test scene for Superfly speed.



  • Just got a GTX 970 a couple of days ago. Wow what a difference in render times. Using the 970 the test scene took 34 minutes. On my old test with the CPU I stopped it after about 3 hours and it was no where near done.



  • @ghostship That's quite a big difference in render times. Congrats on the new card. ~smile~



  • @ghostship It's always wonderful when you get an improvement that isn't measured in fractions of a percent. So hard to justify big expenses for those kind of steps.



  • @piersyf said in test scene for Superfly speed.:

    31 minutes 33 seconds on a GTX 970, with other stuff running.
    I just did this test and my 970 came in at almost the exact same time, mine was just 15 seconds faster. But I guess you'd expect the same cards to be within a few seconds of each other on tests like these.

    Maybe I missed it, but did someone give a 1070 time yet? I've started to get back into working on my Poser scenes and the faster I can render, the better.



  • @johndoe641 no you did not miss anything. Looks like no one that has posted their times have the 1070. (I just scanned the whole thread) Should be faster than the 970. @jura11 had some of the best times with a 1080.



  • @ghostship said in test scene for Superfly speed.:

    Just got a GTX 970 a couple of days ago. Wow what a difference in render times. Using the 970 the test scene took 34 minutes. On my old test with the CPU I stopped it after about 3 hours and it was no where near done.

    Hi there

    When you will add one extra GPU yours times will go down further,usually yours times will be around twice faster like in my case,but this depends on few factors,but still awesome improvement on render times

    In some renderers I prefer to render with CPU as with CPU you usually have more features enabled like with GPU and plus you are not limited by GPU VRAM size,but when CPU is not fast enough and you have fast GPU then,there is no brainier to use GPU

    Thanks,Jura



  • @johndoe641 said in test scene for Superfly speed.:

    @piersyf said in test scene for Superfly speed.:

    31 minutes 33 seconds on a GTX 970, with other stuff running.
    I just did this test and my 970 came in at almost the exact same time, mine was just 15 seconds faster. But I guess you'd expect the same cards to be within a few seconds of each other on tests like these.

    Maybe I missed it, but did someone give a 1070 time yet? I've started to get back into working on my Poser scenes and the faster I can render, the better.

    I've tested only my GTX1080 with Titan X and render times are pretty much fast as below

    Best time on GTX1080 alone is 18 minutes with 512 bucket size and with 1024 Bucket size time went down to 17 minutes
    With GTX 1080 and Titan X with 512 bucket size 10 minutes,with 1024 bucket size time is 14 minutes

    But agree improvement is there if you are comparing my times,GTX1080 is around 2(in some cases 1.5x) times faster in rendering than my Titan X

    Hope this helps

    Thanks,Jura



  • @jura11 said in test scene for Superfly speed.:

    @ghostship said in test scene for Superfly speed.:

    Just got a GTX 970 a couple of days ago. Wow what a difference in render times. Using the 970 the test scene took 34 minutes. On my old test with the CPU I stopped it after about 3 hours and it was no where near done.

    Hi there

    When you will add one extra GPU yours times will go down further,usually yours times will be around twice faster like in my case,but this depends on few factors,but still awesome improvement on render times

    In some renderers I prefer to render with CPU as with CPU you usually have more features enabled like with GPU and plus you are not limited by GPU VRAM size,but when CPU is not fast enough and you have fast GPU then,there is no brainier to use GPU

    Thanks,Jura

    Wow!
    My brother will be getting a new video card in a few months and I'll be getting his 980. Maybe time for a new mobo that will handle two big-assed video cards as the mobo I have now has SATA ports covered by the GPU.



  • @jura11 said in test scene for Superfly speed.:

    With GTX 1080 and Titan X with 512 bucket size 10 minutes,with 1024 bucket size time is 14 minutes

    You SLIed two different cards together?!



  • CUDA and Direct compute don't require SLI, and that will actually either slow it down or cause it not to work.

    If you have multiple video cards, each one is treated as a separate processor. With Superfly and many other GPU render engines it will simply work on multiple buckets at the same time, each card doing one bucket.

    SLI and Crossfire are frame rate tricks for games basically, using the power of two ramdac's to increase frame rates.



  • @jura11 said in test scene for Superfly speed.:

    @johndoe641 said in test scene for Superfly speed.:

    @piersyf said in test scene for Superfly speed.:

    31 minutes 33 seconds on a GTX 970, with other stuff running.
    I just did this test and my 970 came in at almost the exact same time, mine was just 15 seconds faster. But I guess you'd expect the same cards to be within a few seconds of each other on tests like these.

    Maybe I missed it, but did someone give a 1070 time yet? I've started to get back into working on my Poser scenes and the faster I can render, the better.

    I've tested only my GTX1080 with Titan X and render times are pretty much fast as below

    Best time on GTX1080 alone is 18 minutes with 512 bucket size and with 1024 Bucket size time went down to 17 minutes
    With GTX 1080 and Titan X with 512 bucket size 10 minutes,with 1024 bucket size time is 14 minutes

    But agree improvement is there if you are comparing my times,GTX1080 is around 2(in some cases 1.5x) times faster in rendering than my Titan X

    Hope this helps

    Thanks,Jura

    Yeah, I'm assuming that the 1070 would be around 22-24 minutes. Though that's a bit fast than my 31 minutes on my 970, that's not a big of a jump as the 1080. It would probably be much more noticeable on very complex scenes that would usually take my system 3 hours to render most likely or in when I'm using the GPU to render in Luxrender.



  • @ghostship said in test scene for Superfly speed.:

    @jura11 said in test scene for Superfly speed.:

    @ghostship said in test scene for Superfly speed.:

    Just got a GTX 970 a couple of days ago. Wow what a difference in render times. Using the 970 the test scene took 34 minutes. On my old test with the CPU I stopped it after about 3 hours and it was no where near done.

    Hi there

    When you will add one extra GPU yours times will go down further,usually yours times will be around twice faster like in my case,but this depends on few factors,but still awesome improvement on render times

    In some renderers I prefer to render with CPU as with CPU you usually have more features enabled like with GPU and plus you are not limited by GPU VRAM size,but when CPU is not fast enough and you have fast GPU then,there is no brainier to use GPU

    Thanks,Jura

    Wow!
    My brother will be getting a new video card in a few months and I'll be getting his 980. Maybe time for a new mobo that will handle two big-assed video cards as the mobo I have now has SATA ports covered by the GPU.

    @ghostship

    If you will get GTX 980 as second GPU then yours renders times will be faster,this depends on more factors,but I think something like in region 1x or 1.5x increase in render speed is very possible and 2x increase render speed is very possible too

    Regarding new motherboard,I would wait on RYZEN from AMD,this should be pretty awesome CPU and shouldn't cost as Intel counterparts plus 8 cores/16 threads will be great in rendering as well,there are few benches and looks like their CPU are on par with Intel 6900k which $1000 USD CPU and from reports RYZEN 8 core/16 threads shouldn't cost as Intel,I would say in somewhere in region $450-$500USD

    Regarding yours,you can buy angled SATA cables or depends on how many SATA cables do you have you can still buy SATA 3 PCIE card

    Hope this helps

    Thanks,Jura



  • @matb said in test scene for Superfly speed.:

    @jura11 said in test scene for Superfly speed.:

    With GTX 1080 and Titan X with 512 bucket size 10 minutes,with 1024 bucket size time is 14 minutes

    You SLIed two different cards together?!

    @matb

    You can't SLI two different GPU,in theory

    But no,SLI doesn't work in any renderer,you should turn off SLI in any renderer and as @shvrdavid pointed out,both cards are treated as separate processors or separate cards and each cards renders each bucket separately,only last bucket is treated differently or this is rendered by GPU which is highest or main GPU

    Titan X is not bad card in rendering,but seems in SuperFly you will benefit with GTX1080 more than with GTX Titan X,my GTX 1080 is clearly faster than Titan X,with both cards story is different,but still not the best

    Few month back I've done tests in Cycles and SF with Titan X and GTX 780,where my GTX 780 has been faster mainly when SSS has been used and Titan X has struggled with SSS,not sure if they changed CUDA kernel in new Cycles,but Titan X is slightly faster,but still not as fast as GTX 780,same can apply in Poser SF where seems Maxwell generation of cards still is not on par with earlier generation of GTX and now with newer cards,which is strange,have done tests in IRAY too and there Titan X is faster than GTX 1080

    I still do lots of testing and trying to find balance,but if I could recommend and you are thinking get new card,have look on new generation of Titan x and Pascal GPU,they will increase render speeds

    I will have two GTX 1080 soon and will test both cards in rendering if its worth to get extra GTX 1080

    This is render which I've done 3 weeks back

    alt text

    Render times per GPU at 45 samples and times are from Poser log:

    Titan X has rendered that image at 29.1 minutes(1746 seconds)
    GTX1080 has rendered that image in 8.70 minutes (525 seconds)
    GTX1080 with Titan X has rendered that image in 4.60 seconds(281 seconds)

    Hope this helps and answer yours questions

    Thanks,Jura



  • @jura11 said in test scene for Superfly speed.:

    GTX1080 with Titan X has rendered that image in 4.60 seconds(281 seconds)

    4.6 seconds? wow



  • @Y-Phil said in test scene for Superfly speed.:

    @jura11 said in test scene for Superfly speed.:

    GTX1080 with Titan X has rendered that image in 4.60 seconds(281 seconds)

    4.6 seconds? wow

    Not quite 4.6 seconds,I made mistake 281 seconds is around 4.60 minutes

    Sorry for my mistake there

    Thanks,Jura



  • @jura11

    Ur... sorry but I couldn't help but tease.... ~wink~



  • @jura11 Thank you for clarifying.



  • For people who can do math better than me, what would my render time decrease to if I went with a 1070 vs my 970 if the render on my current card took roughly 6 hours to complete using GPU rendering in SF?



  • @johndoe641 not sure how much a difference in time those two cards would be (I know that's no help.) What they are saying further up the thread is that if you have a machine with two slots for video cards you can run both cards at the same time and Poser will render two tiles at the same time effectively doubling your render speed.



  • I have a Gigabyte Gtx1070 that is factory overclocked, and it is a very fast card. OC mini version.
    The GPU stays at about 2 ghtz even on very long renders (days, not hours), and rarely gets hot enough to down clock.
    A non overclocked 1070 is 52 percent faster than a 970 on just about every benchmark, even with incomplete drivers to take advantage of the new GPU.

    http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-970-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1070/2577vs3609

    The additional GPU memory on the 1070 is well worth the investment, just in that fact alone.
    52 percent faster on average, is a huge plus as well.
    I'm not sure how much faster a 500 mhtz jump in GPU speed on the 1070 comes out to, but it has to be substantial.