My little Octane Benchmark
Forum rules
Please do not post any material that is copyrighted or restricted from public use in any way. OTOY NZ LTD and it's forum members are not liable for any copyright infringements on material in this forum. Please contact us if this is the case and we will remove the material in question.
Please do not post any material that is copyrighted or restricted from public use in any way. OTOY NZ LTD and it's forum members are not liable for any copyright infringements on material in this forum. Please contact us if this is the case and we will remove the material in question.
Jaberwocky, do the benchmark with pathtracing, and then see CPU usage (and comparable render time with the others)
SW: Octane 3.05 | Linux Mint 18.1 64bit | Blender 2.78 HW: EVGA GTX 1070 | i5 2500K | 16GB RAM Drivers: 375.26
cgmo.net
cgmo.net
- Jaberwocky
- Posts: 976
- Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:03 pm
This is interesting
The results:
4000 samples/Px - Pathtracing on/Alpha Shadows off
Result : 14mins 40Sec
at Stock Speed: 715MHZ Core : 1800MHZ Ram
Overclocked to 820MHZ Core : 2250MHZ Ram
Same result 14 Mins 40 Sec
So how does that work then ?
Card is a Gigabyte GTX 460 1GB model.
The results:
4000 samples/Px - Pathtracing on/Alpha Shadows off
Result : 14mins 40Sec
at Stock Speed: 715MHZ Core : 1800MHZ Ram
Overclocked to 820MHZ Core : 2250MHZ Ram
Same result 14 Mins 40 Sec
So how does that work then ?
Card is a Gigabyte GTX 460 1GB model.

CPU:-AMD 1055T 6 core, Motherboard:-Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 AM3+, Gigabyte GTX 460-1GB, RAM:-8GB Kingston hyper X Genesis DDR3 1600Mhz D/Ch, Hard Disk:-500GB samsung F3 , OS:-Win7 64bit
Can you post SS? How many megasamples per pixel you have with 820mhz clock?
Cheers,
n1k
Cheers,
n1k
- Jaberwocky
- Posts: 976
- Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:03 pm
N1K
To clarify my test result above
The test came in at 14 mins 40sec for 4000 samples/Px at standard 715Mhz stock clock and at 820Mhz overclock.
The net result is that overclocking the card produced no speed increase on the render.
It must be just this scene.There must be something in this scene which is hitting a performance wall.
I did the same test with one of my own scenes and overclocking the card from 715Mhz GPU and 1800Mhz memory to 820Mhz GPU and 2250Mhz memory and this produced a 25% increase in rendering speed.
It's a bit of a mystery

To clarify my test result above
The test came in at 14 mins 40sec for 4000 samples/Px at standard 715Mhz stock clock and at 820Mhz overclock.
The net result is that overclocking the card produced no speed increase on the render.
It must be just this scene.There must be something in this scene which is hitting a performance wall.
I did the same test with one of my own scenes and overclocking the card from 715Mhz GPU and 1800Mhz memory to 820Mhz GPU and 2250Mhz memory and this produced a 25% increase in rendering speed.
It's a bit of a mystery




CPU:-AMD 1055T 6 core, Motherboard:-Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 AM3+, Gigabyte GTX 460-1GB, RAM:-8GB Kingston hyper X Genesis DDR3 1600Mhz D/Ch, Hard Disk:-500GB samsung F3 , OS:-Win7 64bit
Using the beta demo 2.46 benchmark scene with unmodified settings and no viewpoint change a FX 1800 got aprox. 1.15 Ms when it settled down compared to a 3.1 Ms with a Quadro 2000. The Q2000 has three times the CUDA cores and the rendering speed difference is aprox. 2.7x better. If you take into account that the FX1800 clock rate is 1342MHz and Q2000's is 1221MHz, then if the Q2000's core would be as high, the difference would be close to 3x again. This means that the cores scale really well. Twice the cores, twice the performance when everything else being equal.
The Quadro 2000 card is a loaner, probably going to substitute it with a GTX 560 Ti 2GB version. With 384 cores and a shader clock rate 1645MHz I'm expecting around 8.4 Ms in the benchmark scene. I don't want to get the GTC 470 as its power draw is significantly higher and I'm liking the 2GB memory on the 560 Ti (+ significantly cheaper).
The Quadro 2000 card is a loaner, probably going to substitute it with a GTX 560 Ti 2GB version. With 384 cores and a shader clock rate 1645MHz I'm expecting around 8.4 Ms in the benchmark scene. I don't want to get the GTC 470 as its power draw is significantly higher and I'm liking the 2GB memory on the 560 Ti (+ significantly cheaper).
Setup: Win7 Pro 64bit, XEON X3450, 8GB RAM, Quadro FX 1800, Quadro 2000 for rendering (going to change to a GTX 560 Ti 2GB for rendering).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
AUTHOR: RatedR
OS: Windows 7 64bit
Software: Octane v1.00 Beta 2.46b - 64bit
MACHINE: Selfbuild
PC RAM: 16 GB DDR3 1600
CPU: Intel Core i7 2600k @ 4.8 Ghz
CPU THREAD : 8
CPU TEMP (Core min/max) : 50°C - 56°C
--------
GPU: nVidia GeForce GTX 590
Cores: 1024
GPU CLOCK: 668MHz
GPU TEMP : 84°C
RENDETIME: 10m 02sec
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
5.80 ms/sec 7.37 FPS
AUTHOR: RatedR
OS: Windows 7 64bit
Software: Octane v1.00 Beta 2.46b - 64bit
MACHINE: Selfbuild
PC RAM: 16 GB DDR3 1600
CPU: Intel Core i7 2600k @ 4.8 Ghz
CPU THREAD : 8
CPU TEMP (Core min/max) : 50°C - 56°C
--------
GPU: nVidia GeForce GTX 590
Cores: 1024
GPU CLOCK: 668MHz
GPU TEMP : 84°C
RENDETIME: 10m 02sec
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
5.80 ms/sec 7.37 FPS
ASRock Fatal1ty P67 Professional
G.Skill DIMM 16 GB DDR3-1600
Intel® Core™ i7-2600K @ 4.8 Ghz
Corsair Hydro Series H70
Point of View GeForce GTX590 Charged
OCZ Agility3 2,5" SSD 120 GB
G.Skill DIMM 16 GB DDR3-1600
Intel® Core™ i7-2600K @ 4.8 Ghz
Corsair Hydro Series H70
Point of View GeForce GTX590 Charged
OCZ Agility3 2,5" SSD 120 GB