SLI and crossfire dio not affect viewport performance in any of 3d application.
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 11:12 AM, olivier jeannel <olivier.jean...@noos.fr>wrote: > There was a subject on Redshift Forum about having two grapphic cards. > It seems to be possible to keep a quadro for dispaly (as it is > significantly better at displaying), and have a Titan dedicated to > rendering only (in Redshift you select which card is rendering) as they > have a huge amount of cores and faster memory. > I think I've red somewhere that Titan has 2600 cores against 256 for the > Quadro 4000. > After chating with Nicolas the Titan could be around 4 time faster than > the Quadro4000 ...Which is huge :) > > Le 27/03/2013 09:26, Tim Leydecker a écrit : > > Personally, I´m hesistant to using two or more cards with SLI >> because of micro stuttering: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/** >> Micro_stuttering <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_stuttering> >> >> If there would be a solution to that, I´d go with two GTX670 w/4GB VRAM, >> as they are the same GK104´s with a 915MHz chipspeed instead of a 1006Mhz >> chipspeed as in the reference design GTX680. That could save another >> 15-35% >> percent of investment compared to two single chip GTX 680 cards or one >> GTX Titan. >> >> Overclocked versions may use slightly different chip/shader speeds. >> >> In any case, as much VRAM as available, as that always helps in many >> progamms >> like Mudbox, Redshift and isn´t much of an added cost (comparing 2GB vs >> 4GB). >> >> At a company I worked Mari 1.5.x behaved bitchy unless it was given a >> Quadro >> or forced to ignore the actual card´s game heritage. But that may have >> been >> solved with 2.0... >> >> Cheers, >> >> tim >> >> >> >> On 27.03.2013 08:59, Mirko Jankovic wrote: >> >>> On the other hand Titan is more expensive than 2 gtx680 if I'm not >>> mistaken... and i bet that with two 680 in SLI, when multi GPU is >>> supported >>> you will have better performance than with 1 titan right? >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Tim Leydecker <bauero...@gmx.de> wrote: >>> >>> The GTX Titan is not a gimmick but uses the successor to the chip series >>>> used in the GTX 680, e.g. the GT(X) 6xx series uses the GK104, while >>>> the GTX Titan uses the GK110. You can find the GK110 in the Tesla K20, >>>> too. >>>> >>>> You could describe the GTX690 as a gimmick, as it uses two GK104 on one >>>> card >>>> to maximize performance at the cost of higher powerconsumption, noise >>>> and >>>> heat. >>>> >>>> The performance gain between a GTX680 and a GTX Titan is roughly 35% >>>> and can be felt nicely when using it with higher screenresolutions like >>>> 1920x1200 or 2560x1440 and higher antialiasing in games. >>>> >>>> That´s where the 6GB VRAM of the GTX Titan come in handy, too. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> tim >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 27.03.2013 05:24, Raffaele Fragapane wrote: >>>> >>>> Benchmarking is more driver tuning than it's videocard performance, >>>>> and if >>>>> you want to look at number crunching you should look at the most recent >>>>> gens. >>>>> >>>>> The 680 has brought nVIDIA back up top for number crunching (forgetting >>>>> the >>>>> silver editions or gimmicks like the titan), and close enough to bang >>>>> for >>>>> buck best, but AMD's response to that still has to come. >>>>> >>>>> Ironically, though, the 6xx gen is reported as a crippled, bad >>>>> performer >>>>> in >>>>> DCC apps, although I can't say I noticed it myself. It sure as hell >>>>> works >>>>> admirably well in mudbox, mari, cuda work, and I've had no issues in >>>>> maya >>>>> or soft. I don't really benchmrak or obsess over numbers much though. >>>>> >>>>> When this will obsolesce, I will considering AMD again, probably in a >>>>> couple years. >>>>> >>>>> For GPU rendering though, well, that's something you CAN bench reliably >>>>> with the engine, and AMD might still win the FLOP per dollar run >>>>> there, so >>>>> it's not to be discounted. >>>>> >>>>> Would be good to know what the redshift guys have to say about it >>>>> themselves though if they can spare the thought and can actually >>>>> disclose. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Mirko Jankovic >>>>> <mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com>****wrote: >>>>> >>>>> well no idea about pro cards.. really never got financial >>>>> justification >>>>> >>>>>> to >>>>>> get one, quadro 4000 in old company didn;t really felt anything much >>>>>> better >>>>>> than gaming cards so... >>>>>> but in gaming segment.. >>>>>> opengl scores in sinebench for example: >>>>>> gtx 580: ~55 >>>>>> 7970: ~90 >>>>>> >>>>>> to start with.... >>>>>> not to mention annoying issue with high segment rotating cube in >>>>>> viewport >>>>>> in SI. >>>>>> 7970 smooth at ~170 fps >>>>>> with gtx580 bfore that.. to point out that the rest of comp is >>>>>> identical >>>>>> only switched card... for the first 30-50sec frame rate was stuck at >>>>>> something like 17 fps... and after that it kinda jump to ~70-80fps... >>>>>> >>>>>> in any case with gaming cards ati vs nvidia there is no doubt. and if >>>>>> you >>>>>> are not using CUDA much then no need to even thing which way to go. >>>>>> Now redshift is game changer heheh but I'm still hoping that OpenCL >>>>>> will >>>>>> be supported and I'm looking forward to test it out with two of 7970 >>>>>> in >>>>>> crossfire :) >>>>>> >>>>>> btw I'm not much into programming waters but is it really >>>>>> OpenCL programming that as I understood should work on ALL cards, is >>>>>> that >>>>>> much more complex than for CUDA which is limited to nvidia only? >>>>>> Wouldn't >>>>>> it be more logical to go with solution that is covering a lot more >>>>>> market >>>>>> than something limited to one manufacturer? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Arvid Björn <arvidbj...@gmail.com >>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> My beef with ATI last time I tried FirePro was that it had a hard >>>>>>> time >>>>>>> locking into 25fps playback in some apps, as if the refresh rate was >>>>>>> locked >>>>>>> to 30/60. Realtime playback in Softimage would stutter annoyingly >>>>>>> IIRC. >>>>>>> Plus it seemed to draw text slightly differently in some apps. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Nvidia just feels.. comfy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 5:21 AM, Raffaele Fragapane < >>>>>>> raffsxsil...@googlemail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> These days if you hit the right combination of drivers and planet >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> alignment they are OK. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Performance wise they have been ahead of nVIDIA for a while in >>>>>>>> number >>>>>>>> crunching, the main problem is the drivers are still a coin toss >>>>>>>> chance, >>>>>>>> and that OCL isn't anywhere as popular as CUDA. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> With win7 or 8 and recent versions of Soft/Maya they can do well. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> nVIDIA didn't help with the crippling of the 6xx for professional >>>>>>>> use, >>>>>>>> and pissing off Linus. They are still ahead by a slight margin, for >>>>>>>> now, >>>>>>>> but I wouldn't discount AMD wholesale anymore. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If the next generation is as disappointing as Kepler is, and AMD >>>>>>>> gets >>>>>>>> both Linux support AND decent (and properly OSS) drivers out, I'm >>>>>>>> moving >>>>>>>> time come for the next upgrade. For now I recently bought a 680 >>>>>>>> because it >>>>>>>> was kind of mandatory to not go insane with Mari and Mudbox, and >>>>>>>> because I >>>>>>>> like CUDA and I toy with it at home. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 9:58 PM, Dan Yargici <danyarg...@gmail.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Ati was tested over and over and showing a lot better viewport >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> results >>>>>>>>> in Softimage than nvidia... " >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Really? I don't remember anyone ever suggesting ATI was anything >>>>>>>>> other >>>>>>>>> than shit! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> DAN >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >> >
