Return-Path: Received: from mail-ob0-f169.google.com ([209.85.214.169] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP-TLS id 4739888 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 20:54:46 +0200 Received: by obbwd18 with SMTP id wd18so3029044obb.28 for ; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 11:57:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=U1ijxp0VM8lIsnVABj+nbugK0wEBKsY89J9kCrynkhE=; b=wX/YCZLPVjDtKhjOvMJ6JuMCixt+VutZjrlhi5QrET9i1GJ3h0sPoDHSPGIePWn/MY EtBNAEB4Xvi2/WLfdF1CpWMhMKa9OKEugM5xP5T3XGWZOHFWU2opEQu5dPMxpqZxfgDm OS1B1QiD9zd7pg/Qu1ZBorVvAQuZeuHqzhPBsNRmJX3hAqWMVJKGbfHEIZ6p9peLEqGg eu8U/Ibudlh3+2W1pNKj3GSapB+whuKReMf/a6Ume+LB1TXyTWjlqjKdSfO58kHYCpR+ rv1UVjtJkfdHr8jGZUCZOVo9ONVoKAOTjjWmzIQEE0HNYX3rTBhVfqpcIF+udyL6Ixu6 ZEQQ== Received: by 10.60.28.162 with SMTP id c2mr8340565oeh.3.1339181836383; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 11:57:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.80.167 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 11:56:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Teddy Gage Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 14:56:36 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [AE] Why a raytraced renderer? To: After Effects Mail List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8ff1c762a5b46504c1fa91dd --e89a8ff1c762a5b46504c1fa91dd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 ah that one's mine... different results than the one being discussed, ask rendernyc for his project to compare on the chart. it's a robot scene. the render times on mine (which has glossy reflections and refraction) are around 5 minutes, 42 seconds for the GTX 580, and just over 6 minutes for the GTX 680, if you did want to try that scene On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Robert W. Walker wrote: > http://www.teddygage.com/AEBENCHCS6/ > > > -------- Original Message -------- > > Subject: Re: [AE] Why a raytraced renderer? > > From: Steve Oakley > > Date: Fri, June 08, 2012 2:32 pm > > To: "After Effects Mail List" > > > > > > can you send me a link to the project... > > > > S > > > > > > On Jun 8, 2012, at 11:16 AM, 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 > 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 > > > +---End of message---+ > To unsubscribe send any message to > -- Animator & Editor www.teddygage.com Brooklyn --e89a8ff1c762a5b46504c1fa91dd Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ah that one's mine... different results than the one being discussed, a= sk rendernyc for his project to compare on the chart. it's a robot scen= e.

the render times on mine (which has glossy reflections and refrac= tion) are around 5 minutes, 42 seconds for the GTX 580, and just over 6 min= utes for the GTX 680, if you did want to try that scene

On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Robert W. Wa= lker <robertw@walkersound.com> wrote:
http://w= ww.teddygage.com/AEBENCHCS6/

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [AE] Why a raytraced renderer?
> From: Steve Oakley <steveo@practicali.com>
> Date: Fri, June 08, 2012 2:32 pm
> To: "After Effects Mail List" <AE-List@media-motion.tv>
>
>
> can you send me a link t= o the project...
>
> S
>
>
> On Jun 8, 2012, at 11:16 AM, 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 re= sults
> >
> > danny
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Andrew Embury <aembury@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Fantastic!
> >
> > Thank you ever so much for doing this. This is truly phenomenal o= f the user group to come together to make this all possible.
> >
> > Cheers.
> >
> > - Andrew
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:59 AM, rendernyc <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 power
> >
> > waiting for some tests on that one
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:57 AM, rendernyc <rendernyc@gmail.com> 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 <aembury@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For the performance to cost ratio....WOW! That's phenomenal!<= br> > >
> > 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 <rendernyc@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 480 in a 12 core macpro was 16:21
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Andrew Embury <aembury@gmail.com> 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 <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 =3D 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 =3D 830 seconds
> >
> >
> > So these results seem to imply there is a disk and / or CPU bottl= eneck 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 pro= ject, 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 an= d 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
> >
> > exposedidea= s.com
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Animator & Editor
> > www.teddyg= age.com
> > Brooklyn
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > danny princz
> >
> > exposedidea= s.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > danny princz
> >
> > exposedidea= s.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > danny princz
> >
> > exposedidea= s.com
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > danny princz
> >
> > exposedidea= s.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > danny princz
> >
> > exposedidea= s.com


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



--
Animator & Editor
www.teddygage.com
Brooklyn

--e89a8ff1c762a5b46504c1fa91dd--