mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > Hardware > GPU Computing

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2012-03-30, 00:58   #1
jFKEe3xV9p
 
Mar 2012

3 Posts
Default Compute Capability Version.

Is it possible to change the version number reported from the GPU. For example my current card states that it's using version 1.3 however I need it to report it's version as 2.0.

Any help would be appreciated. I would hate to have to buy a new card.
jFKEe3xV9p is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-03-30, 03:09   #2
Dubslow
Basketry That Evening!
 
Dubslow's Avatar
 
"Bunslow the Bold"
Jun 2011
40<A<43 -89<O<-88

3×2,399 Posts
Default

What do you mean? Compute Compatibility refers to what the hardware is capable of doing.

What card do you have? You can check what it should be reporting at http://developer.nvidia.com/cuda-gpus . If you have a card that appears as 2.0 on that list, but appears in a CUDA program to be 1.3, then that means either the program is old and was compiled before CUDA 2 became available, or it means you have old drivers. The current drivers are 295.xx +.

(If you have Windows, you can use this to find your current driver and get new ones, or on Linux you can run "nvidia-smi -q" to find out your driver version.)

Edit: If your card appears on that list as 1.3, then the hardware is just straight up too old/obsolete and will not run with 2.0+ software, so you'll need to get a new one.

Last fiddled with by Dubslow on 2012-03-30 at 03:11
Dubslow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-03-30, 05:01   #3
jFKEe3xV9p
 
Mar 2012

3 Posts
Default

The card is a GeForce GTX 295 with version 1.3. I don't need it to run 2.0+ software however I need the software to load. It requires 2.0 to load.

I found a similar problem here with no solutions.

http://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentr..._thread/291689


Basically I just want the card to report back to the software that it's running 2.0 even though it really running 1.3. I am fully aware that I wont be able to take advantage of all the features in 2.0.
jFKEe3xV9p is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-03-30, 05:10   #4
Dubslow
Basketry That Evening!
 
Dubslow's Avatar
 
"Bunslow the Bold"
Jun 2011
40<A<43 -89<O<-88

3×2,399 Posts
Default

How could you possibly load 2.0 software without running it?

If software is compiled for version 2.0, then that means that the software issues instructions to your card that the card is literally physically not capable of executing. Even if you could fake the program into running, it wouldn't give any correct answers.
Dubslow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-03-30, 05:16   #5
jFKEe3xV9p
 
Mar 2012

3 Posts
Default

That is the thing. It does not need 2.0 to run it however for what ever reason it has been restricted to only run on 2.0.


If the card is able to report back that it's running 2.0 problem solved.
jFKEe3xV9p is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-03-30, 06:46   #6
Karl M Johnson
 
Karl M Johnson's Avatar
 
Mar 2010

1100110112 Posts
Default

I dont think it's possible (or easy to implement), since the program gets that info using some kind of GetDeviceInfo_CC() function and the GPU itself reports that CC.
Karl M Johnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-03-30, 08:07   #7
Dubslow
Basketry That Evening!
 
Dubslow's Avatar
 
"Bunslow the Bold"
Jun 2011
40<A<43 -89<O<-88

3×2,399 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jFKEe3xV9p View Post
That is the thing. It does not need 2.0 to run it however for what ever reason it has been restricted to only run on 2.0.
I kinda find that hard to believe. What program? When was it designed? Under which SDK was it compiled? Even if it was written and compiled before 2.0 but then recompiled under 2.0 without any changes, it still won't be capable of running, even if you spoofed it. However, if you re-recompiled it again under 1.3, then it will work fine. (In fact even if the program was written after 2.0, recompiling it with the 1.3 SDK might make it work.)

For the record, I don't know how to spoof what compatibility a card reports. However, I do encourage you to post what the software is and when it was written, etc. There might be another workaround.
Dubslow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-03-30, 09:21   #8
ldesnogu
 
ldesnogu's Avatar
 
Jan 2008
France

10000110002 Posts
Default

This type of thing can be done for programs that use shared libraries: you create a fake library that implements the function you want to override. This is probably applicable in this case, but not trivial.

Here is an example.
ldesnogu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-03-30, 09:32   #9
Dubslow
Basketry That Evening!
 
Dubslow's Avatar
 
"Bunslow the Bold"
Jun 2011
40<A<43 -89<O<-88

3×2,399 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ldesnogu View Post
This type of thing can be done for programs that use shared libraries: you create a fake library that implements the function you want to override. This is probably applicable in this case, but not trivial.

Here is an example.
I think I see what you mean, create a new "library" with a function of the same name as above that returns 2.0?

Either way, you'd still have to recompile it, right? And if so, then there's probably a safer workaround anyways.
Dubslow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-03-30, 09:39   #10
ldesnogu
 
ldesnogu's Avatar
 
Jan 2008
France

23·67 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubslow View Post
I think I see what you mean, create a new "library" with a function of the same name as above that returns 2.0?

Either way, you'd still have to recompile it, right? And if so, then there's probably a safer workaround anyways.
I took as hypothesis that the original program checks for 2.0 even though it only uses 1.3 capabilities (note that I don't know anything about CUDA, so this might make no sense ). In that case no recompilation of the original program is needed.
ldesnogu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-03-30, 10:01   #11
Dubslow
Basketry That Evening!
 
Dubslow's Avatar
 
"Bunslow the Bold"
Jun 2011
40<A<43 -89<O<-88

3×2,399 Posts
Default

But in order to get the faked library into the software, you would need to recompile? Because you have new source?
Dubslow is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New GPU Compute System airsquirrels GPU Computing 90 2017-12-08 00:13
[YASQ] Yet Another Stupid Question - Factoring capability ?? Twh0re NFS@Home 23 2015-05-06 12:28
Low-powered motherboard of adequate capability sought fivemack Hardware 1 2011-12-21 19:26
New Compute Box Christenson Hardware 0 2011-01-15 04:44
My throughput does not compute... petrw1 Hardware 9 2007-08-13 14:38

All times are UTC. The time now is 03:14.

Wed Nov 25 03:14:18 UTC 2020 up 76 days, 25 mins, 4 users, load averages: 3.26, 2.01, 1.59

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.