Kepler test build 2.58e Standalone (for GTX 6xx cards)

[MattRM]

Hi Roeland,

Oki, so the 2.58c Kepler and the 2.58e Fermi are the same or just few things are differents ? In all cases, I'll buy a kepler card cause, I have an opportunity for a zotac gtx670 4 giga and also because I saw the nvidia demonstration on this architecture, raytracing realtime with fluids simulation, and filtered (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5mRRElXy-w). do you plain to release a kepler version in parallel of the fermi version ?

Thanks,

Matt

ps : As I saw on nvidia video, the kepler has a really different parallel task gestion, that made possible to have raytracing filtered in realtime, maybe the fermi can't do at all the same approach and lose time on it.

[roeland]

The Kepler build has the same function as the regular build with the same version number.

I just updated the builds to 2.58e.

--
Roeland

[MattRM]

Oki, thanks for your answers.

Matt

[madcoo]

I just updated the builds to 2.58e.

Great stuff Roeland, thanks !

[marcio_max]

I am seriously considering purchasing a GTX 670 4gb.
Does anyone have a GTX 670?
What do you think of the performance?
It's worth buying it?
Thanx!

[MattRM]

@Marcio_max :

I'm waiting my GTX670 4 Gb !!! My assembler said me the power of a GTX 670 4 gb from Zotac (overcloked by default) have only 1% to 3% perfomance less than a GTX 680 2gb ( my assembler produce server for Banks at Luxembourg, so really know what he says ). If you're interested, here the link to this card ( http://www.zotac.com/index.php?page=sho ... 88&lang=fr ). I took informations too from the net, and the result was confirmed.

One biggest things is the power needed by the card, less than previous card, so less temperature... so less noise too .

Matt

[justix]

I am seriously considering purchasing a GTX 670 4gb.
Does anyone have a GTX 670?
What do you think of the performance?
It's worth buying it?
Thanx!

are we all in the same boat? For what i can gather reading the threads about the kepler build the 6xx are not yet comparable not even to my GTX470 but I would be extremely glad to be proved wrong, I trust Refractive for a quick resolution of the matter but I understand Cuda 5 has not yet been released or just..and it will take time in order to compile a build that takes all the cores in action out of this and major new Nvidia 6xx
I'm tempted too to buy a 670.... but so far no good news or no benchmark...early?

[FooZe]

There are benchmark results for a 670 and 680 posted here: http://www.refractivesoftware.com/forum ... f=9&t=7383 (towards the end)

Does anyone have a GTX 670?

I own a 670 myself (not for octane performance however). I get about the same numbers as posted in the benchmark topic above.
Justix is right that it doesn't perform as good as a 470.

These cards are designed quite differently and it may be the case that they will never perform as good in octanerender as the 500 or 400 series.
In my personal opinion these are great gaming cards - but they obviously don't do so well for GPGPU applications.
Having said that - i'm sure much will be (and is being) done to get as much as possible out of them.

One biggest things is the power needed by the card, less than previous card, so less temperature... so less noise too .

Yup i can confirm that!
My 670 runs pretty quiet and cool, even under full load it sits in the low 60's (deg. C). and the fans sit at about 40% (i have the gigabyte windforce edition with 3 fans on it).
NVidia are definately out for performance per watt and they have done it... I think the 470 uses about 215W at full load, a 670 is spec'ed at 170W.

Along with that and the increase memory capacity I quite like them, even tho they aren't lightning quick in octanerender.

Cheers
Chris.

[MattRM]

Hi all,

Currently I have a GTX 480 with 1.5.gb. I will prepare a scene ( multi bounced caustic into volumetric fog ) and compute it in octane standard to get a benchmark ( in 1080p of course ). Normally I will receive my GTX 670 4gb during this week. So after, I will benchmark the same scene with octane' kepler version. I know that cuda 5 is just released and still experimental but we will see a beginning benchmark between this two card.

It's just a question of time to have octane that exploits at 100 percent the new kepler architecture. This GPU is really powerful.

Matt

[justix]

There are benchmark results for a 670 and 680 posted here: http://www.refractivesoftware.com/forum ... f=9&t=7383 (towards the end)

Does anyone have a GTX 670?

I own a 670 myself (not for octane performance however). I get about the same numbers as posted in the benchmark topic above.
Justix is right that it doesn't perform as good as a 470.

These cards are designed quite differently and it may be the case that they will never perform as good in octanerender as the 500 or 400 series.
In my personal opinion these are great gaming cards - but they obviously don't do so well for GPGPU applications.
Having said that - i'm sure much will be (and is being) done to get as much as possible out of them.

One biggest things is the power needed by the card, less than previous card, so less temperature... so less noise too .

Yup i can confirm that!
My 670 runs pretty quiet and cool, even under full load it sits in the low 60's (deg. C). and the fans sit at about 40% (i have the gigabyte windforce edition with 3 fans on it).
NVidia are definately out for performance per watt and they have done it... I think the 470 uses about 215W at full load, a 670 is spec'ed at 170W.

Along with that and the increase memory capacity I quite like them, even tho they aren't lightning quick in octanerender.

Cheers
Chris.

Ouch..If that is the case is a bit of a kick in the nuts really.. leaving octaners with no choice than buy 590 or multiply their cards with 4xx or 5xx series, let's hope for the best as I'm curious how those competitors of yours like Random Control (Arion) can manage the forthcoming update to support Kepler cards as stated on their website..maybe lightyears ahead..still if it perform worse than a 470, and stay that way, is a no no for me and I will look for else...the W consume and Deg C on my 470 is a bit loud and hot-ish (80.C at full load). Fingers crossed?