How much "CPU" do "GPU" clients normally use?

[SunnyD]

Just wondering, since I have an idle (and deactivated) ATI GPU on my motherboard that I can devote to folding instead of sitting turned off. I'm just curious how much CPU impact doing so would have - like whether I could background fold without affecting the performance of anything like gaming and such.

(Sorry, haven't done much in terms of DC)

 

[TAandy]

good question!

and i have another.
on a dual core system (running one instance of the systray client), is the load split between both cores, ie runs for a while on one, then switches to the other, or is it run entirely on the one core?

edit:
i'm asking, cause i'm running the gpu client and the systray client.
just wondering if there's a performance hit?

 

[Markfw]

from my experience, and what I have read, the OS makes a big difference. XP seems to take one core per GPU. So a dual-core with 2 video cards is all used up, 100% load. A quad with one smp and 2 gpu is 100% used up, and a single core (yes I have one) uses 100% with one video card. I have been told that Vista only uses 10% or so per card, but I can;t verify that.

As for running on different core, there is an environment variable that determines that NV_FAH_CPU_AFFINITY , and a setting of 0 uses all cores. The other settings I am not sure of, you need to google it.

 

[geokilla]

New Forceware drivers, mainly 180.XX and up require little to no CPU when doing GPU folding. As for ATI, I have no idea.

P.S. Running SMP and GPU with rig in sig.

 

[Drsignguy]

Originally posted by: geokilla
New Forceware drivers, mainly 180.XX and up require little to no CPU when doing GPU folding. As for ATI, I have no idea.

P.S. Running SMP and GPU with rig in sig.

Correct. I have all my nvidia cards running with drivers of 180.xx and above and with Xp, XP X64 and Vista x64 and ALL have the same effect, very little cpu%. As for my Ati, it doesnt matter, still utilizes a lot of cpu%. Depending on the work unit, it can take more.

 

[Denithor]

Originally posted by: Drsignguy

Originally posted by: geokilla
New Forceware drivers, mainly 180.XX and up require little to no CPU when doing GPU folding. As for ATI, I have no idea.

P.S. Running SMP and GPU with rig in sig.

Correct. I have all my nvidia cards running with drivers of 180.xx and above and with Xp, XP X64 and Vista x64 and ALL have the same effect, very little cpu%. As for my Ati, it doesnt matter, still utilizes a lot of cpu%. Depending on the work unit, it can take more.

Actually, I have exactly the opposite experience. I've got these rigs folding right now beside me:

Rig1
Vista64
e8400 @ 3.6GHz
G92 8800GTS
G92 9600GSO
185.20
CPU: 10-15% combined between the two cores (5-8% on each)

Rig2
XP32
Opty 165 @ 2GHz
G92 8800GS
185.20
CPU: 50% (either 100% one core or 50% spread across both cores)

 

[geokilla]

Originally posted by: Denithor

Originally posted by: Drsignguy

Originally posted by: geokilla
New Forceware drivers, mainly 180.XX and up require little to no CPU when doing GPU folding. As for ATI, I have no idea.

P.S. Running SMP and GPU with rig in sig.

Correct. I have all my nvidia cards running with drivers of 180.xx and above and with Xp, XP X64 and Vista x64 and ALL have the same effect, very little cpu%. As for my Ati, it doesnt matter, still utilizes a lot of cpu%. Depending on the work unit, it can take more.

Actually, I have exactly the opposite experience. I've got these rigs folding right now beside me:

Rig1
Vista64
e8400 @ 3.6GHz
G92 8800GTS
G92 9600GSO
185.20
CPU: 10-15% combined between the two cores (5-8% on each)

Rig2
XP32
Opty 165 @ 2GHz
G92 8800GS
185.20
CPU: 50% (either 100% one core or 50% spread across both cores)

Weird. Try using the official 181.22 drivers. I have no idea how or why the 185.20 were leaked.

 

[Drsignguy]

That is strange if you are getting a different reaction to those drivers. Don't know why this would happen but I would try "geokilla's" idea and try to load the 181.20/22 drivers to see if your cpu % goes way down.