Return-Path: Received: from fep20.mx.upcmail.net ([62.179.121.40] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP id 4924504 for ae-list@media-motion.tv; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 19:21:26 +0100 Received: from edge01.upcmail.net ([192.168.13.236]) by viefep20-int.chello.at (InterMail vM.8.01.05.05 201-2260-151-110-20120111) with ESMTP id <20121213182537.HYJM11920.viefep20-int.chello.at@edge01.upcmail.net> for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 19:25:37 +0100 Received: from 4corePC ([95.97.207.146]) by edge01.upcmail.net with edge id b6Rd1k00P3A34Zb016RdbW; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 19:25:37 +0100 X-SourceIP: 95.97.207.146 From: "lsslss" To: "'After Effects Mail List'" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [AE] 32core benchmarks Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 19:25:31 +0100 Message-ID: <00b801cdd95f$3c991bc0$b5cb5340$@nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00B9_01CDD967.9E5D83C0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Ac3ZW9c9WQFT92SaQdSu+VHD3PfvWwAAvlnw Content-Language: nl This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00B9_01CDD967.9E5D83C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit with the texture memory in the GPU set to 3027 Gb (which is max) instead of set to 1024 Gb. the speed is 18min 28 sec. kind regards, Marcel van Berk Hoge Bomen/LSSLSS 06 485 605 58 info@lsslss.nl www.lsslss.nl Van: After Effects Mail List [mailto:AE-List@media-motion.tv] Namens rendernyc Verzonden: donderdag 13 december 2012 19:01 Aan: After Effects Mail List Onderwerp: Re: [AE] 32core benchmarks another 680 came in at 17:34 in a z800 so thats not super far off but a little slower than average On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 12:39 PM, lsslss wrote: my card did it in 18min 43sec. Not to good then. I've got a Asus 680 GTX with 4 Gb of ram. kind regards, Marcel van Berk Hoge Bomen/LSSLSS info@lsslss.nl www.lsslss.nl Van: After Effects Mail List [mailto:AE-List@media-motion.tv] Namens rendernyc Verzonden: donderdag 13 december 2012 17:24 Aan: After Effects Mail List Onderwerp: Re: [AE] 32core benchmarks heres the chart https://twitter.com/rendernyc/status/279254301510090752/photo/1 On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Robert Kjettrup wrote: Yes, my K5000 took ~22 min and according to Danny the GTX680 is about ~15min, so that does tell that the K5000 is a underclocked 680. at least the openGL performance in Cinebench (and Softimage that i use) is good :-D - Robert 2012/12/13 rendernyc Seems the CUDA performance of the K5000 is much lower than the GTX680 so far on Roberts test. Anyone else have a K5000 that can spare 15-20 minutes to run the test? On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Dave Bittner wrote: 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. 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-t ests/ Dave Bittner - Pixel Workshop Inc. www.pixelworkshop.com 410.381.8555 Twitter @bittner On Dec 12, 2012, at 4:44PM, Robert Kjettrup wrote: > Hi > > 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. > > CineBench scores: > OpenGL 81.45 fps > CPU 25.07 pts > > 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 > > Integer Processor integer performance 32414 > Floating Point Processor floating point performance 42123 > Memory Memory performance 7071 > Stream Memory bandwidth performance 8585 > Geekbench score: 28360 > > 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 :-) > > - Robert > +---End of message---+ To unsubscribe send any message to -- danny princz exposedideas.com -- danny princz exposedideas.com -- danny princz exposedideas.com ------=_NextPart_000_00B9_01CDD967.9E5D83C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

with the texture memory in the GPU set to 3027 Gb (which is max) = instead of set to 1024 Gb.

 

the speed is 18min 28 sec.

 

kind regards,

 

Marcel van Berk

Hoge Bomen/LSSLSS

 

06 485 605 58

 

info@lsslss= .nl

 

www.lsslss.= nl

 

Van:<= /b> = After Effects Mail List [mailto:AE-List@media-motion.tv] Namens = rendernyc
Verzonden: donderdag 13 december 2012 = 19:01
Aan: After Effects Mail List
Onderwerp: Re: = [AE] 32core benchmarks

 

another 680 = came in at 17:34 in a z800 so thats not super far off but a little = slower than average

 

On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 12:39 PM, lsslss <info@lsslss.nl> = wrote:

my card did it in 18min 43sec. Not to good = then.

I've got a Asus 680 GTX with 4 Gb of = ram.

 

 

kind regards,

 

Marcel van Berk

 

Hoge Bomen/LSSLSS

info@lsslss= .nl

 

www.lsslss.= nl

 

Van:<= /b> = After Effects Mail List [mailto:AE-List@media-motion.tv] Namens = rendernyc
Verzonden: donderdag 13 december 2012 = 17:24


Aan: = After Effects Mail List
Onderwerp: Re: [AE] 32core = benchmarks

 <= /o:p>

heres the = chart

 <= /o:p>

 <= /o:p>

 <= /o:p>

 <= /p>

On Thu, Dec = 13, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Robert Kjettrup <robert@stvmayday.dk> wrote:

Yes, my = K5000 took ~22 min and according to Danny the GTX680 is about ~15min, so = that does tell that the K5000 is a underclocked 680. at least the openGL = performance in Cinebench (and Softimage that i use) is good = :-D


- Robert

 <= /p>

2012/12/13 = rendernyc <rendernyc@gmail.com>

Seems the = CUDA performance of the K5000 is much lower than the GTX680 so far on = Roberts test.

Anyone else = have a K5000 that can spare 15-20 minutes to run the = test?

 <= /o:p>

 <= /o:p>

 <= /p>

On Thu, Dec = 13, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Dave Bittner <dave@pixelworkshop.com> wrote:

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.

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-racin= g-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
>
> 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.
>
> CineBench scores:
> OpenGL 81.45 = fps
> CPU 25.07 pts
>
> 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
>
> Integer       Processor integer = performance   32414
> Floating Point       =  Processor floating point performance    42123
> = Memory        Memory performance     =  7071
> Stream        Memory bandwidth = performance    8585
> Geekbench score: = 28360
>
> 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 :-)
>
> - = Robert
>



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



 <= /o:p>

--
danny princz

exposedideas.com

<= /div>

 <= /o:p>



 <= /o:p>

-- =
danny princz

exposedideas.com



 

-- =
danny princz

exposedideas.com

------=_NextPart_000_00B9_01CDD967.9E5D83C0--