Article: GPU Compute render performance benchmarked with 20 graphics cards

People talking about this at Indigo Renderer forums, a developer said:

"Raw flops as a measurement is almost irrelevant. Data has to be fed to the arithmetic units. This has been a major problem for many years and is the limiting factor in most cases."

https://www.indigorenderer.com/foru...sid=eb3e0a25eab979b5504130a841ed1032&start=45

It's a vague explanation of the issue, but it could be related to why Radeons are always sometimes slower despite having higher compute power...

(Edited)

 

In theory you can pool or share VRAM in OpenCL 2.0 renderers or in some renderers you can use Out of core memory which is helpful

More GPUs you have, faster render times will be, due this I'm running 4*GPUs and if my Zotac RTX 2080Ti AMP doesn't sell then I will cannibalise that card to my loop hahaha, hate have something unused

Have look in rendering adding extra GPU will speed up the renders for sure

Hope this helps

Thanks, Jura

 

This again depends, in some renderers AMD GPUs are comparable with similar Nvidia gaming counterpart like is in LuxRender or AMD ProRender

Hope this helps

Thanks, Jura

 

Thanks HH! It's a pleasant change seeing a review devoted to professional apps and the GPU benchmark results.

I would expect some improvement coming with the Ampere node change.

 

Wow, you actually managed to find OpenCL application where NVIDIA is competitive, that's surprising.

Of course not all GPU Compute is the same, but not all GPU Compute accelerated rendering is the same either. Check for example LuxMark (based on LuxRender), where AMD is doing just fine

 

#RTXOn

 

This is incorrect, Nvidia have on multi occasions offered to work with AMD to run cuda on AMD hardware, and AMD have an inhouse tool for converting CUDA applications.

 

There is no link to this forum thread from the article, fyi.

 

Hilbert if you click the cog on the top right and choose Graphics under the first list you'll see an Advanced drop down click that and it's the second from the bottom choice

 

It's not true. Nividia cards are considerably faster and more efficient in more than 90 percent of mining algorithms. AMD cards are usually used for mining on Ethash but Ethash performance is not limited by GPU compute performance, it's mostly dependent on memory bandwidths which AMD cards are usually good at.

 

Interesting comparison. I miss two things though...

1. Unity3D - GPU progressive lightmapper comparison. It can use both RadeonRays and Optix for raytracing.
2. No GTX1080 and no SLI test?

 

The setting is probably specific to Vega.

 

Would've been nice to see some CPU thrown in so we can compare how much better GPUs are vs CPUs.

 

I know it's different but I transcoded a 3hr movie in H.264 4K HDR into H.265 once with only the cpu and then with NVENC on a 1080ti and the fps pretty much doubled
would be great to have 1 "gaming" and 1 "hedt" cpus just to see the giant trench between gpu and cpu processing

 

Hi there

Agree it would be worthwhile to test CPU vs GPU in rendering as most of these renderers do offer CPU only mode

3990x would be very close to RTX 2080Ti I would suspect in some renderers and in Blender I think 3990X would be slightly faster than RTX 2080Ti then add GPU to mix and you have one of hell render Workstation

Hope this helps

Thanks, Jura

 

Hi there

Not sure if would compare CPU vs GPU in video editing or video rendering

I think Linus and few others done such tests while back

Hope this helps

Thanks, Jura

 

From those results it appears to me the 2070 Super is the clear winner if you want to render using Blender. It is only 20% slower than faster 2080 Ti using the Optix API - and you can get it for 45% of price!

Cheapest 2080Ti is about £950, cheapest 2070 Super is £450... most expensive, fastest 2070 Super is still only £582 FFS!

Also an even closer 2080 Super or 2080 is still only the £650 area.

2080 ti should definitely be faster using Optix - it has 140% number of cores of 2080 Super and only 112% performance difference. Where did it lose the 28% difference??

Against 2070 Super it has 170% number of cores and only 120% difference in speed.

 

100% slower would be zero performance.
Not sure what to make of 120% less performance, does it undo work?

 

The 2070 Super is 120% while the 2080 Ti is 100% relative speed. It's obvious what I was talking about. So maybe its 20% slower then.