platform/device versions mismatch
Hi

Having downloaded the 295.73 drivers for my GeForce 9600M GT (and on another machine, my 9500 GT) I have a mismatch between my CL_DEVICE_VERSION and my CL_PLATFORM_VERSION

The platform version is "OpenCL 1.1 CUDA 4.1.1" whilst the more believable device version is "OpenCL 1.0 CUDA"

Ever since the new drivers have been installed I've been getting some very odd compilation errors, which I won't go into here, just yet (proprietary code, for a start - but I'm sure I'll be able to demonstrate with something non-proprietary, given time). The point is, it all compiled no problem with the previous drivers.

My question, if you'd be so good ... does this mismatch look wrong to you? Seems odd to see OpenCL 1.1 mentioned on a card which was sitting on my desk before 1.1 was released

Something else which looks wrong is the CL_DEVICE_IMAGE3D_MAX_* values I'm seeing ...
* CL_DEVICE_IMAGE3D_MAX_WIDTH is 2048 (ok, good)
* CL_DEVICE_IMAGE3D_MAX_HEIGHT is 2048 too (again, fine)
* but CL_DEVICE_IMAGE3D_MAX_DEPTH is *also* a somewhat unbelievable 2048 (16, surely?)

Any input much appreciated

TIA
Neil
Hi



Having downloaded the 295.73 drivers for my GeForce 9600M GT (and on another machine, my 9500 GT) I have a mismatch between my CL_DEVICE_VERSION and my CL_PLATFORM_VERSION



The platform version is "OpenCL 1.1 CUDA 4.1.1" whilst the more believable device version is "OpenCL 1.0 CUDA"



Ever since the new drivers have been installed I've been getting some very odd compilation errors, which I won't go into here, just yet (proprietary code, for a start - but I'm sure I'll be able to demonstrate with something non-proprietary, given time). The point is, it all compiled no problem with the previous drivers.



My question, if you'd be so good ... does this mismatch look wrong to you? Seems odd to see OpenCL 1.1 mentioned on a card which was sitting on my desk before 1.1 was released



Something else which looks wrong is the CL_DEVICE_IMAGE3D_MAX_* values I'm seeing ...

* CL_DEVICE_IMAGE3D_MAX_WIDTH is 2048 (ok, good)

* CL_DEVICE_IMAGE3D_MAX_HEIGHT is 2048 too (again, fine)

* but CL_DEVICE_IMAGE3D_MAX_DEPTH is *also* a somewhat unbelievable 2048 (16, surely?)



Any input much appreciated



TIA

Neil

#1
Posted 03/05/2012 01:38 PM   
[quote name='wadoNeil' date='05 March 2012 - 02:38 PM' timestamp='1330954695' post='1378836']
My question, if you'd be so good ... does this mismatch look wrong to you? Seems odd to see OpenCL 1.1 mentioned on a card which was sitting on my desk before 1.1 was released[/quote]

No, that's actually fine, see my post over [url="http://forums.nvidia.com/index.php?showtopic=207323&st=0&p=1278308&#entry1278308"]here[/url]. Also, OpenCL 1.1 defines some minimum hardware requirements that of course can be fulfilled by a card that was manufactured before the OpenCL 1.1 specification was released.

[quote name='wadoNeil' date='05 March 2012 - 02:38 PM' timestamp='1330954695' post='1378836']
Something else which looks wrong is the CL_DEVICE_IMAGE3D_MAX_* values I'm seeing ...
* CL_DEVICE_IMAGE3D_MAX_WIDTH is 2048 (ok, good)
* CL_DEVICE_IMAGE3D_MAX_HEIGHT is 2048 too (again, fine)
* but CL_DEVICE_IMAGE3D_MAX_DEPTH is *also* a somewhat unbelievable 2048 (16, surely?)
[/quote]

That's fine, too. 3D texture can be large these days. Actually, 2048 is the required minimum, see the [url="http://www.khronos.org/registry/cl/sdk/1.0/docs/man/xhtml/clGetDeviceInfo.html"]clGetDeviceInfo[/url] documentation.
[quote name='wadoNeil' date='05 March 2012 - 02:38 PM' timestamp='1330954695' post='1378836']

My question, if you'd be so good ... does this mismatch look wrong to you? Seems odd to see OpenCL 1.1 mentioned on a card which was sitting on my desk before 1.1 was released



No, that's actually fine, see my post over here. Also, OpenCL 1.1 defines some minimum hardware requirements that of course can be fulfilled by a card that was manufactured before the OpenCL 1.1 specification was released.



[quote name='wadoNeil' date='05 March 2012 - 02:38 PM' timestamp='1330954695' post='1378836']

Something else which looks wrong is the CL_DEVICE_IMAGE3D_MAX_* values I'm seeing ...

* CL_DEVICE_IMAGE3D_MAX_WIDTH is 2048 (ok, good)

* CL_DEVICE_IMAGE3D_MAX_HEIGHT is 2048 too (again, fine)

* but CL_DEVICE_IMAGE3D_MAX_DEPTH is *also* a somewhat unbelievable 2048 (16, surely?)





That's fine, too. 3D texture can be large these days. Actually, 2048 is the required minimum, see the clGetDeviceInfo documentation.

#2
Posted 03/05/2012 01:52 PM   
Danke eybex

Neil
Danke eybex



Neil

#3
Posted 03/05/2012 02:34 PM   
Scroll To Top