Danny, what can you tell us about your test?

I'd be curious to see results for two different tests: one with an animated environment layer and one with a static environment layer. The animated environment layer will tax the bandwidth to the VRAM, which can be the bottleneck rather than CUDA cores in some real-world uses.

________________________________________
From: After Effects Mail List [AE-List@media-motion.tv] On Behalf Of rendernyc [rendernyc@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 12:00 PM
To: After Effects Mail List
Subject: Re: [AE] [OT] Benchmarking AE CUDA on nVidia GTX 580 vs. GTX 680 - SHOCKING RESULTS

the 590 is 2 580s on one card. so it should be way faster than a 580
havent tested any multi card setups yet but am interested in seeing that.
i would have thought the 590 would be much faster than it was in this test


On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Andrew Embury <aembury@gmail.com<mailto:aembury@gmail.com>> wrote:
Why is the 590 beating everyone else out?

Could it be just a software support issue?

If that's the case, should I wait for the 680 to catch up or just splurge on the 590?

Thanks guys for the time and patience.

Cheers.

- Andrew



On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:34 PM, rendernyc <rendernyc@gmail.com<mailto:rendernyc@gmail.com>> wrote:
we did a little bit of testing on a raytrace scene with the q4000, GTX285 480 490 580 590 &680

heres a chart with some results so far
https://twitter.com/rendernyc/status/208421894792298496/photo/1/large


On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Andrew Embury <aembury@gmail.com<mailto:aembury@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hey Teddy,

Anything more to report? I'm looking at building my new PC for the sole purpose of AE/ C4D work and I'm curious to know if you have anything more to report between the GTX 680 and the GTX 580.

Thank you ever so much,

- Andrew


On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Todd Kopriva <kopriva@adobe.com<mailto:kopriva@adobe.com>> wrote:
I'd be curious to see a test with an animated environment map, since that will tax the VRAM and the memory bus to the same.


From: After Effects Mail List [mailto:AE-List@media-motion.tv<mailto:AE-List@media-motion.tv>] On Behalf Of Teddy Gage
Sent: 26May2012 11:50
To: After Effects Mail List
Subject: [AE] [OT] Benchmarking AE CUDA on nVidia GTX 580 vs. GTX 680 - SHOCKING RESULTS

    Well, shocking if you care about this sort of thing. So after some struggles getting the GTX 680 to work with AE CS6 11.0.1 I finally got it working. How would the 3 GB VRAM GTX 580, with 500 CUDA cores stack up to the brand new 2 GB VRAM GTX 680 with 1,500 CUDA cores?

Would it be worth upgrading if you already owned a 580? Would the extra 1 GB VRAM make a difference for the older card?

Well I came up with a benchmark (228K) available HERE<http://www.teddygage.com/AEBENCHCS6/> that maxes out the GPU and tests your CUDA processing ability. You will need about 900 MB local space for the output and the new 11.0.1 patch (probably).

Now a lot of figures are at play here but with the project using 100% GPU and 25% CPU I think it's a decent bench for comparing graphics cards. Here are the results:

GTX 680 (2GB) = 6 min. 11 sec to render
GTX 680 (2GB) (overclocked) = 5 min. 52 s
GTX 580 (3GB) = 5 min. 42 s

So the GTX 580 with 3GB VRAM is faster. Now it's hard to say whether that's because the architecture is more compute-friendly, or the extra GB of VRAM makes that much of a difference.

Considering I got the 580 for about $415 shipped used on eBay, I'd say for now nobody needs to rush out and buy a 680. It's performance is nearly as good, and great if you are focusing on games, but not for purely compute / cuda / mercury in CS6

I would love to hear some results on a 4GB 680, a 590 or a 690, let me know

TG

--
Animator & Editor
www.teddygage.com<http://www.teddygage.com>
Brooklyn




--
danny princz

exposedideas.com<http://exposedideas.com>




--
danny princz

exposedideas.com<http://exposedideas.com>

+---End of message---+
To unsubscribe send any message to <ae-list-off@media-motion.tv>