Jump to content

Sciences proves mining kills cards

Strategic
1 minute ago, leadeater said:

Well I'm afraid that their testing and sample data is likely filled with bad data as the literal hundreds of thousands, no probably millions, of server GPUs proves this research data wrong in real life.

It is peer reviewed, and degradation is not equal to gpu dying. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Strategic said:

"As to what degree is under argument." Not really as shown in youtube video referencing the research, at 350  (1157,407 days) kelvin at already degrades significantly faster than than at 300 kelvin as 400 kelvin compared to 350 kelving ( 100000 seconds = 116 days)

 

unknown.png

I'm going to say this study is about as accurate as my 4 year old doing math.

I bought my GTX 1080 and ran F@H and BOINC on it for 24/7 16months out. The card ran much harder than it did when I mined on it. The card still works just as well as the day I bought it.

The metric they are using is just not viable.

Just saying.

 

Also you still need to clean up your original post.

COMMUNITY STANDARDS   |   TECH NEWS POSTING GUIDELINES   |   FORUM STAFF

LTT Folding Users Tips, Tricks and FAQ   |   F@H & BOINC Badge Request   |   F@H Contribution    My Rig   |   Project Steamroller

I am a Moderator, but I am fallible. Discuss or debate with me as you will but please do not argue with me as that will get us nowhere.

 

Spoiler

  

 

Character is like a Tree and Reputation like its Shadow. The Shadow is what we think of it; The Tree is the Real thing.  ~ Abraham Lincoln

Reputation is a Lifetime to create but seconds to destroy.

You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.  ~ Winston Churchill

Docendo discimus - "to teach is to learn"

 

 CHRISTIAN MEMBER 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Strategic said:

It is peer reviewed, and degradation is not equal to gpu dying. 

Peer reviewed publications can and have still be incorrect and have had to issue retractions. This is sadly not as uncommon as it should be, still very uncommon but it still happens.

 

Edit:

Now science being wrong isn't a problem in itself, that whole point of science is to explore. But we and everyone other scientist will have to apply critical thinking to anything that is published and hopefully if the subject is important enough verified by other researchers conducting their own tests to further validate the finding.

 

Things really only become accepted fact after multiple independent studies shows the same thing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Frostbobomb said:

Hmmm, anyway for me to check the Tjunction? Or is that not possible on EVGA?

Is there anything in HWinfo64 about memory junction temp? If not then I'm not too sure

EVGA might not be reporting or pulling from the sensors if it's not present, which is kind of weird and concerning, because that's the most accurate way to measure temps

 

8 minutes ago, leadeater said:

the common misconception is that cards will die in 3 months like this source claims which is SOOOOO clearly false.

I can debunk this

 

I bought my GPUs around December and January

It is now... Mid April, none of them died (yet, -touch wood-)

 

Though one of the GPU fans are whining ever so slightly, I'll probably RMA it after stock stabilise and they won't offer a refund instead of repair/replacement

-sigh- feeling like I'm being too negative lately

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL if cards really died 3 months, who would ever make ROI?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Frostbobomb said:

LOL if cards really died 3 months, who would ever make ROI?

GPU I bought in December took ~3 months to ROI

 

because

1) cards prices weren't insane (yet)

2) the profitability from December to february was nuts

-sigh- feeling like I'm being too negative lately

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, leadeater said:

the common misconception is that cards will die in 3 months like this source claims which is SOOOOO clearly false.

Rewatched the video part, but he never stated such thing. He said to start throwing memory errors (elevated retention time degradation) within 4 month of usage, is exactly what he was talking about the memory retention. Meaning that it will get slower due to the errors, which certainly can affect the lifespan of the card. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Strategic said:

Rewatched the video part, but he never stated such thing. He said to start throwing memory errors (elevated retention time degradation) within 4 month of usage, is exactly what he was talking about the memory retention. Meaning that it will get slower due to the errors, which certainly can affect the lifespan of the card. 

The problem there is a lot of things, first I'll start off with what is being tested. Now you'll have to excusing any errors in this evaluation as he's jumping all over the place between research papers and some I cannot be bothered logging in to work to access as the full papers are not public.

 

In one of them he is referencing research that has being done on DDR1, DDR2 and FBDIMM, obviously all very old technology. These older memory technologies use higher operating voltages to modern memory and do actually just not last as long from my experience. Newer memory is also manufactured using better processes, how much this affects typical life span I don't know as even DDR1 and DDR2 lifespans are very long, I still have memory of this age working.

 

When it comes to GDDR memory this is actually a different memory type with different operational and functional parameters in mind, one of those being generally higher operating temperatures compared to regular DRAM.

 

Another problem is some of the data being presented is worst case, which is very problematic if you use this incorrectly. The other problem with worst case is without a huge sample size and knowing exactly how the worst case sample points were chosen we don't know what the actual underlying cause of the degradation is.

 

Then to bring it to the practical real world application mining specifically is highly sensitive to memory errors and if they happen the current job fails and is discarded, these errors are logged in the mining software. If errors really were a common thing and to the extent these research papers are being interpreted as then like I mentioned mining would not be a thing as the hardware would become non functional for the purpose before ROI.

 

Basically good science can be used badly.

 

Edit:

Not that I fundamentally disagree with the warning specifically being about RTX 30 series cards with GDDR6X as the memory does run much hotter, the problem there is this appears to be normal not abnormal (to some extent) so we have no idea how GDDR6X acts over longer term. It's just too new and I highly doubt research in much older memory technology is all that directly applicable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, leadeater said:

The problem there is a lot of things, first it'll start off with what is being tested. Now you'll have to excusing any errors in this evaluation as he's jumping all over the place between research papers and some I cannot be bothered logging in to work to access as the full papers are not public.

 

In one of them he is referencing research that has being done on DDR1, DDR2 and FBDIMM, obviously all very old technology. These older memory technologies use higher operating voltages to modern memory and do actually just not last as long from my experience. Newer memory is also manufactured using better processes, how much this affects typical life span I don't know as even DDR1 and DDR2 lifespans are very long, I still have memory of this age working.

 

When it comes to GDDR memory this is actually a different memory type with different operational and functional parameters in mind, one of those being generally higher operating temperatures compared to regular DRAM.

 

Another problem is some of the data being presented is worst case, which is very problematic if you use this incorrectly. The other problem with worst case is without a huge sample size and knowing exactly how the worst case sample points were chosen we don't know that actual underlying cause of the degradation.

 

Then to bring it to the practical real world application mining specifically is highly sensitive to memory errors and if they happen the current job fails and is discarded, these errors are logged in the mining software. If errors really were a common thing and to the extent these research papers are being interpreted as then like a mentioned mining would not be a thing as the hardware would become non functional for the purpose before ROI.

 

Actually higher DRAM density is more sensitive to heat, that's why it even plays more. Same with 7nm CPU's degrading faster due to higher voltage and heat (my 3600 degraded 0.1 ghz within 1 year from 4.3ghz allcore to 4.2 ghz at higher voltage). That's the reason the research is even more relevant because they've found high density DRAM cells to be degrading faster.

 

Quote from abstract: "Abstract: The band-to-defect tunneling (BDT) induced junction leakage current of high density DRAM cell transistors under off-state bias-temperature (B-T) stress was studied in detail for the first time. It was found that the BDT leakage current is most critical for limiting the cell transistor scaling. The new off-state B-T stress was proven to be a very effective reliability assessment tool for leakage current degradation of the DRAM cell transistor. It was also found to be useful for assessing reliability degradation of future high density DRAMs." -https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/922872

 

But thing is, CPU's generally survive way longer than anybody will probably use the CPU. So if AMD goes 5nm the cpu will prolly drop from 14 years to 13 years life expectancy same with GPU chip, so that's  no problem. But VRAM on videocards seem to die way quicker, whereas the GPU chip is pretty much the last thing that will die on a gpu. It simply will then not turn on, whereas with VRAM problems you get these weird artefacts on your screen as VRAMs are like chiplets so if one dies gpu can still work albeit with artefacts.

 

--------------

 

But I appreciate your take, otherwise I wouldn't have had the chance explaining my view on it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Strategic said:

Same with 7nm CPU's degrading faster due to higher voltage and heat (my 3600 degraded 0.1 ghz within 1 year from 4.3ghz allcore to 4.2 ghz at higher voltage). That's the reason the research is even more relevant because they've found high density DRAM cells to be degrading faster.

But you have no idea what the actual cause is, could very well be external to the CPU and be related to VRM and input voltage signal quality. 

 

10 minutes ago, Strategic said:

Actually higher DRAM density is more sensitive to heat, that's why it even plays more.

Such is why operating voltage is lower and the junction temperatures delta to case temperature is lower than older memory technology that uses 1.5V or 1.8V rather than 1.25V or 1.35V. The entire way memory operates has changed significantly to account for all these factors. This is also why DDR5 is incorporating ECC function in to the specifications itself so memory density can be increased. Each memory generation incorporates changes to allow it to work and last as long or longer than what came before.

 

10 minutes ago, Strategic said:

But VRAM on videocards seem to die way quicker

But do they? We have many GPUs in 1U servers running very long time and have not seen abnormal failures at all. And that is the case for many thousands of other server operators. Cards are not dying before they become functionally useless, not at an abnormal rate.

 

When it comes to GPUs prematurely dying this is far more likely to be related to AIB OC profiles operating the memory above rated voltages to achieve increased performance. Voltage kills much faster than heat, so muuuch faster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

44 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Such is why operating voltage is lower and the junction temperatures delta to case temperature is lower than older memory technology that uses 1.5V or 1.8V rather than 1.25V or 1.35V. The entire way memory operates has changed significantly to account for all these factors. This is also why DDR5 is incorporating ECC function in to the specifications itself so memory density can be increased. Each memory generation incorporates changes to allow it to work and last as long or longer than what came before.

Well as for the 3000 series, we've yet to find out as it appears for example 3090 to run at 100 degrees when mining and 86 degrees without overclocking memory. Older GPU seem not to have that hot VRAM temps although they still die. I've had 3 gpu's die on me past 14 years (geforce 8800 2x and gtx 280 , they all had lines (sign of vram not working properly) on my screen and couldn't fix them by putting my last one in an oven (yes that was one of the solutions you could try to fix vram). My current MSI 1080 Ti (3+ years old) is already doing with occasional lines  if I overclock my memory with +50 mhz (and coil whines now) probably because I have been mining past 1,5 month and earned €200 with it (it could handle +200 mhz before). So I stopped mining and run my memory at stock now, hoping it will survive otherwise long enough for gpu prices to recover xd. 

 

image.png.b08c967f06c5b1d0b9da50abc8356536.png

 

-----------------

 

My initial point of the topic was that Linus has made several video's stating that miners are not a worse if not better buy for second hand, because they run their gpu's at lower temperature. But he ignores the fact that VRAM temperatures are not lowered, they're actually overclocked and run higher than stock. For example 3090 without overclocking memory it should run around 86 degrees or lower. Whereas miners that want increase their mining efficiency overclock their memory as that is the most important thing to overclock for mining.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Strategic said:

couldn't fix them by putting my last one in an oven (yes that was one of the solutions you could try to fix vram).

That's disappointing, my 8800 GTS was fixed this way, still works today (not that I use it lol).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Strategic said:

last one in an oven (yes that was one of the solutions you could try to fix vram).

You're not actually doing that to "fix" the vram. Heat cycles will cause solder joints to get stiff and eventually start to crack and break. Baking the GPU melts the solder to fix cracks and breaks in the solder. 

Think about it. If heat kills VRAM, how does higher heat fix VRAM?

I'm not actually trying to be as grumpy as it seems.

I will find your mentions of Ikea or Gnome and I will /s post. 

Project Hot Box

CPU 13900k, Motherboard Gigabyte Aorus Elite AX, RAM CORSAIR Vengeance 4x16gb 5200 MHZ, GPU Zotac RTX 4090 Trinity OC, Case Fractal Pop Air XL, Storage Sabrent Rocket Q4 2tbCORSAIR Force Series MP510 1920GB NVMe, CORSAIR FORCE Series MP510 960GB NVMe, PSU CORSAIR HX1000i, Cooling Corsair XC8 CPU block, Bykski GPU block, 360mm and 280mm radiator, Displays Odyssey G9, LG 34UC98-W 34-Inch,Keyboard Mountain Everest Max, Mouse Mountain Makalu 67, Sound AT2035, Massdrop 6xx headphones, Go XLR 

Oppbevaring

CPU i9-9900k, Motherboard, ASUS Rog Maximus Code XI, RAM, 48GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB 3200 mhz (2x16)+(2x8) GPUs Asus ROG Strix 2070 8gb, PNY 1080, Nvidia 1080, Case Mining Frame, 2x Storage Samsung 860 Evo 500 GB, PSU Corsair RM1000x and RM850x, Cooling Asus Rog Ryuo 240 with Noctua NF-12 fans

 

Why is the 5800x so hot?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, what science? What peer reviewed council gave way to this objectively bad argument and premise?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I don't think this is "news" as in actual new information,  and in my opinion the biggest problem is people not knowing what they're doing, overclocking to get more $/t ,not having adequate cooling and for good measure put a lot of voltage and use dodgy "mining bios".

 

Of course it will degrade or outright kill gpus (which is why I'd never buy used gpus, from strangers,  because especially ebay & co is where those usually end up)

 

33 minutes ago, Zulu-Cheese-Alpha-IV said:

Sorry, what science?

"Youtube"

 

 

The direction tells you... the direction

-Scott Manley, 2021

 

Softwares used:

Corsair Link (Anime Edition) 

MSI Afterburner 

OpenRGB

Lively Wallpaper 

OBS Studio

Shutter Encoder

Avidemux

FSResizer

Audacity 

VLC

WMP

GIMP

HWiNFO64

Paint

3D Paint

GitHub Desktop 

Superposition 

Prime95

Aida64

GPUZ

CPUZ

Generic Logviewer

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the card lasts years mining, it isnt taking anything off its life span. As it lived through it already.

 

Main RIg Corsair Air 540, I7 9900k, ASUS ROG Maximus XI Hero, G.Skill Ripjaws 3600 32GB, 3090FE, EVGA 1000G5, Acer Nitro XZ3 2560 x 1440@240hz 

 

Spare RIg Lian Li O11 AIR MINI, I7 4790K, Asus Maximus VI Extreme, G.Skill Ares 2400 32Gb, EVGA 1080ti, 1080sc 1070sc & 1060 SSC, EVGA 850GA, Acer KG251Q 1920x1080@240hz

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×