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 4740165 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Sat, 09 Jun 2012 00:15:59 +0200 Received: by obbwd18 with SMTP id wd18so3259246obb.28 for ; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 15:18:31 -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=Fh2SQbmoCkVwcFbsZnlmrnOtVs21o1CVye82zA/HQYg=; b=FdHS8PRlwCdjY5u+WdCWnSQcbMG9ZpwJHs4Il/POozd+zefBym2rFRSwVuUNwszJCY 7eGIsk7pEzCza8C3z7DxRKATVCR52R0hyVsEY/XwpCi4dbUINZF5Q+tv5wM1vzbcy2XU WR7l61SlhCnF+nV2BMB6UUBMgWRcGKs6JvK/82sIO2UZLUi1c9pnWeEVxVBxWqOZJvpa ehcHvm31sKO1TKevjIIEjv2Jd4u7JcTRHxVIcN/QDMM+C6GfqWtakbrNuzPXD2QptMWG 7pMJllh64PCgY6Vmmuf4zIOWVM7s9f9ewWgq/33Gg6Se2JplJa7+1Z3QnLgp/DjWllfp 2pwQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.145.4 with SMTP id sq4mr8596970obb.76.1339193911044; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 15:18:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.182.193.99 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 15:18:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 18:18:31 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [AE] Why a raytraced renderer? - Same config, way different results From: rendernyc To: After Effects Mail List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d044631805a6b5004c1fd61e9 --f46d044631805a6b5004c1fd61e9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 we had a time of 1 hr for a 4800 and about 45mins i think for the 4000 so that would be about right for the 4000 in your AE preview prefs it shows you what is being used for opengl vs cuda On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 6:15 PM, Steve Oakley wrote: > I just rendered on a 3.1 mac with QFX 4800 and Q4000. my time was 43:10 > > seems like maybe the 4800 was being used, or perhaps bogging things down. > is there a GPU activity meter like GPU-Z on PC ? > > S > > On Jun 8, 2012, at 4:40 PM, rendernyc wrote: > > 17:23 for the robot on a mac w single q4000? > did you render more than once? > > On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Robert W. Walker 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 >> > Date: Fri, June 08, 2012 1:12 pm >> > To: "After Effects Mail List" >> > >> > >> > 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 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 >> 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 >> wrote: >> > >> >> > >>> Wow. Alright, thanks! >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> ////Greg Balint >> > >>> ///Art Director / Motion Graphics Designer >> > >>> delRAZOR.com/ >> > >>> >> > >>> On Jun 8, 2012, at 12:30 PM, rendernyc 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 >> wrote: >> > >>> >> > >>>> 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 < >> 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 >> > > > > -- > danny princz > > exposedideas.com > > > -- danny princz exposedideas.com --f46d044631805a6b5004c1fd61e9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable we had a time of 1 hr for a 4800 and about 45mins i think for the 4000 so t= hat would be about right for the 4000

in your AE preview= prefs it shows you what is being used for opengl vs cuda

On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 6:15 PM, Steve Oakley <steveo@practicali.com> wrote:
I just rendered on a 3.1 mac with QFX 4= 800 and Q4000. my time was 43:10

seems like maybe the 48= 00 was being used, or perhaps bogging things down. is there a GPU activity = meter like GPU-Z on PC ?

S
<= /font>

On Jun 8, 2012, at 4= :40 PM, rendernyc wrote:

17:23 for the r= obot on a mac w single q4000?
did you render more than once?

On Fri, Ju= n 8, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Robert W. Walker <robertw@walkersound.com&= gt; wrote:
Interesting: =A0our MacPro 3,1 (2.8ghz) runn= ing AE 11.01 on OS 10.7.4,
32gb RAM with a Quadro 4000 just rendered the scene in 17:23. =A0That same<= br> 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<= br> > around so just started testing some cards
>
> The comp is extruded shape layers with some lights, shadows, reflectio= ns,
> motion blur and DoF being raytraced.
> Its not relying on any outside footage or really doing anything else o= ther
> 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 AE= BENCHCS6
> > 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:<= br> > >
> >> 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 abo= ve benchmark
> >> project took 48 minutes vs. 13 minutes with GPU on, on a high= ly overclocked
> >> core i7 3930K @ 4.7 ghz
> >>
> >> One thing is clear, the CS6 engine is optimized solely for GP= Us. 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 w= ith 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
> >>> delRAZ= OR.com/
> >>>
> >>> On Jun 8, 2012, at 12:30 PM, rendernyc <rendernyc@gmail.com> wrot= e:
> >>>
> >>> 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 ab= out 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 pro= ject file with the
> >>>>> 580 turned off? Just to see how much the Nvidia c= ards 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&= gt; 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 &l= t;aembury@gmail.com<= /a>>wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Fantastic!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thank you ever so much for doing this. This i= s 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 &l= t;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, renderny= c <rendernyc@gm= ail.com>wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> we had the 580 at 15:07
> >>>>>>>> so 480 was about 8% slower
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Andr= ew Embury <aembur= y@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 <rend= ernyc@gmail.com>wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 480 in a 12 core macpro was 1= 6:21
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:31 = AM, Andrew Embury <aembury@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> What about the 480? Did t= hat not score between the 580 and 680?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I'd be very intereste= d to see that.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Cheers.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> - Andrew
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11= :28 AM, rendernyc <rendernyc@gmail.com>wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> interesting
> >>>>>>>>>>>> thats why we need mor= e results...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the 680 tested in a z= 800 rendered in 17:34
> >>>>>>>>>>>> a 580 in an 2008 mac = pro was 15:07
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 a= t 11:20 AM, Teddy Gage <
> >>>>>>>>>>>> teddygage@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GTX 680 - 2 GB VR= AM - 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 VR= AM - clock speed 866 MHZ
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> core i7 940 (4 co= res) oc'd to 3.7 gHZ
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> render time 13 mi= n 50 seconds =3D 830 seconds
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> So these results = seem to imply there is a disk and / or CPU
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> bottleneck in you= r 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 th= e faster machine. Interesting...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 8, 20= 12 at 11:07 AM, rendernyc <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> rendernyc@gmail.com> wrote:<= br> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> email sent > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 8= , 2012 at 10:26 AM, Dave Bittner <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> dave@pixelworkshop.com&g= t; wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm r= unning 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 &qu= ot;officially" talk about is the currently shipping q4000
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +---End o= f message---+
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubs= cribe send any message to <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ae-list-off@media= -motion.tv>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> danny princz<= br> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> exposedideas.com
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Animator & Ed= itor
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 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
> >>>
> >>> ex= posedideas.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Animator & Editor
> >> www.t= eddygage.com
> >> Brooklyn
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Animator & Editor
> > www.teddy= gage.com
> > Brooklyn
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> danny princz
>
> exposedideas.co= m


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



--
danny princz=

exposedideas= .com




--
danny princz

exposedideas.com
--f46d044631805a6b5004c1fd61e9--