NVIDIA Fall Driver Update (rel 180) and Other Treats
by Derek Wilson on November 20, 2008 8:00 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Tesla, CUDA, and the Future
We haven't been super excited about the applicability of CUDA on the desktop. Sure, NVIDIA has made wondrous promises and bold claims, but the applications for end users just aren't there yet (and the ones that are are rather limited in scope and applicability). But the same has not been true for CUDA in the workstation and HPC markets.
Tesla, NVIDIA's workstation level GPU computing version of its graphics cards (it has no display output and is spec'd a bit differently) has been around for a while, but we are seeing more momentum in that area lately. As of yesterday, NVIDIA has announced partnerships with Dell, Lenovo, Penguin Computing and others to bring desktop boxes featuring 4 way Tesla action. These 4-Tesla desktop systems, called Tesla Personal Supercomputers, will cost less than $10k US. This is an important number to come in under (says NVIDIA) because this is below the limit for discretionary spending at many major universities. Rather than needing to follow in the footsteps of Harvard, MIT, UIUC, and others who have built their own GPU computing boxes and clusters, universities and businesses can now trust in a reliable computing vendor to deliver and support the required hardware.
We don't have any solid specs on the new boxes yet. Different vendors may do things slightly differently and we aren't sure if NVIDIA is pushing for a heavily standardized box or will give these guys complete flexibility. But regardless of the rest of the box, the Tesla cards themselves are the same cards that have been available since earlier this year.
These personal supercomputers aren't going to end up in homes anytime soon, as they are squarely targeted at workstation and higher level computing. But that doesn't mean this development won't have an impact on the end user. By targeting universities through the retail support of their new partners in this effort, NVIDIA is making it much more attractive (and possible) for universities to teach GPU computing and massively parallel programming using their hardware. Getting CUDA into the minds of future developers will go a long way, not just for the HPC market, but for every market touched by these future graduates.
It's also much easier for an engineer to sell a PHB on picking up "that new Dell system" rather than a laundry list of expensive components to be built and supported either by IT staff or by the engineer himself. Making in roads into industry (no matter the industry) will start getting parts moving, expose more developers to the CUDA environment, and create demand for more CUDA developers. This will also help gently nudge students and universities towards CUDA, and even if the initial target is HPC research and engineering, increased availability of hardware and programs will attract students who are interested in applying the knowledge to other areas.
It's all about indoctrination really. Having a good product or a good API does nothing without having developers and support. The more people NVIDIA can convince that CUDA is the greatest thing since sliced bread, the closer to the greatest thing since sliced bread CUDA will become (in the lab and on the desktop). Yes, they've still got a long long way to go, but the announcement of partners in providing Tesla Personal Supercomputer systems is a major development and not something the industry (and especially AMD) should under appreciate.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
63 Comments
View All Comments
Finally - Friday, November 21, 2008 - link
Thank you Derek for your insightful posting, clarity and all.The only lesson I can extract from your writing is the common man's knowledge that you shouldn't mess around with SLI/Crossfire, ever.
@Tejas:
[quote]As a 3870X2 quadfire and 4870 Crossfire owner I can say without doubt that AMD driver support is lousy and bordering on scandalous... I still do not have a Crossfire profile for Fallout 3 and it has been almost a month."[/quote]
Stop bitching. You called for your personal grief and you got it delivered alright. If you got too much time on your hands and want to spend them on ridiculous hobbies, so be it - but don't bitch for the common man.
Finally - Friday, November 21, 2008 - link
To clarify the meaning of "calling for personal grief":Putting too many graphics cards in your rig is like hiring a motorcycle gang to beat you up with sticks and chains and all and then running around the town, showing your bruises and bloodpouring to everyone complaining how bad you are feeling after that paid-for encounter...
tejas84 - Thursday, November 20, 2008 - link
Derek Wilson is 100% right. As a 3870X2 quadfire and 4870 Crossfire owner I can say without doubt that AMD driver support is lousy and bordering on scandalous... I still do not have a Crossfire profile for Fallout 3 and it has been almost a month.I had to wait for TWO catalyst revisions until Crysis Warhead and Stalker CS had profiles as well as GRID, Assassins Creed, World in Conflict etc etc....
Nvidia put the effort to work with developers to ensure the games work with their hardware and integrate SLI profiles. AMD are arrogant and I remember an AMD moderator say that the TWIMTBP program was simply paying for a logo. For a company betting everything on multi GPU isnt it strange that AMD doesnt work with devs to get Crossfire profiles into game.
Well actually they pay so that their games work well with the latest games. AMD are lazy and cut corners just like with their CPUs and frankly I am going to sell up my AMD cards and go exclusively Nvidia from now on...
Bottom line... anyone who thinks that Derek is being harsh has NEVER OWNED AN ATI CROSSFIRE SETUP BEFORE....
Regards
Griswold - Friday, November 21, 2008 - link
Point and case why multi-GPU solution suck donkey nuts, no matter what team you depend on - you depend on them twice as much as everyone else (one for the raw driver and its bugs or lack thereof and one for the profiles). No thanks to that.Tough luck, I say. And with nvidia on, what seems to be a financial downward slope, it remains to be seen if they're willing and capable to deliver in the future. Good luck, I say.
Goty - Thursday, November 20, 2008 - link
So wait, I think you're forgetting the whole "Call of Juarez" deal. ATI had a deal with the developer there in the same manner that NVIDIA has a deal with all the developers that participate in the TWIMTBP program. NVIDIA's hardware performed like crap in the game when it was first released and everyone cried foul, saying that it was "unfair" and "anti-competitive" for AMD to do something like that.Now, if we want to talk about anti-competitive, what about NVIDIA's dubious dealings with Ubisoft and Assassin's Creed and DirectX 10.1 support? Hmmm...
tejas84 - Thursday, November 20, 2008 - link
addendum,Well actually they pay so that their games work well with the latest games- this refers to Nvidia
chizow - Thursday, November 20, 2008 - link
Its not the first, Anand recently ripped into ATI drivers in his Core i7 launch review:Its a problem that has been gaining momentum lately and has drawn a LOT of attention with the recent Farcry 2 driver debacle. First there was the issue of render errors, hitching in DX10 and overall poor performance without FPS caps. Then there were hot fixes, fixes for hot fixes and further hot fixes. Then there were CF problems with newer drivers that necessitated using drivers that had the render errors or DX10 stuttering or both. But it comes down to this, if the recommended fix for a problem is to revert to prior drivers, its pretty clear the monthly WHQL program isn't working.
ATI gets more heat because their drivers tend to be more reactive than Nvidia, who tends to be more proactive with their TWIMTBP program and driver updates that come in advance or arrive in tandem with hot launch titles. This latest round of reviews and performance in top 5 titles would confirm this.
ATI has also made multi-GPU their solution for high-end performance, which means their products rely heavily CF scaling and compatibility. A big problem here is that ATI does not have user-defined profiles for games like Nvidia, which means there is no recourse if you have poor CF scaling or performance short of workarounds like renaming game .exes.
giantpandaman2 - Thursday, November 20, 2008 - link
Where's the blame on Ubisoft Montreal? Can't a game company release a game that works with a large portion of video cards?That said, I think AMD should go to once every other month. Less overhead, more things fixed with the same amount of man hours. nVidia drivers simply take too damn long. They go to the opposite extreme if you ask me. I owned an 8800GT and it took them 9 months to get their video card fully compatible with my monitor in Vista64. That's ridiculous.
But, seriously, why do people only blame driver makers and not the fricken game makers who have easy access to the hardware?
DerekWilson - Thursday, November 20, 2008 - link
game developers are hitting a moving target as well. they don't have the drivers that will be out when their game launches until their game launches ... and it would have been final for month(s) before that.in contrast, AMD and NVIDIA can get their hands on those games months before hand and make sure that drivers work they way they should with the software.
there is developer responsibility to be sure, but a driver issue is a driver issue ... game devs can't shoulder that burden.
JonnyDough - Friday, November 21, 2008 - link
Hence, MORE STANDARDS!