2.4 pre-beta speed improvement on 460 gtx

[t0m4sk0]

Hi Marcus,

On my system the speed is the same with or without alpha shadows - literally identical. Again, that's on gtx 580. I just wanted to point out the tools for monitoring GPU usage. Thanks for your explanation and input on the subject.

Regards,
Voja

Yup, thanks for that

Regarding the speeds with and without alpha-shadows: If you use only HDRI lighting and no emitters and no sun, then the alpha-shadow option becomes indeed completely unimportant.

Cheers,
Marcus

Sorry, what is that alpha-shadows button ?

[n1k]

Here's what I was talking about:). Alpha shadows on vs off = 1.2 mega samples vs 1.64 mega samples.

Cheers,
n1k

[t0m4sk0]

Unfortunately, there is more to speed than only the number of cores. All these additional cores are only of any help, if you can utilitze them, i.e. the code runs fully parallel. How parallel things can be executed, depends on the geometry, materials and kernel settings and other stuff. -> An increase of 50% render speed is not possible and won't happen.

Also make sure that you disable alpha shadows if you want to compare render speed.

Cheers,
Marcus

Ok then.
... if on gtx 470, performance increase is also 15 % on 2.4, why on gtx 460 it is only 15 % while 112 more cores are unlocked?
... as radiance wrote, perf. gtx 460 is almost like gtx 470 perf.,
http://www.refractivesoftware.com/forum ... &start=140
... but in octane 2.3 v5 our gtx 470 have got twice samples against to gtx 460.

[Jaberwocky]

I have done a test using GPU-Z v0.5 on my GTX460 1GB card using a render file on both this and the previous release.It's definately using all the cores to render up with.GPU-Z is reporting 95-98% usage of the GPU.So all the cores are in play.As i commented in another thread and correctly guessed earlier in this thread, the earlier release was incorrectly reporting only 2/3rds of the cores in play where'as actually it was actually using all the cores to render with.Hence why there is now only a 10-20% increase in speed on this release over the previous one as this is probably down to just the code optimisation only.

[FamilyGuy]

As already been said - overclocked GTX 460 = GTX 470. So if someone could check the performance of GTX470 we will have the answer.

[t0m4sk0]

from

http://www.refractivesoftware.com/forum ... &start=170

[FamilyGuy]

Thanks t0m4sk0. So we see that GTX460 = GTX260 (336cores compared to 216cores). GTX460 is still slower than gtx470. It seems to me that the bug still exists - so what could be a problem CUDA 3.2 or Octan 2.4pre?

[t0m4sk0]

Thanks t0m4sk0. So we see that GTX460 = GTX260 (336cores compared to 216cores). GTX460 is still slower than gtx470. It seems to me that the bug still exists - so what could be a problem CUDA 3.2 or Octan 2.4pre?

yes, i think that gtx 460 is still not in full perf.
because, if gtx 470 in 2.4 pre-beta get also better perf. why gtx 460 cannot get much better score in 2.4 against to 2.3 (112 more cores) ?

[Jaberwocky]

Read this link

It could be a Memory Bandwidth issue related to the GTX460 Not sure.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3809/nvid ... 00-king/16

[t0m4sk0]

Read this link

It could be a Memory Bandwidth issue related to the GTX460 Not sure.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3809/nvid ... 00-king/16

http://www.refractivesoftware.com/forum ... =33&t=5012