20% more power. That's where all the transistors went.Īs the factory clock rate saw a +32,8% the ramp up of 50W seems reasonable. There are now 1792 FP64 cores instead of 96. Also the cache is bigger (4MB instead of 3MB). I guess the consumer GP100 will also have a slightly higher clock rate.Ībout your question: each core has new functions and a much better DP-rate. Third, the factory specs of Titan X and M40 differ, that's why there are two numbers. I agree with you totally for many other applications, but especially hashcat has an almost linear increase of performance (maybe not with all kernels, but at least the ones I use). Second, under hashcat, a 40% increase in clockrate surely means 40% plus in performance. So the standard base and boost rate are somewhat compareble. Even a slight overclock of 10-15% would give a big performance boost over Titan X. No one knows how good or bad the new chip will overclock. First, we can only compare the factory specs provided by NVidia.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |