Benchspeed or Bunkmark?

[Aselert]

It might be interesting to create a benchmark as do other programs (Maxwell Benchwell I remember) to enable comparison of different graphics cards capabilities.
I speak mainly GPU even if one could imagine CPU bench or Hybrid. But personnally I fear that it gives too much disparity ...

It could be a number of passes (1000 by exemple) in minimum time or vice versa (limited to 1 min) on the basis of "Material model" with its presets.

Good idea or not?

Cheers

[andy]

There use to be a scene of some sort of underwater personal transport device I think.

To have a good benchmark though you'd need a few different scenes and render sizes and record all of the numbers.

I'd say a more simple scene, another with self lit objects and glossies, and another with Tons of data and high resolution textures. Render each at a few different sizes.

[david.randle]

Download "Bunkspeed Graffiti Benchmark" from the Community under Projects.

Then render with the following criteria:

1920x1080 500passes Inline (mm:ss)
1920x1080 500passes Background (mm:ss)
960x540 realtime FPS at 1000 passes

Example:

"1x Quadro 5000 + 2x Tesla C2050"
2.2 (mm:ss)
2.32 (mm:ss)
8.5 FPS

[Cyberwest]

Hi,

I'd like to benchmark using Bunkspeed, but I can't find a single sample BIF file anywhere, and the Community Project area you mention here doesn't seem to exist. Any suggestions?

Thanks!

Best,
James

[JohnG]

This is the project David was referring to..

http://www.bunkspeed.com/asset/viewasset?assetId=463

[Cyberwest]

Brilliant - thanks! This is for 3D World magazine in the UK, by the way.

[lele]

Bunkspeed Shot 2012.5.1.2 "Trial" GPU only (NO background) - 500 pass - res. 960*540

ZOTAC GTX 560TI - 2GB - 384 Cuda
174s

ASUS GTX 670 - 2GB -1344 Cuda
125s

[andy]

Ouch! Really LeLe?

With those number it appears Keppler is running almost 2.5x slower than a Fermi card with comparable numbers. I thought Bunkspeed was seeing a slight increase at least.
Using straight up numbers, your 670 Should be 3.37x faster, but it's only 1.39x faster. Since it has way more cores, and only a slightly slower clock you would think it should breeze through the frames.

I'm hoping it's just not quite optimized yet.

[lele]

Kepler technology works differently than the Fermi. The amount of core is not comparable between their
Kepler cards have a lot more RAM memory and consume much less and the same prices
In my opinion a good step forward, even when the possibility of improving performance

[andy]

Sure, I think it's a step forward too, but it's pretty darn difficult to compare. With those numbers, none of the Kepler cards compare to the GTX 580 3GB. Not even close.

So we'll have to either wait for some optimization, or the next generation. Granted, if it's that much more power and cooling efficient, we can also jam more cards into a box easier.

But since games are getting better performance on Keppler, I would guess we just need some iRay optimization. I'm still going to wait on any "upgrades" for now. The slowest card we have in the building is the 470, which is still faster than the 670's. I do stuff that doesn't fit on a card often, but the designers don't unless they try and render a suite of products at once. But we have a render station for that rarity.