| iray GPU / CPU comparison test. |
 Nik Clark |
We might have to split into iRay 1 and 2, it seems they changed quite a lot.
========== Current Results ============
0:13 GTX 590 3GB i7 980 3.33GHz (Thanks Nanne!)
0:23 GTX 590 3GB, I7 2600
0:23 GTX 580 3GB, i7
0:24 GTX 580, i7 2600K @ 3.40 GHz,
0:27 Zotac 560Ti 448 cores, i7 2600k
0:28 fx 570, i7 2600K
0:29 Fermi 570, Dual Quad Xeon@ 2.26
0:31 GeForce GTX 570, Intel Xeon X5650
0:33 2x quadro fx 3800, dual sixcore 3.4ghz (while realflow)
0:35 GTX 560 Ti Hawk, i7 960 @3.2 24 GB DDR3 Ram
0:36 GTX 560 Ti DirectCU 1GB Asus, 2500k (@4.5Ghz)
0:37 GTX 560, i7 sandy bridge 2600K quad 3.4 GHz
0:40 GTX 470, 1GB Q660 quad-core
0:49 GTX 560 Ti, Phenom II X6 1100T
0:51 GTX 560, Core2 Quad Q8200
0:51 Quadro 400, 6core Xeon
1:02 GTX 285
2:10 i7 920 2.66 overclocked to 3.4Ghz
2:44 9800 GT Core2 Quad Q8200
2:46 core i7 920 quad-core
3:41 secs Firepro v4800, i5 760 (2.8ghz)
3:55 Xeon Quad core (3.0ghz)
13:31 Dual-core laptop
Nanne has the fastest machine so far, and as such has the largest manhood on Maxforums :)
-----------------------
AS's idea of benchmarking GPU renders is a good one.
I thought I'd see if anybody has Max 2012 and a CUDA device. If you do, can you give this a try please, and let us know your hardware and render time?
Here's a test file I whipped together just now.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/23316655/iray_test_just_hit_render.zip
This is what it should look like (although your render will be noisier, I let this one go on for a bit longer).
Just load the file and hit render, then post your render time and specs here when it finished. Let's see how much faster these GPU cards are.
My render took 3:55 with a Xeon quad-core machine with NO CUDA device, so CPU only rendering. How much quicker is a £100 gaming card? A £1000 Fermi card?
Any takers?
EDIT: All the renders should come out identical, so posting the picture is optional.
The time it takes to reach the iterations (finish the render) in the unaltered scene is the important thing.
read 5456 times
5/6/2011 4:03:01 PM (last edit: 3/24/2012 5:33:37 PM)
|
| Joey Parker Jr. |
Where is that like button?
2:46 - no cuda, core i7 920 quad-core.
What do you mean you let yours go longer? How do I let mine go longer?
read 5442 times
5/6/2011 4:15:10 PM (last edit: 5/6/2011 4:15:10 PM)
|
| Nik Clark |
In the Render Setup window, choose the Renderer tab. You have the option for limiting the time, limiting the iterations, and unlimited. Stick it on unlimited and hit stop when you get bored of watching it.
I deliberately made this a shorter render, nobody wants to spend an hour on this!
Thanks for taking part! :o)
Interesting to see that the i7 is quite a bit faster.
read 5438 times
5/6/2011 4:18:36 PM (last edit: 5/6/2011 4:21:06 PM)
|
| albongino |
I think there's a timer in the Iray tab that you set for the renderer to stop or continue calculating based on the value you enter.
[edit] what he said :/
Anyways here's mine:
I set the timer for 2:30 on a dual quad Xeon@ 2.26ghz and a Fermi 570 1,2Gb.
................
read 5435 times
5/6/2011 4:19:06 PM (last edit: 5/6/2011 4:32:42 PM)
|
| Nik Clark |
Alibongo, can you post how long it took with the "just hit render" as well please? Unless we are all rendering the same number of iterations, the comparison is lost.
All the renders will have noise, as I set the file up, the time is more important than the quality.
Thanks :o)
read 5404 times
5/6/2011 4:35:54 PM (last edit: 5/6/2011 4:37:51 PM)
|
| Mr_Stabby |
gtx 285, 240 cuda cores @ 648 mhz
1 minute
2 minutes
3 minutes
4 minutes
alltho i dont think this is an accurate comparison between cpu and gpu rendering since cpus are more flexible in rendering techniques and using them to bruteforce iray just means ignoring most of their capabilities
read 5394 times
5/6/2011 4:39:35 PM (last edit: 5/6/2011 4:43:19 PM)
|
| Nik Clark |
Hey guys. Can you make sure you post the time that it took to render the file before you made any changes please. That's the only way to really make a comparison!
Thanks for taking part guys. :o)
read 5391 times
5/6/2011 4:40:53 PM (last edit: 5/6/2011 4:40:53 PM)
|
| Pil |
Google = 1.3 seconds
.
.
read 5373 times
5/6/2011 4:48:05 PM (last edit: 5/6/2011 4:48:05 PM)
|
| albongino |
OK, got cha Nik,
I reopened the file and just hit the render button,
Time: 29 secs.
Fermi 570 1,2Gb / Dual Quad Xeon@ 2.26
................
read 5364 times
5/6/2011 4:53:05 PM (last edit: 5/6/2011 4:59:35 PM)
|
| Nik Clark |
29 seconds! That is so much faster than CPU only. Thanks for updating!
read 5361 times
5/6/2011 4:54:44 PM (last edit: 5/6/2011 4:54:44 PM)
|
| albongino |
I know, that thing just spat the render, so is iRay combining CPU/GPU power to produce the image I'm assuming, why the hell hasn't Vray come up with something like this yet?
................
read 5355 times
5/6/2011 5:00:55 PM (last edit: 5/6/2011 5:00:55 PM)
|
| Nik Clark |
I think that's what VrayRT is. Not sure, as I've never used Vray in any form.
read 5347 times
5/6/2011 5:06:15 PM (last edit: 5/6/2011 5:06:15 PM)
|
| zeefusion |
Does iray use CPU if CUDA is not present? if CUDA is present will it use both CPU and GPU? Or does it only use GPU.
read 5346 times
5/6/2011 5:08:47 PM (last edit: 5/6/2011 5:10:17 PM)
|
| Nik Clark |
It falls back to the CPU if no CUDA device is present. If there is a CUDA device, it does the render calculations on that.
read 5338 times
5/6/2011 5:11:39 PM (last edit: 5/6/2011 5:11:39 PM)
|
| zeefusion |
so it doesn't combine both?
read 5333 times
5/6/2011 5:12:11 PM (last edit: 5/6/2011 5:12:11 PM)
|