GTX 560 TI 2gb, benckmark test

A public forum for discussing and asking questions about the demo version of Octane Render.
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.
BlueBread
Posts: 37
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 8:17 pm

Does monitor size matter when comparing these bench scenes? Because, Jaberwocky's cards do differ from mine in performance.
GeoPappas
Licensed Customer
Posts: 429
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 5:31 pm

BlueBread wrote:Does monitor size matter when comparing these bench scenes?
No, monitor size has nothing to do with performance, but render size would matter (if it was different).
User avatar
bepeg4d
Octane Guru
Posts: 10359
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 6:02 am
Location: Italy
Contact:

thanks to tuts3d and BlueBread for posting your results, unfortunately the pt test can't be correctly compared between the demo and the 1.24.3 that has different maxdepth settings and alphashadows enabled.
maybe tuts3d could redo the pt benchmark with maxdepth to 8 and alphashadows disabled :roll:
ciao beppe
User avatar
Jaberwocky
Licensed Customer
Posts: 976
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:03 pm

The only thing about display that affects the cards is the resolution, if you are using just 1 card for both display and rendering.The resolution eats into the on board memory of the card before octane has a chance to load it's scene.In my case as i have both a 24" - 1920 x 1200 & a 17" - 1280x1024 twin screen set up going then bang goes 300mb of my 1GB before Octane even loads a scene.Another reason , if one was needed to get a 2nd card and keep one just for display.
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
tuts3d
Licensed Customer
Posts: 129
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 1:44 pm

Thanks Beppe for pointing that out :) I didn't even noticed those difference in parameters. Will redo the test this evening.

Thanks
win 7 64 bit/ core i7 4770k/ 32 GB ram / gtx Titan sc/ asus Maximus vii hero MOBO
eyearmy
Licensed Customer
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 4:32 pm
Location: Reykjavik, Iceland

Chiming in with my own benchmark results for a GTX 560 Ti:

MSI N560GTX-Ti Twin Frozr II (1 GB)
[beta 2.43, v266.66 drivers]
Direct lighting: 7.64 to 7.83 megasamples/sec
Path tracing: 1.87 megasamples/sec
Windows 8.1 x64 / GTX 970 / i7-4790@4GHz / 16 GB
Mk pt
Licensed Customer
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 11:26 pm

Gtx570 coming today..
i think tomorrow i can post the benchmark with a gtx570 to compare.. :)


But will be with the GTX570 for display and CUDA, don't know what result expect..
i7 920 @ 3.78Ghz | 6 gb ddr3 1800MHz | Gigabyte GTX 570 OC -780MHz/1560MHz/3800MHz | Windows 7 x64 SP1
PSS-PT
Licensed Customer
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 4:25 pm

Gigabyte GTX 560 TI 1GB OC
Attachments
Capture.PNG
WIN 7 64 | 3DS MAX 2011 | VRAY | OCTANE RENDER - i7 3930K | 32GB | GTX 680
Xraygunner
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 4:25 pm

Hope you all don't mind the slight diversion here, but I would love some input along these lines. I'm looking to upgrade my computer in the within a month and am wondering which way to go in regard to the video card issue. I'm looking at either a SLI 560 ti 2gb setup or (if they become available) a 580 gtx 3gb. With two 560's you get more cores but with the 580 gtx 3gb you get more vram with the possibility of upgrading later (adding another card) and getting more cores.

So which is more important when rendering with octane? I understand that it would depend on the complexity of the scene, but which would you all lean to when considering this?

Thanks.
PSS-PT
Licensed Customer
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 4:25 pm

Get a GTX 590!
WIN 7 64 | 3DS MAX 2011 | VRAY | OCTANE RENDER - i7 3930K | 32GB | GTX 680
Post Reply

Return to “Demo Version Questions & Discussion”