Return-Path: Received: from mail-vc0-f169.google.com ([209.85.220.169] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP-TLS id 4739718 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 18:23:46 +0200 Received: by vcbfl10 with SMTP id fl10so1165222vcb.28 for ; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 09:26:18 -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=elFBk0gA1ByLViqzu9nl+h5veLuolBwpjmkTbAM8Ggk=; b=j2J+KWwDWQaqAusfufmo4MwPPLCHKNKdhGZBwyHYjGPfQEU1dDyggat55fDQ7C7xYB 8Yo3t4vCxO8NC5u2xMMAIS9BVhPzHnk1ajEaxG3DnCkFkNRl+nPT/ATR9QzJ7qNLcS5k x+8s88gbCwXBolGtkpngQ/SOsGmcecDhmtQ02LfDqgp8AkTLOOGI03IFvCGY8X5ZGGoI D2mFPwiw1E3gmEUhaSG6oZv7AtCslW3Zhz5dabtEZuiO8VITn19qcIGwjAFKs4+sRcmi hElJwPXyziMfqTQ7SVOEcOSxu0UHBaYcXiSqi/rJRiVpCmPExdPUBY2t3Jkf6UAhMIyE 6/+Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.70.242 with SMTP id p18mr5879244vdu.97.1339172778096; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 09:26:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.149.70 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 09:26:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 12:26:18 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [AE] Why a raytraced renderer? From: rendernyc To: After Effects Mail List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec501c52cbb375104c1f8750e --bcaec501c52cbb375104c1f8750e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 CPU based render? On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Greg Balint wrote: > Danny, could you do a test for me on the same project file with the 580 > turned off? Just to see how much the Nvidia cards are helping the situation? > > ////Greg Balint > ///Art Director / Motion Graphics Designer > delRAZOR.com/ > > On Jun 8, 2012, at 12:16 PM, rendernyc wrote: > > if ANYONE has one of the cards tested already or a different one and > wouldnt mind popping off a render please email me so we can get more results > > danny > > On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Andrew Embury wrote: > >> Fantastic! >> >> Thank you ever so much for doing this. This is truly phenomenal of the >> user group to come together to make this all possible. >> >> Cheers. >> >> - Andrew >> >> >> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:59 AM, rendernyc wrote: >> >>> The 480 uses more power than the 5XX >>> im expecting the 570 to be about the same speed as the 480 while using >>> less power >>> >>> waiting for some tests on that one >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:57 AM, rendernyc wrote: >>> >>>> we had the 580 at 15:07 >>>> so 480 was about 8% slower >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Andrew Embury wrote: >>>> >>>>> For the performance to cost ratio....WOW! That's phenomenal! >>>>> >>>>> Now, the 580 is cutting that time by 3 minutes is that correct? >>>>> >>>>> Cheers. >>>>> >>>>> - Andrew >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:36 AM, rendernyc wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> 480 in a 12 core macpro was 16:21 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Andrew Embury wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> 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 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 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 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 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> danny princz >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> exposedideas.com >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Animator & Editor >>>>>>>>> www.teddygage.com >>>>>>>>> Brooklyn >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> danny princz >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> exposedideas.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> danny princz >>>>>> >>>>>> exposedideas.com >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> danny princz >>>> >>>> exposedideas.com >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> danny princz >>> >>> exposedideas.com >>> >> >> > > > -- > danny princz > > exposedideas.com > > -- danny princz exposedideas.com --bcaec501c52cbb375104c1f8750e Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable CPU based render?


On Fri, Jun 8, 201= 2 at 12:24 PM, Greg Balint <greg@delrazor.com> wrote:
Danny, could you do a test for me on the same= project file with the 580 turned off? Just to see how much the Nvidia card= s are helping the situation?=

////Greg Balint
///Art Director / Motion Graphics Designer
delRAZOR.com/

On Jun 8, 2012, at 12:= 16 PM, rendernyc <rendernyc@gmail.com> wrote:

if ANYONE = has one of the cards tested already or a different one and wouldnt mind pop= ping off a render please email me so we can get more results

danny

On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 12:06 P= M, Andrew Embury <aembury@gmail.com> wrote:
Fantastic!

Thank you ever so much for= doing this. This is truly phenomenal of the user group to come together to= make this all possible.

Cheers.

- Andrew


On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:59 AM, r= endernyc <rendernyc@gmail.com> wrote:
The 480 uses more power than the 5XX
im = expecting the 570 to be about the same speed as the 480 while using less po= wer

waiting for some tests on that one


On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:57 AM, rendernyc <rend= ernyc@gmail.com> wrote:
we had the 580 at 15:07=A0
so 480 was ab= out 8% slower



On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Andrew Embury <aembury@gmail.com><= /span> wrote:
For the performance to cost ratio....WOW! Th= at's phenomenal!

Now, the 580 is cutting that time by 3 minutes = is that correct?

Cheers.

- Andrew


On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:36 AM, r= endernyc <rendernyc@gmail.com> wrote:
480 in a 12 core macpro was 16:21
<= br>
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Andrew E= mbury <aembury@gmail.com> wrote:
What about the 480? Did that not score betwe= en 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><= /span> wrote:
interesting
thats why we need more resul= ts...

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 =3D 780 seconds


GTX 580 - 3 GB VRAM - clock speed 866 MHZ

core i7 940 (4 cor= es) oc'd to 3.7 gHZ

render time 13 min 50 seconds =3D 830 seconds


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...


= On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:07 AM, rendernyc <rendernyc@gmail.com><= /span> 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&#= 39;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 "offi= cially" talk about is the currently shipping q4000


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



<= font color=3D"#888888">--
danny princz

exposedideas.com



=
--
Animator & Editor
www.teddygage.= com
Brooklyn




--
danny princz

exposedideas.com




<= /div>--
danny princz

exposedideas.com




<= /div>--
danny princz

exposedideas.com



<= font color=3D"#888888">--
danny princz

exposedideas.com



--
= danny princz

e= xposedideas.com



--
danny princz

exposedideas.com
--bcaec501c52cbb375104c1f8750e--