GTX470 benchmarks / comparison

[Amplitude]

Well compared to my previews benchmark, beta 2.2 is super fast.

Are you sure you're using pathtracing? Because the new benchmark scene file has directlighing turned on by default...

[Maryus3D]

Well I'v just downloaded the 2.2 scenes. I thought it was the same. So is the light fault for the big differences? And yes I'm using the directlight. So, I'm doing something wrong? I'm noob to octane .

[Amplitude]

yep you have to turn pathtracing on, it's much more computing intensive. Directlighting is more for previewing.

this little video explains all the settings required for comparative benchmark.
[vimeo]http://www.vimeo.com/10699771[/vimeo]

[Maryus3D]

Ok I'll try out. 10x for the video .

[Amplitude]

you're welcome.

by the way here's mine, no 470 but it can still keep up

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
AUTHOR: Amplitude

OS: Windows 7 Pro 64bit

Software: Octane v1.022 b2.2 - 64bit

MACHINE: INTEL Core2Quad 3.4 Ghz

PC RAM: 8 GB

CPU: INTEL qx6700 4 x 3.4 Ghz

CPU THREAD : 4

CPU TEMP (Core min/max) : 42°C - 63°C

--------

GPU: 2x Nvidia Evga 285 GTX Superclocked - 2048 MB RAM

Cores: 2x 240

GPU CLOCK: 675/1548 MHz

GPU TEMP : 82°C

RENDERTIME: 11m 07sec
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[justix]

Following amplitude video I had a go with my GTX470 MSI drivers Forceware 197.75 on WIN7 64Bit and I have the same result of my XP32 installation with 1 minute difference.
The odd thing is that I see that I got some sort of noise still going on, both 32 and 64 bit same results...4000 samples

Xp32 13mins.30
Win7 64 14Min27

[radiance]

Following amplitude video I had a go with my GTX470 MSI drivers Forceware 197.75 on WIN7 64Bit and I have the same result of my XP32 installation with 1 minute difference.
The odd thing is that I see that I got some sort of noise still going on, both 32 and 64 bit same results...4000 samples

Xp32 13mins.30
Win7 64 14Min27

that scene's glossyness is way higher though...
it looks different than the others, is it the one from the new 2.2 demosuite, with pathtracing enabled ?

Radiance

[justix]

Following amplitude video I had a go with my GTX470 MSI drivers Forceware 197.75 on WIN7 64Bit and I have the same result of my XP32 installation with 1 minute difference.
The odd thing is that I see that I got some sort of noise still going on, both 32 and 64 bit same results...4000 samples

Xp32 13mins.30
Win7 64 14Min27

that scene's glossyness is way higher though...
it looks different than the others, is it the one from the new 2.2 demosuite, with pathtracing enabled ?

Radiance

I think not where do I grab it? (but it has pathtracing enabled)

[radiance]

Following amplitude video I had a go with my GTX470 MSI drivers Forceware 197.75 on WIN7 64Bit and I have the same result of my XP32 installation with 1 minute difference.
The odd thing is that I see that I got some sort of noise still going on, both 32 and 64 bit same results...4000 samples

Xp32 13mins.30
Win7 64 14Min27

that scene's glossyness is way higher though...
it looks different than the others, is it the one from the new 2.2 demosuite, with pathtracing enabled ?

Radiance

I think not where do I grab it? (but it has pathtracing enabled)

on the demo download page, but you must change to pathtracing kernel.

Radiance

[justix]

Much better now

11.46min

But amplitude video does have in his glossy settings a totally different values, specular is set to 0.2 and roughness at 120 (!!)