GTX470 benchmarks / comparison

Post, discuss and share handy resources like textures, models and HDRI maps in this forum.
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.
Locked
jipe
Licensed Customer
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 12:40 am

I'd be very surprised if anyone released a GTX 480 with 6 GB; there just aren't any games that could take advantage of that much memory, which means the potential market (basically all of us here!) is very small. I think the best we might see is a 480 with 3 GB, hopefully later this year. Or you could pick up a Tesla C2070 when it's released, but I think most of us have better ways to spend a few thousand dollars.
tforgo
Licensed Customer
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 8:24 am

Last two images posted with optimized fermi octane appear to be darker in shadows and have less reflection on materials. Could it suggest that there is less light bounces calculated?
User avatar
radiance
Posts: 7633
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 2:33 pm

tforgo wrote:Last two images posted with optimized fermi octane appear to be darker in shadows and have less reflection on materials. Could it suggest that there is less light bounces calculated?
they are the same scene / same settings and they look equal to me...

Radiance
Win 7 x64 & ubuntu | 2x GTX480 | Quad 2.66GHz | 8GB
User avatar
Maryus3D
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 5:32 pm

Hello!

Here are my results on my GTX275 1792 MB Gigabyte HDMI stock clocks with Q6600 @ 2,4 GHz , 8 GB ram A-Data DDR2 800 MHz, MSI P35 using hackintosh OSX 10.6.3 :D . Octane render 1.021 beta 2.1 demo .

Image

Uploaded with ImageShack.us
DavidT
Licensed Customer
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 10:55 pm

tforgo wrote:Last two images posted with optimized fermi octane appear to be darker in shadows and have less reflection on materials. Could it suggest that there is less light bounces calculated?
tforgo asked me about doing a comparison with the new optimized version, so I rendered the benchmark all the way through again. I have attached the images from my last benchmark render that was to the finish and the new 1.21 beta. I didn't think I would see any difference, but when I switched between the two images, I could see the new render is just slightly darker than the original render.

The original render is on the bottom, new render on the top.
Attachments
BenchmarkComparison.png
Windows 7 64-bit | GTX 470 | i7 920 | 12 GB
User avatar
radiance
Posts: 7633
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 2:33 pm

the sky is also a bit darker, so i'm guessing the exposure it a bit different.
maybe it's due to the non-linear exposure changes between both versions.

Radiance
Win 7 x64 & ubuntu | 2x GTX480 | Quad 2.66GHz | 8GB
User avatar
FamilyGuy
Licensed Customer
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 12:23 pm
Location: Poland

Hi.

My result is:

1h 20min 12s on GTX 260 216cores.
1.94 Megasamples/sec

This test is a realy good thing :)
Image
User avatar
Chris
Licensed Customer
Posts: 439
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 5:01 pm
Location: Norway

Heres mine:
29.04.png
________________________________________________________
Win 7 64 | 1x GeForce GTX Titan | AMD Phenom II X6 3.20Ghz | 16GB
User avatar
Maryus3D
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 5:32 pm

Maryus3D wrote:Hello!

Here are my results on my GTX275 1792 MB Gigabyte HDMI stock clocks with Q6600 @ 2,4 GHz , 8 GB ram A-Data DDR2 800 MHz, MSI P35 using hackintosh OSX 10.6.3 :D . Octane render 1.021 beta 2.1 demo .

Image

Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Well compared to my previews benchmark, beta 2.2 is super fast.


Image

Uploaded with ImageShack.us
tforgo
Licensed Customer
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 8:24 am

2.15 to 7.88 ??? Just compare light angle. Totaly diffrerent render. Not Compareable!
Locked

Return to “Resources and Sharing”