I did undervolting my GTX 460

Message boards : Graphics cards (GPUs) : I did undervolting my GTX 460

Author	Message
Rantanplan Send message Joined: 22 Jul 11 Posts: 166 Credit: 138,629,987 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 24726 - Posted: 4 May 2012 \| 20:43:29 UTC
	Hy there ! So i got the solution for my energy problems. I undervolted my two GTX 460 at 875mV and stock frequencies. So running Nathan FAX4 and PAOLA at the same time my energy consumtion wend down from 517 watts to 282 watts !!! (without LCD monitor). I hope it wont stop crunshing. Why did i that ? For sure i will never end up within the 24 hour bonus so i decided to crunsh at normal frequencies an less power, just trying. Then my electricity bill will be much much lower i think. CU
	ID: 24726 \| Rating: 0 \| rate: / Reply Quote

ExtraTerrestrial Apes Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 17 Aug 08 Posts: 2705 Credit: 1,311,122,549 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 24728 - Posted: 4 May 2012 \| 21:19:03 UTC - in response to Message 24726.
	That's an exceptionally low voltage for stock frequency :) And an exceptional gain in efficiency. Did you previously overclock and overvolt them "like mad"? MrS ____________ Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002
	ID: 24728 \| Rating: 0 \| rate: / Reply Quote

Rantanplan Send message Joined: 22 Jul 11 Posts: 166 Credit: 138,629,987 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 24735 - Posted: 5 May 2012 \| 2:54:21 UTC - in response to Message 24728.
	Did you previously overclock and overvolt them "like mad"? Yes, hopefully that will be my fault. I will compare the running time results when it ends up. Hopefully i will save some electricity and some money too.
	ID: 24735 \| Rating: 0 \| rate: / Reply Quote

]{LiK`Rangers` Send message Joined: 5 Jan 12 Posts: 117 Credit: 77,256,014 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 24736 - Posted: 5 May 2012 \| 3:31:36 UTC - in response to Message 24735.
	I looked up how much energy it took to run a computer recently, and it said it was one of the most energy efficient things in your house already.
	ID: 24736 \| Rating: 0 \| rate: / Reply Quote

Rantanplan Send message Joined: 22 Jul 11 Posts: 166 Credit: 138,629,987 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 24737 - Posted: 5 May 2012 \| 3:59:22 UTC Last modified: 5 May 2012 \| 4:00:54 UTC
	ok, i looking at frequency comparsion then i will deside me to overclock again or not. My calculations about the already running time says me to save 1 to 1,5 kw/h by crunshing Nathan FAX4 at normal frequencys and undervolting. I am anxious to that, telling u soon. Edit: I noticed by increasing temperature the energy consumpion raised by 40 watts :ugly
	ID: 24737 \| Rating: 0 \| rate: / Reply Quote

skgiven Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 23 Apr 09 Posts: 3968 Credit: 1,995,359,260 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 24738 - Posted: 5 May 2012 \| 9:40:40 UTC - in response to Message 24737.
	I looked at the energy usage compared to temperature a year or so ago, and what you observed sounds about right; I saw ~30W more power draw when the temps were very high compared to when the temps were very low. You can also see this on CPU's, to varying extents. One other thing. Different tasks use different amounts of energy. Applies to both GPU's and CPU's (even if the GPU is being utilized to the same extent). ____________ FAQ's HOW TO: - Opt out of Beta Tests - Ask for Help
	ID: 24738 \| Rating: 0 \| rate: / Reply Quote

ExtraTerrestrial Apes Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 17 Aug 08 Posts: 2705 Credit: 1,311,122,549 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 24741 - Posted: 5 May 2012 \| 11:46:15 UTC
	Leakage increases exponentially with temperature, that's why cooler running chips consume less. Yes, the energy consumption of a computer is normally not very high. However, if you're crunching 24/7 every little bit counts. Especially if you're using GPUs so that the overall power draw is several 100 W. At 23 ct/kWh Ratanplans original config would cost 2.85€/day over here, i.e. 1041€/year. Efficient or not, that's a lot! That's the reason why paying a few 10€ more for a highly efficient PSU pays for itself quickly if you're crunching 24/7. MrS ____________ Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002
	ID: 24741 \| Rating: 0 \| rate: / Reply Quote

Rantanplan Send message Joined: 22 Jul 11 Posts: 166 Credit: 138,629,987 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 24754 - Posted: 6 May 2012 \| 6:36:08 UTC Last modified: 6 May 2012 \| 6:37:21 UTC
	worst case calculation old / undervoltet FAX4 took FAX4 took 89065s / 104606s power consumption 512(old)/320(underv) watts 12,743 kw/h // 9,298 Kw/h so there is a difference of 3,445 kw/h that a saved to crunsh two wus at the save time. So that says to me, good work, continue :)
	ID: 24754 \| Rating: 0 \| rate: / Reply Quote

Rantanplan Send message Joined: 22 Jul 11 Posts: 166 Credit: 138,629,987 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 24756 - Posted: 6 May 2012 \| 9:44:25 UTC - in response to Message 24754. Last modified: 6 May 2012 \| 9:44:56 UTC
	I also again did a little overclocking by maintain 875mV , but dont know how high i can go . Chipset frequency at 740 Mhz by ablsolutly no wattage changes.
	ID: 24756 \| Rating: 0 \| rate: / Reply Quote

skgiven Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 23 Apr 09 Posts: 3968 Credit: 1,995,359,260 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 24757 - Posted: 6 May 2012 \| 10:15:23 UTC - in response to Message 24754.
	Your performance per Watt looks better underclocked. I undervolted my two GTX 460 at 875mV and stock frequencies. So running Nathan FAX4 and PAOLA at the same time my energy consumption wend down from 517 watts to 282 watts !!! (without LCD monitor). I have an i7-2600 with a stock GTX470 (<1000mV), and it uses ~270W (crunching on 6 CPU threads and the GPU). IIRC the CPU uses ~65W and the GPU typically uses ~70 to 75% the TDP (the board, 2 modules of RAM, a few fans and a SSD drive accounting for the rest). Although a GTX470 gets a bit more than twice the credit per day of a GTX 460, we are also talking about a TDP of 215W v's 2*160W (320W) at ref. So I think at 320W for the system, you are running reasonably efficiently. To be more efficient you would really need to update to a CC2.0 GPU, preferably a GTX500 series, or move to a GTX600 series at some stage. My system is probably ~30% more efficient. A GTX570 does ~20% more work for ~the same power usage, so in theory that could take you to ~55% more efficient. A GTX680 is ~50% more power efficient than a GTX580, so one of those would be ~230% as efficient as two GTX460's. A GTX680 is ~192% as efficient as a GTX470, and a GTX690 should be ~twice as efficient. I expect I could replace two GTX470's with one GTX680 and almost do as much work for almost half the electric. I recon that if I sold both GTX470's and purchased a GTX680 it would just about pay for itself in 1year, from the difference in running costs. However I would be more interested in seeing what a GTX670 brings to the table, and I think a lot of people would be interested in the mid-range cards (GTX660Ti/660/650Ti/650 or whatever they will be called). ____________ FAQ's HOW TO: - Opt out of Beta Tests - Ask for Help
	ID: 24757 \| Rating: 0 \| rate: / Reply Quote

TheFiend Send message Joined: 26 Aug 11 Posts: 99 Credit: 2,500,112,138 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 24776 - Posted: 7 May 2012 \| 10:22:58 UTC
	This thread has inspired me to try undervolting my 460 with the aim of maintaining performance yet reduce power and temperatures. So far I've reduced the voltage on my EVGA 460 down from 1.00 to 0.95 and temperature has dropped about 5Deg already.
	ID: 24776 \| Rating: 0 \| rate: / Reply Quote

Post to thread

Message boards : Graphics cards (GPUs) : I did undervolting my GTX 460

	About	Science	Volunteers	Performance	Forum	Join us	Donate