# TPU Folding PPD Charts 2015



## Nordic (Dec 20, 2014)

*Getting Started:*
If you are new and want to fold with our team, read here to get you started. Then say hello in this thread. If you have any questions ask them in our team discussion thread here.


*Directions:*
***Your results will not be added if you do not follow the rules and format as stated below***

Let F@H run until the work unit is more than 15% complete.
Take a screenshot of GPUZ(Or linux equivalent such as Nvidea X server) and the FAH advanced control interface. Look at this example. (Linux example's below.
Read the format below then find the information you need to make a post.
Make a post. It will look like this.
At the top of the post, state what fahcore such as 0x15, 0x17, or 0x18.
Below that post the information in the correct format. It is very important you follow the format shown below because it will be copy and pasted into the chart.
Make a spoiler below the formatted information.
Place screenshot in a spoiler.
If you have anything else to say, place the text below the screenshot. It should now look like this.
Smile, FAH is a fun way to use your hardware for something good.
***Your results will be added as I have time.***


*Purpose:*
It has come to our attention that other charts online may have cherry picked results to show the maximum ppd obtainable but not for the whole WU. The purpose of this chart is to have TPU specific results of what ppd a person can expect under normal circumstances. The fields used are to maximize information to provide the best comparison possible. Please keep that in mind when posting results. These are results for tpu folders by tpu folders.

***The aim is to have the most accurate results, but given the nature of folding ppd state is always an estimate ***

****Follow this format****
Core XX
Username|Project #|GPU|PPD(u)|Core/Vram Clock(MHz)|GPU cores|TPF (h:min:sec)|Run, Clone, Gen|OS|Driver Version|Extra Client Options
Core 17
Example|P9201|GTX 999|440,330|1549/6008|2048|00:01:21|R483, C3, G159|Ubuntu 14.04 x64|V. 347.09|next-unit-percentage 100, client-type advanced

If you have any questions feel free to ask. If you think this chart could be made better please tell me how.



Spoiler: FahCore 0x17



____________


Username|Project #|GPU|PPD(u)|Core/Vram Clock(MHz)|GPU cores|TPF (h:min:sec)|Run, Clone, Gen|OS|Driver Version|Extra Client Options
james888|P9201|GTX 970|267,891|1436/1502|1664|00:01:49|R133, C2, G110|Windows 7 x64|V. 347.09|next-unit-percentage 100, client-type advanced
james888|p9201|GTX 970|289,480|1486/1502|1664|00:01:48|R681, C0, G290|Windows 7 x64|V. 347.09|next-unit-percentage 100
james888|P9201|GTX 750ti|74,118|1401/1425|640|00:04:26|R665, C3, G87|Ubuntu x64|V. 343.36|next-unit-percentage 100
james888|P9201|GTX 750ti|56,583|1150/1350|640|00:05:19|R627, C2, G118|Ubuntu x64|V. 343.36|next-unit-percentage 100
james888|P9201|GTX 750ti|59,082|1176/1350|640|00:05:11|R931, C2, G91|Windows 10 Preview x64|V. 347.09|next-unit-percentage 100
mx500torid|PRCG 9201|HD 7950|PPD 127649|1050 core/1250 mem|1792 shaders|TPF 3 min 6 sec|R773,C2,G168|Windows 7 x64|Driver 14.3|no additional options
Buck_Nasty|P9201|GTX 970|307,778|1503/6008|1664|1:43|R697,C4,G98|Ubuntu 14.10|V343.22|No additional options
agent00skid|P13000|Radeon 7950|90377|900/1250|1792|00:10:15|R933, C0, G122|Windows 7 x64|Catalyst 14.8|None







Spoiler: FahCore 0x18



____________


Username|Project #|GPU|PPD(u)|Core/Vram Clock(MHz)|GPU cores|TPF (h:min:sec)|Run, Clone, Gen|OS|Driver Version|Extra Client Options
james888|P9105|GTX 970|80,623|1436/1502|1664|00:04:22|R1, C7, G64|Windows 7 x64|V. 347.09|next-unit-percentage 100
james888|P9104|GTX 970|99,391|1436/1502|1664|00:03:48|R18, C5, G11|Windows 7 x64|V. 347.09|next-unit-percentage 100
hat | PRCG 10476 | GTX 660 Ti | PPD 67,611 | 1084 core/1502 mem | 1344 shaders | TPF 5 mins 55 secs | R0, C137, G48 | Windows 8.1 x64 | Driver 347.09 | no additional options
MStenholm|P9111|GTX 680|123521|1247/6008|1536|00:03:17|R15, C2, P22|Windows 7 x64|340.52|4 GHz i7 970
johnerz|P10477|GTX670|87824|1306/6624|1344|00:07:48|R1,94,2|Windows & X64|V. 327.23| no Opotions






Spoiler: FahCore 0x15





Username|Project #|GPU|PPD(u)|Core/Vram Clock(MHz)|GPU cores|TPF (h:min:sec)|Run, Clone, Gen|OS|Driver Version|Extra Client Options
Placeholder|P9201|GTX 999|440,330|1549/6008|2048|00:01:21|R483, C3, G159|Ubuntu 14.04 x64|V. 347.09|next-unit-percentage 100, client-type advanced


----------



## Nordic (Dec 20, 2014)

Although I doubt we will need it, I am reserving this post space for if we may ever need it.


----------



## Nordic (Dec 30, 2014)

Core 0x18
james888|P9105|GTX 970|80,623|1436/1502|1664|00:04:22|R1, C7, G64|Windows 7 x64|V. 347.09|next-unit-percentage 100


Spoiler: Screenshot












Here is our first results post. This post is an example of how your post should look. Below the screenshot/spoiler you can write whatever you would like, but the information needs to be the first thing in the post.


----------



## hertz9753 (Jan 2, 2015)

http://www.overclock.net/t/830237/b...r-music-that-mike-likes/6120_20#post_23351607

I never follow the rules.  I'm not sure if you can if you can right click and open link on that thread.

$ilent has been warned about cherry picking wu's on his 970's.  I get about 233k ppd on each of my 970's on a good day running Win7 and the advanced flag.


----------



## mx500torid (Jan 2, 2015)

Thanks hertz thats the guy I seen in your forums you guys  were talking about his results. While you are here do you notice any difference if a cpu is overclocked? Does it help the gpu ppd output?


----------



## hertz9753 (Jan 2, 2015)

Nothing after 3.9-4.0 GHz on the i7 2600k that is in that rig.  That is the sweet spot for that rig.


----------



## Nordic (Jan 7, 2015)

Core 0x17
james888|P9201|GTX 970|267,891|1436/1502|1664|00:01:49|R133, C2, G110|Windows 7 x64|V. 347.09|next-unit-percentage 100, client-type advanced


Spoiler: Screenshot











With this submission, I here by open this thread up for more submissions. Post away team!



hertz9753 said:


> http://www.overclock.net/t/830237/b...r-music-that-mike-likes/6120_20#post_23351607
> 
> I never follow the rules.  I'm not sure if you can if you can right click and open link on that thread.
> 
> $ilent has been warned about cherry picking wu's on his 970's.  I get about 233k ppd on each of my 970's on a good day running Win7 and the advanced flag.



I'm hurt! You weren't supposed to post! This is unacceptable!!!!

Really though, I was asked to do this. It sounded worthwhile. More information is never a bad thing, both charts can be used.


----------



## Nordic (Jan 7, 2015)

Core 0x18
james888|9104|GTX 970|99,391|1436/1502|1664|00:03:48|R18, C5, G11|Windows 7 x64|V. 347.09|next-unit-percentage 100


Spoiler: Screenshot











Core 0x17
james888|P9201|GTX 750ti|59,082|1176/1350|640|00:05:11|R931, C2, G91|Windows 10 Preview x64|V. 347.09|next-unit-percentage 100


Spoiler: Screenshot











Core 0x17
james888|P9201|GTX 750ti|56,583|1150/1350|640|00:05:19|R627, C2, G118|Ubuntu x64|V. 343.36|next-unit-percentage 100


Spoiler: Screenshot











Core 0x17
james888|P9201|GTX 750ti|74,118|1401/1425|640|00:04:26|R665, C3, G87|Ubuntu x64|V. 343.36|next-unit-percentage 100


Spoiler: Screenshot











Core 0x17
james888|9201|GTX 970|289,480|1486/1502|1664|00:01:48|R681, C0, G290|Windows 7 x64|V. 347.09|next-unit-percentage 100


Spoiler: Screenshot











This is what a post should look like if you have multiple submissions at once. See how nice spoilers are.


----------



## mstenholm (Jan 7, 2015)

So we have to look at spoilers or are you collecting the information into a nice table?


----------



## Nordic (Jan 7, 2015)

mstenholm said:


> So we have to look at spoilers or are you collecting the information into a nice table?


In the OP click on a spoiler to see a nice table. Using spoilers in this way reduces thread clutter, making it so you only have to look at the data you want to look at. If you want to look at it all open all spoilers.

I had a feeling I would get more feedback after I opened up the thread.


----------



## mx500torid (Jan 7, 2015)

Nice job there james


----------



## Nordic (Jan 7, 2015)

mx500torid said:


> Nice job there james


Just waiting on other peoples results. I have input everything I can. I think its a little nvidia heavy, but even nvidea maxwell heavy.


----------



## hat (Jan 7, 2015)

hat | PRCG 10476 | GTX 660 Ti | PPD 67,611 | 1084 core/1502 mem | 1344 shaders | TPF 5 mins 55 secs | R0, C137, G48 | Windows 8.1 x64 | Driver 347.09 | no additional options



Spoiler


----------



## Nordic (Jan 8, 2015)

mx500torid said:


> Im impressed with the ppd of those GTX 750 TI! Man 8 of those would be over a million a day @ 130k ppd. If you could pick some up at 75.00 bucks or so.


All for 50w. You could potentially run about 6 from a quad core with risers.


----------



## Nordic (Jan 8, 2015)

I can look at your screenshot, but its nice if you follow the directions and state which core type (0x18 or 0x17) at above your information. Also spoilers are very nice, also in the directions @mx500torid


----------



## mx500torid (Jan 8, 2015)

I guess Im not good with directions no more from me sorry.


----------



## Nordic (Jan 8, 2015)

mx500torid said:


> I guess Im not good with directions no more from me sorry.


I would love to get any results you can add, the directions are mostly just nice formatting to make things easier and should be followed as closely as possible. My posts are an example.


----------



## BUCK NASTY (Jan 10, 2015)

Core_17

Buck_Nasty|P9201|307,778|GTX 970|1503/6008|1664|1:43|697,4,98|Ubuntu 14.10|343.22|No additional options



Spoiler


----------



## agent00skid (Jan 10, 2015)

Core 0x17
agent00skid|P13000|Radeon 7950|90377|900/1250|1792|00:10:15|R933, C0, G122|Windows 7 x64|Catalyst 14.8|None


Spoiler


----------



## mstenholm (Jan 11, 2015)

Core 0x18
MStenholm|P9111|GTX 680|123521|1247/6008|1536|00:03:17|R15, C2, P22|Windows 7 x64|340.52|4 GHz i7 970


Spoiler










I think this is the best my 680 ever did and that is with a newer driver which is not supposed to be optimal.

On a side note I moved my one GTX 970 to my i7 4790 rig. Now it does 1:53 TPF. Did 2:00 at similar clock in my "slower" i7 970 and it even have to share PCI lances. The original 970 went from 1:51 to 1:53 due to lower bandwidth.  You can happily live in the world where - CPU have no influence on folding performance - but you will be wrong.


----------



## Nordic (Jan 11, 2015)

Core 15 
james888|P7621|GTX 970|75,163|1486/1502|1664|00:02:42|R718, C0, G246|Windows 7 x64|V. 347.09|next-unit-percentage 100



Spoiler: Screenshot











Seem to be getting a lot of core 15 wu's now. Sad isn't it.


----------



## johnerz (Jan 14, 2015)

johnerz|P10477|GTX670|87824|1306/6624|1344|00:07:48|R1,94,2|Windows & X64|V. 327.23| no Opotions

Username|Project #|GPU|PPD(u)|Core/Vram Clock(MHz)|GPU cores|TPF (h:min:sec)|Run, Clone, Gen|OS|Driver Version|Extra Client Options
Example|P9201|GTX 999|440,330|1549/6008|2048|00:01:21|R483, C3, G159|Ubuntu 14.04 x64|V. 347.09|next-unit-percentage 100, client-type advanced



Spoiler: Spoiler


----------



## mstenholm (Jul 23, 2015)

Time for some updates primarily for my GTX970s but also a few entries for a GTX 680 and a 7970.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1W-PlatA9CgOOTA3qcvTxhFm_YoedvoHmXHNgZqczY4g/edit#gid=0


----------



## Nordic (Jul 23, 2015)

mstenholm said:


> Time for some updates primarily for my GTX970s but also a few entries for a GTX 680 and a 7970.
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1W-PlatA9CgOOTA3qcvTxhFm_YoedvoHmXHNgZqczY4g/edit#gid=0


I would love to put all that information entirely into the OP. I can't just copy and paste it though because it is not in the format as described in the OP. I don't want to take the time to put it all in that format either.


----------



## mstenholm (Jul 23, 2015)

james888 said:


> I would love to put all that information entirely into the OP. I can't just copy and paste it though because it is not in the format as described in the OP. I don't want to take the time to put it all in that format either.


I know. You insisted to make the chart but made it impossible keep it updated for us by not letting us do the update in an easy fashion. Btw my numbes are included upload time. Real TPF is roughly 1 second less.


----------



## Nordic (Jul 24, 2015)

mstenholm said:


> I know. You insisted to make the chart but made it impossible keep it updated for us by not letting us do the update in an easy fashion. Btw my numbes are included upload time. Real TPF is roughly 1 second less.


I am the one who took initiative of actually making it, after some requested it. I asked around for suggestions on how the team would like it done. I was suggested to make it like the heaven benchmark thread, so I did.


----------



## hertz9753 (Jul 24, 2015)

I know guy that is working something.

http://www.overclock.net/u/301008/tmontney


----------



## mstenholm (Jul 24, 2015)

hertz9753 said:


> I know guy that is working something.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/u/301008/tmontney


Yes I know that one thanks. I copied the layout more or less.


----------

