It is currently Tue May 21, 2013 1:32 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




 Page 6 of 8 [ 75 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
#51) 
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Why Kepler is based on GF104 and not GF110 - heading for GTC
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2012 7:44 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 11:57 pm
Posts: 3977
apoppin wrote:
SickBeast wrote:
What's a GPC?



Oops .. i am starting to think like everyone else here.
:blush:

Graphics Processing Cluster
:hello:

And how does that differ from an SMX?


Offline
 Profile  
 
#52) 
 Post subject: Re: Why Kepler is based on GF104 and not GF110 - heading for GTC
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2012 8:00 pm 

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:49 am
Posts: 39
SickBeast wrote:
apoppin wrote:
SickBeast wrote:
What's a GPC?



Oops .. i am starting to think like everyone else here.
:blush:

Graphics Processing Cluster
:hello:

And how does that differ from an SMX?


A GPC is like a "mini GPU" by itself, containing SMXs (2 in the case of GK104; looks like 3 in the case of GK110) and each can output one triangle per clock (e.g. Fermi has 4 GPC = 4 triangles per clock). GK104 has 4 GPCs and 1536 shaders = 4*2*192. Its like an hierarchy of "modules": GPU > GPC > SMX > Cuda Cores.


Offline
 Profile  
 
#53) 
 Post subject: Re: Why Kepler is based on GF104 and not GF110 - heading for GTC
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2012 8:01 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 1:26 am
Posts: 19710
Location: 404 - Not Found!
SM is Streaming Multiprocessor - as it was called in Fermi and earlier architecture.

It has been greatly expanded in Kepler to be called SMX architecture
http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=28910&page=2
Image

There are 15 SMX units in GK110; 3 GPCs

If you are looking for the basics, you might want to look at chapter 4 of the CUDA programming guide
http://developer.download.nvidia.com/co ... de_3.1.pdf
From Chapter 4:
Quote:
The CUDA architecture is built around a scalable array of multithreaded Streaming Multiprocessors (SMs). When a CUDA program on the host CPU invokes a kernel grid, the blocks of the grid are enumerated and distributed to multiprocessors with available execution capacity. The threads of a thread block execute concurrently on one multiprocessor, and multiple thread blocks can execute concurrently on one multiprocessor. As thread blocks terminate, new blocks are launched on the vacated multiprocessors.
A multiprocessor is designed to execute hundreds of threads concurrently. To manage such a large amount of threads, it employs a unique architecture called SIMT (Single-Instruction, Multiple-Thread) that is described in Section 4.1. The instructions are pipelined to leverage instruction-level parallelism within a single thread, as well as thread-level parallelism extensively through simultaneous hardware multithreading as detailed in Section 4.2. Unlike CPU cores they are issued in order however and there is no branch prediction and no speculative execution. . . .

SIMT Architecture

The multiprocessor creates, manages, schedules, and executes threads in groups of 32 parallel threads called warps. Individual threads composing a warp start together at the same program address, but they have their own instruction address counter and register state and are therefore free to branch and execute independently. The term warp originates from weaving, the first parallel thread technology. A half-warp is either the first or second half of a warp. A quarter-warp is either the first, second, third, or fourth quarter of a warp.
When a multiprocessor is given one or more thread blocks to execute, it partitions them into warps and each warp gets scheduled by a warp scheduler for execution. The way a block is partitioned into warps is always the same; each warp contains threads of consecutive, increasing thread IDs with the first warp containing thread 0. Section 2.2 describes how thread IDs relate to thread indices in the block.


Offline
 Profile  
 
#54) 
 Post subject: Re: Why Kepler is based on GF104 and not GF110 - heading for GTC
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2012 8:16 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 11:19 am
Posts: 4978
That is very weird. What is the die size of Big K? I can see they have comprised the GPC's of clusters of 3 SMX's previously there would be 4 SM's. Kepler overall has been quite weird though, but this only reinforces why for non DP tasks GTX690 will likely end up more powerful than Big K -- Big K does not double the resources of GK104.

The only reason I can think of for not doing so is they ran out of die space or the GPC's would contain 4 SMX's each and not 3.



_________________
This is such total Horse-S**t!
"At NVIDIA we know that all shredders are green." --Jensen Huang
Adam knew he should have bought a PC, but Eve fell for the marketing hype. >:)
Offline
 Profile  
 
#55) 
 Post subject: Re: Why Kepler is based on GF104 and not GF110 - heading for GTC
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2012 8:22 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 1:26 am
Posts: 19710
Location: 404 - Not Found!
i would suggest that you wait for the Whitepaper. It will be available in about 17 hours at 10:30AM Pacific Time.

i have to agree that in a gaming GPU, the GTX 690 will probably be faster than the GTX 780 (if that is what is ends up being called). However, Nvidia made sweeping changes to Kepler to make it more efficient for programming.

They stopped with Fermi because of its inefficiency compared to Kepler. Clock speeds are also lower. It's going to be interesting. Frankly, i am very happy with my GTX 690 for gaming
.. and i want to go home and GAME .. this programming is reaching a near-overload for me. But i did learn a lot.


Offline
 Profile  
 
#56) 
 Post subject: Re: Why Kepler is based on GF104 and not GF110 - heading for GTC
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2012 8:24 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 1:26 am
Posts: 19710
Location: 404 - Not Found!
GOOD NEWS!

You (and i) don't have to wait for the whitepaper
http://www.nvidia.com/content/PDF/keple ... epaper.pdf

:yahoo:


Offline
 Profile  
 
#57) 
 Post subject: Re: Why Kepler is based on GF104 and not GF110 - heading for GTC
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2012 8:28 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 11:19 am
Posts: 4978
I'll have a read. I expect the scheduler in Big K is substantially different to that in GK104 though (even if it isn't quite Fermi level of complexity)

Well, the first page says it all really, "The fastest, most efficient HPC architecture ever built"
The separation we saw starting with GF104, is pretty much complete with Kepler. While it is possible it can also power high-end consumer graphics, it's pretty safe to say that wasn't really its design focus.



_________________
This is such total Horse-S**t!
"At NVIDIA we know that all shredders are green." --Jensen Huang
Adam knew he should have bought a PC, but Eve fell for the marketing hype. >:)
Offline
 Profile  
 
#58) 
 Post subject: Re: Why Kepler is based on GF104 and not GF110 - heading for GTC
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2012 8:50 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 1:26 am
Posts: 19710
Location: 404 - Not Found!
However, when the GK110 GeForce is released, you will see this - - -
(my prediction:)
"The fastest, most efficient Gaming architecture ever built"
:)

However, i better add this quickly

Quote:
Kepler GK110 was built first and foremost for Tesla, and its goal was to be the highest performing parallel computing microprocessor in the world.


Offline
 Profile  
 
#59) 
 Post subject: Re: Why Kepler is based on GF104 and not GF110 - heading for GTC
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2012 2:23 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 3:46 pm
Posts: 3854
Location: Earth
apoppin wrote:
i would suggest that you wait for the Whitepaper. It will be available in about 17 hours at 10:30AM Pacific Time.

i have to agree that in a gaming GPU, the GTX 690 will probably be faster than the GTX 780 (if that is what is ends up being called). However, Nvidia made sweeping changes to Kepler to make it more efficient for programming.

They stopped with Fermi because of its inefficiency compared to Kepler. Clock speeds are also lower. It's going to be interesting. Frankly, i am very happy with my GTX 690 for gaming
.. and i want to go home and GAME .. this programming is reaching a near-overload for me. But i did learn a lot.

Who wouldn't be happy with a GTX 690?!? Especially the guy that got it without really paying for it! (ROFLMAO)



_________________
What is this thing right now?
Put your arms up on one side of the horizon, put them up into the sky and twist them across, meeting unto the other side of the horizon. That is a sign symbol of life.
Face the goodness in life.


Offline
 Profile  
 
#60) 
 Post subject: Re: Why Kepler is based on GF104 and not GF110 - heading for GTC
PostPosted: Mon May 21, 2012 10:01 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 1:26 am
Posts: 19710
Location: 404 - Not Found!
BoFox wrote:
Who wouldn't be happy with a GTX 690?!? Especially the guy that got it without really paying for it! (ROFLMAO)

i had a good talk with Scott, the owner of The Tech Report.

As he put it, we never get anything "free"
.... it would be cool to just get a GTX 690 that one doesn't have to spend many hours "working" for.

Believe me, we do "pay" for it
:hello:


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 6 of 8 [ 75 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Ocre and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: