Return-Path: <aembury@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-we0-f169.google.com ([74.125.82.169] verified)
  by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10)
  with ESMTP-TLS id 4739588 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 17:28:55 +0200
Received: by wefh52 with SMTP id h52so741537wef.28
        for <AE-List@media-motion.tv>; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 08:31:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        bh=zaaELxlX9+WPqHH4xIENNbATmUEPkMkTvLTpZ6OEGoM=;
        b=AVc7OTqsHfJPu4i4WBFoVgKoF2WXnKJYwcpnQyS5wDJroTZUAzZEP1kTB1GN31Q5fR
         /B+S52D7DLY1ajpOMY3UKKOypxqvZxp3Oy1+eO0fQU4ooj94jQ2HrtVFvhUyw0GHUd7B
         NMwA9lKIzHdKJdMPw5bP33yJD8G3z9r6QTC+A7D7C3wRTO/i32Fcfs7MzA2DwnX+6sDQ
         DMukVb9OfY4iUY/9BBX+xG88gEF5lQvv9KcfCbRRk5bX2Q+UWT08LAuiNjQpIZP0jW5L
         UNlJoRFy8win0DNW35qOjkb13V6tJqVgEVCFkW8lvxMPukOOD9cqDxMCBTnsH8HNbmLW
         LsNQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.180.84.35 with SMTP id v3mr1357664wiy.20.1339169488517; Fri,
 08 Jun 2012 08:31:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.216.76 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 08:31:28 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <list-4739575@media-motion.tv>
References: <list-4739575@media-motion.tv>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 11:31:28 -0400
Message-ID: <CAGCkTearONAZfvPB43WhgnSqFTGn9SNvZOuG1G6EdbrX1+d=Og@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [AE] Why a raytraced renderer?
From: Andrew Embury <aembury@gmail.com>
To: After Effects Mail List <AE-List@media-motion.tv>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04428b30a83af304c1f7b186

--f46d04428b30a83af304c1f7b186
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

What about the 480? Did that not score between the 580 and 680?

I'd be very interested to see that.

Cheers.

- Andrew


On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:28 AM, rendernyc <rendernyc@gmail.com> wrote:

> interesting
> thats why we need more results...
>
> the 680 tested in a z800 rendered in 17:34
> a 580 in an 2008 mac pro was 15:07
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Teddy Gage <teddygage@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> GTX 680 - 2 GB VRAM - clock speed 1096 MHZ
>>
>> core i7 3930K (6 logical cores) overclocked to 4.7 gHZ
>>
>> render time : 13 min 5 seconds = 780 seconds
>>
>>
>> GTX 580 - 3 GB VRAM - clock speed 866 MHZ
>>
>> core i7 940 (4 cores) oc'd to 3.7 gHZ
>>
>> render time 13 min 50 seconds = 830 seconds
>>
>>
>> So these results seem to imply there is a disk and / or CPU bottleneck in
>> your benchmark project, or there is something else going on. Maybe RAM
>> plays a factor. Because in my own benchmark tests with a different project,
>> I get different results, where the GTX 580 is faster, not the 680 in the
>> faster machine. Interesting...
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:07 AM, rendernyc <rendernyc@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> email sent
>>>
>>> thanks
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Dave Bittner <dave@pixelworkshop.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm running a flashed 470 from eBay. I'll run the test and send you the
>>>> results.
>>>>
>>>> On Jun 7, 2012, at 5:41PM, rendernyc wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > yup, been testing lots of diff cards with the raytracer.
>>>> > want to run a test on your 570 for the chart?
>>>> >
>>>> > have the 285, 480, 580, 680, q4000 and q4800 so far
>>>> >
>>>> > was just saying that the only card someone from adobe could
>>>> "officially" talk about is the currently shipping q4000
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +---End of message---+
>>>> To unsubscribe send any message to <ae-list-off@media-motion.tv>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> danny princz
>>>
>>> exposedideas.com
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Animator & Editor
>> www.teddygage.com
>> Brooklyn
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> danny princz
>
> exposedideas.com
>

--f46d04428b30a83af304c1f7b186
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

What about the 480? Did that not score between the 580 and 680?<br><br>I&#3=
9;d be very interested to see that.<br><br>Cheers.<br><br>- Andrew<br><br><=
br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:28 AM, rendernyc <s=
pan dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:rendernyc@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank=
">rendernyc@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">interesting<div>thats why we need more resul=
ts...</div><div><br></div><div>the 680 tested in a z800 rendered in 17:34<d=
iv>
a 580 in an 2008 mac pro was 15:07</div><div><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_qu=
ote">On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Teddy Gage <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a h=
ref=3D"mailto:teddygage@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">teddygage@gmail.com</a=
>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>

<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">GTX 680 - 2 GB VRAM - clock speed 1096 MHZ<b=
r><br>core i7 3930K (6 logical cores) overclocked to 4.7 gHZ<br><br>render =
time : 13 min 5 seconds =3D 780 seconds<br>

<br><br>GTX 580 - 3 GB VRAM - clock speed 866 MHZ<br><br>core i7 940 (4 cor=
es) oc&#39;d to 3.7 gHZ<br>


<br>render time 13 min 50 seconds =3D 830 seconds<br><br><br>So these=20
results seem to imply there is a disk and / or CPU bottleneck in your=20
benchmark project, or there is something else going on. Maybe RAM plays a
 factor. Because in my own benchmark tests with a different project, I=20
get different results, where the GTX 580 is faster, not the 680 in the=20
faster machine. Interesting...<div><div><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">=
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:07 AM, rendernyc <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D=
"mailto:rendernyc@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">rendernyc@gmail.com</a>&gt;<=
/span> wrote:<br>



<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">email sent<div><br></div><div>thanks<div><di=
v><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Dave =
Bittner <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:dave@pixelworkshop.com" tar=
get=3D"_blank">dave@pixelworkshop.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>




<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">I&#39;m running a flashed 470 from eBay. I&#=
39;ll run the test and send you the results.<br>
<br>
On Jun 7, 2012, at 5:41PM, rendernyc wrote:<br>
<br>
&gt; yup, been testing lots of diff cards with the raytracer.<br>
&gt; want to run a test on your 570 for the chart?<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; have the 285, 480, 580, 680, q4000 and q4800 so far<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; was just saying that the only card someone from adobe could &quot;offi=
cially&quot; talk about is the currently shipping q4000<br>
<br>
<br>
+---End of message---+<br>
To unsubscribe send any message to &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:ae-list-off@media-=
motion.tv" target=3D"_blank">ae-list-off@media-motion.tv</a>&gt;<br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"><div><br></div></div></div><span><=
font color=3D"#888888">-- <br>danny princz<br><br><a href=3D"http://exposed=
ideas.com" target=3D"_blank">exposedideas.com</a><br>
</font></span></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"><span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font color=
=3D"#888888"><br></font></span></div></div><span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font col=
or=3D"#888888"><span><font color=3D"#888888">-- <br><span>Animator &amp; Ed=
itor</span><br>
<span><a href=3D"http://www.teddygage.com" target=3D"_blank">www.teddygage.=
com</a></span><br>


<span>Brooklyn</span><br><br>
</font></span></font></span></blockquote></div><span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font=
 color=3D"#888888"><br><br clear=3D"all"><div><br></div>-- <br>danny princz=
<br><br><a href=3D"http://exposedideas.com" target=3D"_blank">exposedideas.=
com</a><br>

</font></span></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br>

--f46d04428b30a83af304c1f7b186--