On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Robert W. Walker <robertw@walkersound.com> wrote:

Interesting:  our MacPro 3,1 (2.8ghz) running AE 11.01 on OS 10.7.4,
32gb RAM with a Quadro 4000 just rendered the scene in 17:23.  That same
configuration on your machine took 45:23 according to the results
spreadsheet?

Robert W. Walker
Los Angeles


> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [AE] Why a raytraced renderer?
> From: rendernyc <rendernyc@gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, June 08, 2012 1:12 pm
> To: "After Effects Mail List" <AE-List@media-motion.tv>
>
>
> Im not sure what you mean by explicity testing the GPU.
> I didnt build this for benchmarking purposes but rather had it laying
> around so just started testing some cards
>
> The comp is extruded shape layers with some lights, shadows, reflections,
> motion blur and DoF being raytraced.
> Its not relying on any outside footage or really doing anything else other
> than rendering the 3d objects
> its heavier than just some text, but if thats all that "you" will be using
> the raytracer for than that would be a better benchmark.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Teddy Gage <teddygage@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > ah, just to clarify, the robot project took 48 min vs 13 - the AEBENCHCS6
> > is closer to 5 minutes on a gtx 580; I have to look up the exact times if
> > anyone's interested
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Teddy Gage <teddygage@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Danny, I'm not convinced your scene is explicitly testing the GPU, have
> >> you tried the benchmark file I posted a while ago? I'd be curious to see
> >> your results on it. I actually did a migration test and I got the exact
> >> same render times in two different machines with the same GPU. Not so with
> >> this robot project...
> >>
> >> http://www.teddygage.com/AEBENCHCS6/
> >>
> >> And Greg (Balint), using the CPU engine for raytrace, the above benchmark
> >> project took 48 minutes vs. 13 minutes with GPU on, on a highly overclocked
> >> core i7 3930K @ 4.7 ghz
> >>
> >> One thing is clear, the CS6 engine is optimized solely for GPUs. This is
> >> significantly slower than any CPU renderer I use like mental ray or Vray,
> >> for a scene an order of magnitude less complicated. However with GPU on it
> >> is certainly comparable / possibly faster for some situations.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Greg Balint <greg@delrazor.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Wow. Alright, thanks!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ////Greg Balint
> >>> ///Art Director / Motion Graphics Designer
> >>> delRAZOR.com/
> >>>
> >>> On Jun 8, 2012, at 12:30 PM, rendernyc <rendernyc@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> did a little test with lloyd the other day that had some extuded text
> >>> with a reflective floor. 2008 macpro CPU render was abotu 15mins. he turned
> >>> on his 8800GT that is not supported and it rendered in about 7 mins. on a
> >>> q4000 the same scene took 37 seconds
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 12:26 PM, rendernyc <rendernyc@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> CPU based render?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 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 cards 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 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 <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, 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!
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 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 = 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
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>> danny princz
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> exposedideas.com
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> danny princz
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> exposedideas.com
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> danny princz
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> exposedideas.com
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> danny princz
> >>>>>
> >>>>> exposedideas.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> danny princz
> >>>>
> >>>> exposedideas.com
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> danny princz
> >>>
> >>> exposedideas.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Animator & Editor
> >> www.teddygage.com
> >> Brooklyn
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Animator & Editor
> > www.teddygage.com
> > Brooklyn
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> danny princz
>
> exposedideas.com


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