Compute Capability Version.

jFKEe3xV9p · 2012-03-30, 00:58

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.

Dubslow · 2012-03-30, 03:09

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.

jFKEe3xV9p · 2012-03-30, 05:01

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.

Dubslow · 2012-03-30, 05:10

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.

jFKEe3xV9p · 2012-03-30, 05:16

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.

Karl M Johnson · 2012-03-30, 06:46

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.

Dubslow · 2012-03-30, 08:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by jFKEe3xV9p

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.

ldesnogu · 2012-03-30, 09:21

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.

Dubslow · 2012-03-30, 09:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by ldesnogu

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.

ldesnogu · 2012-03-30, 09:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dubslow

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.

Dubslow · 2012-03-30, 10:01

But in order to get the faked library into the software, you would need to recompile? Because you have new source?

2012-03-30, 00:58	#1
jFKEe3xV9p Mar 2012 3 Posts	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.

2012-03-30, 03:09	#2
Dubslow Basketry That Evening! "Bunslow the Bold" Jun 2011 40<A<43 -89<O<-88 3·29·83 Posts	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

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

2012-03-30, 05:01	#3
jFKEe3xV9p Mar 2012 3 Posts	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.

2012-03-30, 05:10	#4
Dubslow Basketry That Evening! "Bunslow the Bold" Jun 2011 40<A<43 -89<O<-88 16065₈ Posts	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.

2012-03-30, 05:16	#5
jFKEe3xV9p Mar 2012 3 Posts	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.

2012-03-30, 06:46	#6
Karl M Johnson Mar 2010 3×137 Posts	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.

2012-03-30, 09:21	#8
ldesnogu Jan 2008 France 3×181 Posts	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.

2012-03-30, 10:01	#11
Dubslow Basketry That Evening! "Bunslow the Bold" Jun 2011 40<A<43 -89<O<-88 3×29×83 Posts	But in order to get the faked library into the software, you would need to recompile? Because you have new source?