Indigo Renderer Forum

DanJ wrote:Did Kkors re-run his CPU benchmark? I was at the top with my system, shame I can't overclock mine!!

Haha I actually did.
Had tons of stuff and over 60 browser tabs open when I benched the first time.

I run it stable @4.6 in summer and @4.7 in winter.

kklors wrote:

DanJ wrote:Did Kkors re-run his CPU benchmark? I was at the top with my system, shame I can't overclock mine!!

Haha I actually did.
Had tons of stuff and over 60 browser tabs open when I benched the first time.

I run it stable @4.6 in summer and @4.7 in winter.

Nice, I'm looking to trade in my workstation and get a more graphics based pc, looking at gtx 1080/1070 with an overclocked i7, but I have to sell my current pc first before I can buy the new one!!

Yeah depends.

980Tis are cheap for what they are at the moment.

I'm waiting for 1080Ti, because the Pascal Titans were underwhelming.

The new titans are around twice the price of the 1080 over here. yeah 1080ti could be interesting, by the time I can afford a new system they would probably be out/outdated! haha problem with only being an enthusiast..

I wonder if anyone has a quadro m6000.. curious as to how it will perform.

DanJ wrote:I wonder if anyone has a quadro m6000.. curious as to how it will perform.

Quadro cards do OpenGL magic, no special OpenCL power to be expected :/
Afaik it will have little lower performance to the mainstream counterpart, little less because of slightly lower clock rates...

Zom-B wrote:

DanJ wrote:I wonder if anyone has a quadro m6000.. curious as to how it will perform.

Quadro cards do OpenGL magic, no special OpenCL power to be expected :/
Afaik it will have little lower performance to the mainstream counterpart, little less because of slightly lower clock rates...

So you would only really get one if you needed the 24Gb memory?

I was surprised to see my laptop GPU outpacing an m4000...

DanJ wrote:So you would only really get one if you needed the 24Gb memory?

Sounds like a very expensive solution, rather invest some time in optimizing your scene, and hope for RAM saving technologies in coming Indigo versions, like for example MipMapping.

DanJ wrote:I was surprised to see my laptop GPU outpacing an m4000...

Because its the same architecture and your card has higher clocks then the Quadro (and uses Boost to raise it even further): http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Quadro-M4000M-v ... e-GTX-970M

Also Quadro Drivers could perform diferently in OpenCL compared to the mainstream drivers...

When I try to run it, it crashes, and it's probably because my AMD configuration does not support SSE 4.1. It only supports SSE 1, 2, 3, 4A. Will the SSE 4.1 be a requirement for Indigo 4? If so, that's a very bad news for many AMD users. :(

IHMO I thank devs for newer instructions support as this gives boost and that is more important thing... Indigo is hell fast and using newer hardware is really a plus.

Posted my bench I noticed the new AMD Polaris RX480/70 did not shine as usual on OpenCL bench vs Nvidia.
Some missing optimization from AMD or from Indigo bench side?

davide445 wrote:Posted my bench I noticed the new AMD Polaris RX480/70 did not shine as usual on OpenCL bench vs Nvidia.
Some missing optimization from AMD or from Indigo bench side?

AMD bad drivers more likely

davide445 wrote:Posted my bench I noticed the new AMD Polaris RX480/70 did not shine as usual on OpenCL bench vs Nvidia.
Some missing optimization from AMD or from Indigo bench side?

What benchmarks are you referring to specifically?

In Luxmark the AMD GPUs are often faster than the nVidia ones. Especially the 1080 is a lot slower than the R9 390(x) for example.

fused wrote:

davide445 wrote:Posted my bench I noticed the new AMD Polaris RX480/70 did not shine as usual on OpenCL bench vs Nvidia.
Some missing optimization from AMD or from Indigo bench side?

What benchmarks are you referring to specifically?

Available OpenCL benchmarks was and are very few.
Just remembering Compubench or Luxrender in the pre-IndigoBench era results where comparable AMD GPU are often superior to Nvidia, i.e. an 7850 is far superior than 660, R9 270 also superior than 760, R9 290 is at the same level of a 980Ti, an R9 280 is superior to a 960, etc.
So surprised to see RX 480 passed so much from a 1060 in IndigoBench and CompuBench, Luxrender appear to be different with some AMD Ellsemere (RX 480) at the same level of a GTX980.

The big shift came with Maxwell I think. If you sort the results by Bedroom scores (the tougher of the two tests, stressing incoherent rays), on page 2 currently, you'll see that kklors' massively powerful 8-core Haswell-E at 4.6 GHz gets a slightly lower score than a firstgen Maxwell GTX 750 Ti (!!). I bet it wasn't even overclocked, those little GPUs have a ton of headroom available...

Anyway, it seems impressive to me that the little GPU is kicking so much ass compared to the previous generations from NVidia (and high end CPU-based systems), where AMD were very competitive with eg the 7970. I think it has a lot to do with the 2MB L2 cache and reduction of dynamic thread scheduling logic. Pascal added a large generational improvement on top (finally not 28nm, 2 GHz core, 8 GB memory), so it's in some way not surprising that they are winning right now.