Any one tested the v1.00 with both gtx5xx and 6xx?

[PolderAnimation]

I read the 680 is 30% faster in 1.11 then 1.10. And before a 680 was 10% slower then a 580. So I think the 680 is beating the 580 now by a small bit.

Here are some benchmarks from the 680 with 1.11 build against 1.10
http://render.otoy.com/forum/viewtopic. ... &start=170

[Carl S.]

Why? I read the 680 is 30% faster in 1.11 then 1.10, so I think (and hope) Titan will benefit from it as we'll. (both kepler)
And there are already some benchmarks done on the Titan in 1.10 and the card was 60% faster then a 580.
So with the new build 70% maybe 80% isn't that wears =D.

Here are some benchmarks from the 680 with 1.11 build against 1.10
http://render.otoy.com/forum/viewtopic. ... &start=170

Because the 680's cores run at a lower power.
The Titan is 33% faster than a 580 for rendering. Where are you getting these stats?

[PolderAnimation]

abstrax posted this:

Now that the performance review ban has been lifted: We don't have any cards here yet, but Chris gave it a spin with version 1.10 on one of the review site systems via remote access and the results were, that the Titan is on the benchmark scene (maxdepth 16, no alpha shadows) 60% faster than a GTX 580 and about 10-12% slower than a GTX 690 (using both GPUs).

In my opinion that's fairly impressive and better than I expected and although expensive it may be a good GPU for smaller studios that actually earn money with Octane. You basically get almost the speed of a GTX 690 with 3x as much memory. We have to wait now until those graphics cards actually get sold and arrive here in NZ...

Regarding "optmization" for compute model 3.5 GPUs: A while ago I tried to coax more speed out of a K20c using different build options, but it turned out that the way how we currently build the CUDA stuff for Octane, was already the fastest. I will have a look at it again, when we hold a Titan in our hands, but don't hold your breath. There may no speed gains here.

Cheers,
Marcus


Where did you find you info about the 30%? I hope (for all of us) I am right =P

[kavorka]

its more reasonable to compare the titan to the 590/690 not the 80s because then you are looking at the same price point.

[PolderAnimation]

Octane 1.10

Gtx 680 3.15 Ms/sec (http://render.otoy.com/forum/viewtopic. ... &start=170)
1 TITAN Card = 6.25 Ms/sec (http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=103 ... tcount=185)

2x the speed of a 680.

[Carl S.]

abstrax posted this:

Now that the performance review ban has been lifted: We don't have any cards here yet, but Chris gave it a spin with version 1.10 on one of the review site systems via remote access and the results were, that the Titan is on the benchmark scene (maxdepth 16, no alpha shadows) 60% faster than a GTX 580 and about 10-12% slower than a GTX 690 (using both GPUs).

In my opinion that's fairly impressive and better than I expected and although expensive it may be a good GPU for smaller studios that actually earn money with Octane. You basically get almost the speed of a GTX 690 with 3x as much memory. We have to wait now until those graphics cards actually get sold and arrive here in NZ...

Regarding "optmization" for compute model 3.5 GPUs: A while ago I tried to coax more speed out of a K20c using different build options, but it turned out that the way how we currently build the CUDA stuff for Octane, was already the fastest. I will have a look at it again, when we hold a Titan in our hands, but don't hold your breath. There may no speed gains here.

Cheers,
Marcus


Where did you find you info about the 30%? I hope (for all of us) I am right =P

Ok from one benchmark I see a 680 classified at 3.15 my 580 classified runs at 3.23. One of my regular 580's runs at 3.07.
I hope you are right too but 60% seems like a unnaturally huge jump. 33% seems what to expect IMO.

Edit I am still on 1.10 I need to update.

[PolderAnimation]

Just look at my link

Octane 1.11
EVGA GTX 680 Classified

- stock PT 4.08Ms/sec
- o/c PT 5.05Ms/sec

So stock (so not overclock) is 4.08 against 3.23 from you 580. So the 680 beats the 580 in this build.

(Or there whent something wrong with the bench of the 680, how knows =))

[Carl S.]

Just look at my link

Octane 1.11
EVGA GTX 680 Classified

- stock PT 4.08Ms/sec
- o/c PT 5.05Ms/sec

So stock (so not overclock) is 4.08 against 3.23 from you 580. So the 680 beats the 580 in this build.

(Or there whent something wrong with the bench of the 680, how knows =))

Ok after updating I am getting 5.27 on a 580 classified.. Slightly faster than before, still slower than that 680 classified benchmark..
If those Titans are indeed that much faster it is simply amazing. 33% is something that sounds realistic. Sorry I can't disclose the source of the 33% benchmark. It wasn't Octane, but a similar render with similar times.

[kavorka]

Octane 1.10

Gtx 680 3.15 Ms/sec (http://render.otoy.com/forum/viewtopic. ... &start=170)
1 TITAN Card = 6.25 Ms/sec (http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=103 ... tcount=185)

2x the speed of a 680.

And twice the price, as I stated above, compare it to the 690 for an accurate price to speed comparison. Comparing it to the 680 doesn't do you much good.

[Carl S.]

Octane 1.10

Gtx 680 3.15 Ms/sec (http://render.otoy.com/forum/viewtopic. ... &start=170)
1 TITAN Card = 6.25 Ms/sec (http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=103 ... tcount=185)

2x the speed of a 680.

And twice the price, as I stated above, compare it to the 690 for an accurate price to speed comparison. Comparing it to the 680 doesn't do you much good.

It does me a lot of good. I am thinking of upgrading from our 580's to Titans if the speed is high enough to warrant it. Honestly the price difference isn't a factor in our environment. It is paid for with a few days of work.