OctaneBench

Forums: OctaneBench
Read about News and Updates regarding Octane Render in this forum.
Forum rules
For new users: this forum is moderated. Your first post will appear only after it has been reviewed by a moderator, so it will not show up immediately.
This is necessary to avoid this forum being flooded by spam.

Re: OctaneBench

Postby linvanchene » Thu Mar 12, 2015 11:44 am

linvanchene Thu Mar 12, 2015 11:44 am
obsolete post edited and removed by user
Last edited by linvanchene on Mon May 11, 2015 6:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
linvanchene
Licensed Customer
Licensed Customer
 
Posts: 783
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 10:58 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: OctaneBench

Postby riggles » Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:00 pm

riggles Thu Mar 12, 2015 12:00 pm
abstrax wrote:
riggles wrote:
abstrax wrote:Tim fixed a bunch of issues with the results page. Could you have a look and tell us if that's better now?

Yes it is improved. Getting rid of the pagination helps a lot. And now the "single GPU only" preference persists between filtering modes. Thank you. I'm sure the Titan Z thing will take a bit more time to settle and implement.

Currently, we don't want to change it, because it's always not 100% clear to the user what "1x Titan Z" means. Octane internally deals with GPUs and doesn't care if they are on the same board or not. So, a user who works with Octane and sees "1x Titan Z", will still scratch his/her head and wonder if that means that it's the result of a Titan Z video card or Titan Z GPU.

What we've done is explicitly mentioning multi-GPU video cards in the text above the result list.

It's never going to be 100% clear to everyone all the time. But I think the goal should be being clear to most people most of the time, and i don't believe splitting cards up by singular GPUs accomplished that. The confusion starts in Octane where 1 physical Titanz Z is represented as 2, without saying "(single GPU)" or "(GPU 1 of 2)". So the Octane Bench results are consistent, but consistently unclear. And sure it's more work for you to adjust, but I think the better approach is to think like people instead of making people think like Octane to understand the data. People naturally think 1 Titan Z means one physical card with dual GPUs. Yea, there's a note there, but it'll be as effective as a sticky in a subreddit which no one reads and keeps asking the same questions.
riggles
Licensed Customer
Licensed Customer
 
Posts: 493
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 3:34 pm
Location: CT, USA

Re: OctaneBench

Postby raybender » Fri Mar 13, 2015 12:07 pm

raybender Fri Mar 13, 2015 12:07 pm
why is there an AMD w9100 card on the top of the list ? did miss something and Octane is supporting AMD cards now ?!
Win7x64/ Dual Xeon [email protected]/ 48GB RAM/ 2x GTX Titan 6GB/ 1x GTX 670 4GB
http://www.alexbroeckel.com
raybender
Licensed Customer
Licensed Customer
 
Posts: 336
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:00 pm
Location: Germany

Re: OctaneBench

Postby smicha » Fri Mar 13, 2015 12:16 pm

smicha Fri Mar 13, 2015 12:16 pm
raybender wrote:why is there an AMD w9100 card on the top of the list ? did miss something and Octane is supporting AMD cards now ?!



:shock: Who placed the score? What is this suppose to mean?
Win7, Modo 10.1, Octane for Modo and Sketchup, nVidia latest, TITAN+3x780 6GB, 2600K, P8P67WS, 32GB, 1350W
SMH10, EK, Airplex_480, SR1_560, 20xNB_PL2, 2xD5, Aquaero 6XT
build-log http://render.otoy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=42540
User avatar
smicha
Licensed Customer
Licensed Customer
 
Posts: 3145
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 4:13 pm
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Re: OctaneBench

Postby snake12 » Fri Mar 13, 2015 2:31 pm

snake12 Fri Mar 13, 2015 2:31 pm
AMD W9100 Is real for Octane or is joke, support Cuda.
Cosmos II, Asrock 79 extreme 11, Intel i7-3930K 4.40 GHz, 32gb Ram Quad 2.400 OC., 2 Drives Intel SSd 520 240gb Raid 0, 1 Gtx 580 3 gb + 3 Gtx 590 4Gb.
snake12
Licensed Customer
Licensed Customer
 
Posts: 97
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 7:21 am

Re: OctaneBench

Postby smicha » Fri Mar 13, 2015 2:32 pm

smicha Fri Mar 13, 2015 2:32 pm
It's fake
Win7, Modo 10.1, Octane for Modo and Sketchup, nVidia latest, TITAN+3x780 6GB, 2600K, P8P67WS, 32GB, 1350W
SMH10, EK, Airplex_480, SR1_560, 20xNB_PL2, 2xD5, Aquaero 6XT
build-log http://render.otoy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=42540
User avatar
smicha
Licensed Customer
Licensed Customer
 
Posts: 3145
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 4:13 pm
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Re: OctaneBench

Postby resmas » Fri Mar 13, 2015 7:17 pm

resmas Fri Mar 13, 2015 7:17 pm
This bench is great. Until now i never had the chance to see how gtx590 compared to gtx780ti.

3 gtx590(6 gpus) - score 308
3 gtx 780ti - score 313

well of 780ti deliver the same as the gtx590, but only with 1gpu, and less power consumption, and double vram.

But still the gtx590 do a great result.

Used gtx590 are around 150€ so nice price/performance.
1gtx 590(2gpus) - score 104

cheers
resmas
i7-2600k | SSD Vertex 3 | WD Velociraptor | WS Revolution | 16GB Ram HyperX | PSU LEPA G1600W | 3 X Asus GTX590 |
https://pt-pt.facebook.com/arq.resmas
User avatar
resmas
Licensed Customer
Licensed Customer
 
Posts: 510
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 10:44 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: OctaneBench

Postby ChrisVis » Sat Mar 14, 2015 8:57 pm

ChrisVis Sat Mar 14, 2015 8:57 pm
Hi guys,

I am a bit suprised how well my old GTX580 and GTX590 still compare to the newest NVIDIA Cards... And GTX 780Ti is still performing very good for single GPU-Performance...


Here are my benchmarking results (one GTX590 in my turbobox is broken, I got a replacement (used for 250€), but didn`t have time to replace the old one yet. Will post new results, when 8 oder 9 GPUS are running).


Octane version:
2.17
Operating system:
Windows 7 64-bit
Devices:
GeForce GTX 780 Ti
GeForce GTX 580
GeForce GTX 580
GeForce GTX 590
GeForce GTX 590
GeForce GTX 590
GeForce GTX 590


Scene, Kernel, Ms/s, GTX980 Ms/s, Ratio, Weight, Score
Idea (by Julio Cayetaño), info channels, 385.714256, 81.25, 4.747, 10, 15.824175
Idea (by Julio Cayetaño), direct lighting, 88.475534, 18.64, 4.747, 35, 55.376318
Idea (by Julio Cayetaño), path tracing, 77.162057, 15.99, 4.826, 35, 56.299187
Idea (by Julio Cayetaño), PMC, 11.973796, 2.88, 4.158, 20, 27.717120
ATV (by Jürgen Aleksejev), info channels, 154.389837, 32.48, 4.753, 10, 15.844606
ATV (by Jürgen Aleksejev), direct lighting, 58.408017, 12.40, 4.710, 35, 54.953779
ATV (by Jürgen Aleksejev), path tracing, 47.630455, 10.02, 4.754, 35, 55.457949
ATV (by Jürgen Aleksejev), PMC, 17.384328, 3.77, 4.611, 20, 30.741517
Box (by Enrico Cerica), info channels, 264.826450, 59.18, 4.475, 10, 14.916439
Box (by Enrico Cerica), direct lighting, 53.738921, 11.76, 4.570, 35, 53.312422
Box (by Enrico Cerica), path tracing, 54.393552, 11.74, 4.633, 35, 54.053785
Box (by Enrico Cerica), PMC, 15.534357, 3.83, 4.056, 20, 27.039786


Total score
461.537082

Cya,
ChrisVis
C4D R15 - C4DOctane 4.0 | Win7 64 | NVIDIA 417.22 | EVGA GTX 980 Ti SC | EVGA GTX 780 Ti SC |EVGA GTX 780 Ti SC
i7 4930K 6x4.3GHz OC | 64GB | ASUS P9X79-E WS
+ Netstor Turbobox 250A | 2x EVGA GTX 780 Ti SC + 2 x Palit GTX780 Ti 3GB | all watercooled
ChrisVis
Licensed Customer
Licensed Customer
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:53 am
Location: Germany

Re: OctaneBench

Postby gazukull » Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:58 pm

gazukull Tue Mar 17, 2015 10:58 pm
Well now that we have the Octane 3 announcement. I am really curious about AMD performance - the 290x opencl benchmarks are CRAZY.
Win 8.1 X64 / 6x780GTX / AMD FX-8320 / 32GB RAM
User avatar
gazukull
Licensed Customer
Licensed Customer
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:08 pm

Re: OctaneBench

Postby raybender » Tue Mar 17, 2015 11:00 pm

raybender Tue Mar 17, 2015 11:00 pm
hey guys..so the w9100 benchmarks which disappered haven't been fakes ?
Win7x64/ Dual Xeon [email protected]/ 48GB RAM/ 2x GTX Titan 6GB/ 1x GTX 670 4GB
http://www.alexbroeckel.com
raybender
Licensed Customer
Licensed Customer
 
Posts: 336
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:00 pm
Location: Germany
PreviousNext

Return to News & Announcements


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Tue Oct 20, 2020 11:51 pm [ UTC ]