Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\))
Subject: Re: [AE] 32core benchmarks
From: Dave Bittner <dave@pixelworkshop.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-4923693@media-motion.tv>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 10:10:29 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <25EA600F-F22A-4351-8CDC-5F44D809A4C8@pixelworkshop.com>
References: <list-4923693@media-motion.tv>
To: "After Effects Mail List" <AE-List@media-motion.tv>

On the issue of lower OpenGL performance from the GTX series of cards, I =
did some research, and the conclusion seems to be that NVidia did some =
internal bandwidth bottlenecking on the GTX cards to keep them from =
competing with the much more expensive Quadro series. As gaming cards, =
the GTX series is designed to get images rendered to the screen quickly, =
but for OpenGL it is limited in getting those rendered images back to =
the CPU, which is what we need for graphics work. The CUDA pipes are =
wide open, from what I could find.=20

This stuff came up as part of my blog post exploring where the =
bottlenecks actually are in GPU accelerated rendering.

=
http://www.pixelworkshop.com/2012/05/02/slot-card-racing-mac-pro-gpu-speed=
-tests/

Dave Bittner - Pixel Workshop Inc.
www.pixelworkshop.com
410.381.8555
Twitter @bittner

On Dec 12, 2012, at 4:44PM, Robert Kjettrup <robert@stvmayday.dk> wrote:

> Hi
>=20
> Just for fun i tried running my new 16core (32 threads) Z820 through =
some of these tests, and comparing it there also seems to be some odd =
numbers for your GPU in cineBench. I have the new Quadro K5000 that as =
far as i know is a lower clocked version of the GTX680 you have in your =
machine, but my OpenGL fps number are much higher. I only got the K5000 =
because i have had some bad experience with my former GTX card that just =
crashed the OpenGL driver when it was under load for longer periods. =
Would have gone with the GTX680 if i trusted the gamer cards more, but =
"known" stability was prioritised.
>=20
> CineBench scores:
> OpenGL 81.45 fps
> CPU 25.07 pts
>=20
> And running GeekBench (the free 32bit version) i can see that Teddy =
has some impressive memory numbers, higher than i get. Is the memory =
linked to the CPU clock frequency also? 4.5Ghz is a bit higher than my =
3.1Ghz :-D
>=20
> Integer	Processor integer performance	32414=09
> Floating Point	Processor floating point performance	42123
> Memory	Memory performance	7071
> Stream	Memory bandwidth performance	8585
> Geekbench score: 28360
>=20
> not to show off, but i thought some of you guys would like to see the =
numbers of the current top of the line intel xeon
> well, but i also guess that this machine has cost ALOT more than what =
you spent on yours. Intel/HP sure know how to price their current =
highend stuff :-)
>=20
> - Robert
>=20