+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 102

Thread: Any news on Kepler rendering yet?

Hybrid View

  1. #1

    Any news on Kepler rendering yet?

    Has Nvidia posted anything new on a Kepler iray release?

  2. #2
    Administrator david.randle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    1,252
    We got a build of iray that supports Keplar late last week. It is integrated and 2012.5 will support Kepler. So far, we havn't had enough seat time to do any real benchmarking so that will come next.
    David Randle / General Manager / Bunkspeed

  3. #3
    Hi David,
    In the absence of hard information on the benchmarks then, can you suggest which might be an excellent Kepler card or cards to pair with a 12 core HP z800?
    Can the high-end gamer cards suffice, or is this a "wait for Quadro" moment!

  4. #4
    Senior Member andy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    781
    I think that always comes down to your average data, and how much money you have. If you have enough money for a few tesla cards, that might be the way to go. If you only have 1-2k, then go with gamer cards. The x80 is probably best. I have 2 570's, but occasionally a single 580 is faster, which would lead me to believe that it's running out of memory somewhere and is caching the data too many times. I'm not sure of the details, but I have one machine with a single 580 that occasionally renders faster than mine with 2 570's. The 580 has a 3GB version, and the 680 has a 4GB version. Make sure you spend the extra 50-100 bucks on the better version, and avoid any of the overclocked cards.

    If you are in the market just Now, I'd probably wait to see some sort of benchmark for the 680 using iRay since it sounds pretty close. I'm guessing once that's figured out, Keppler Quadro and Tesla cards are probably just around the corner. Of course, by just around the corner I mean early next year. nVidia isn't the fastest at releasing hardware (probably not a bad thing) and since you Also have to wait for a manufacturer to make their own version of the card, that slows things down. You'll get PNY's version, ASUS, EVGA, etc. They all take time to develop and test their own card with their own subtle tweaks.

  5. #5
    Administrator david.randle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    1,252
    Waller - If you can get a GTX 680 with 4GB of VRAM, that would be the the way to go right now. As it stands, the 680 is about 30% faster than the 580 and if you can get one more GB of VRAM, that's a win win. There is also the 680 out but although it is advertised as having 4GB of VRAM, it really has 2GB per GPU.
    David Randle / General Manager / Bunkspeed

  6. #6
    Thanks David and Andy--
    I guess I should have parsed my question a tad differently: is there any compelling reason to go Quadro rather than high-end gamer, such as GTX680 with a boatload of ram. I have always had Quadros, tho never the cutting-edge versions and they were always the "safe" choice...My current Quadro, the FX1800 is not the quickest and I have to rely on CPU-only renders which even on my 12 core box are not impressive.

    David, you seem to be coming down on the "fast-and-loose" side (LOL) and Andy seems to be playing it safe. I will have to re-pose this question with my SW vendor as well...so I'm just trying to get a leg-up on Kepler!
    Thanks, and any other thoughts would be welcome.

  7. #7
    Administrator david.randle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    1,252
    LOL...i was assuming you had to make a decision quickly based on your question. If time is on your side...then wait it out and see what happens with the Quadros. I hear the replacement for the Quadro 5000 which is based on the same chip as the GTX680 should be arriving fairly soon.
    David Randle / General Manager / Bunkspeed

  8. #8
    Senior Member andy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    781
    Hey David, the 680's 4GB version is split into 2? I thought that was the 690. I haven't dug too much into it, but if it compares to the 580, then there would be 2 versions, one with only more memory. Am I wrong?
    A quick check on newegg Looks like you just pay a premium for more memory. Everything appears to be the same other than 4GB of memory.

    I was just wondering if that was a typo and you meant the 690, or if they did something different with the 600 series cards. When I upgrade, I'll probably want a couple 680's with 4GB of memory, but it's not work the extra money if that actually ends up splitting the memory between it's cores.

    I say go quadro, only if your workplace requires it, or if you want to put more than a couple cards in, and Then why not Tesla? Gaming cards require much better cooling and use more power. I think that's because gamer geeks like to brag, so they push the cards to the limit. I kind of wonder if you'd get similar results using the software monitor to take the speed Down to what it is set on the quadro cards instead of using it for overclocking though. I don't like to touch any of the settings. Too much at risk. Even if you want 2 gaming cards, you'll have to upgrade your PSU. In fact, be careful. If you purchased a lower end workstation, you Might even need to upgrade your PSU with a single 680. I don't think it would hurt much, but we've had a few 470's here and they didn't upgrade the PSU at first and noticed those machines were slower at rendering. We ran the monitor and noticed they were running at only 50%. I think that's a fail safe built in or something if it's not getting enough power?

    One nice thing is you can get one that's a bit more efficient, and quieter as well. Both are good reasons to upgrade. Dell, HP, Lenovo...they only need to make sure you have enough power from day 1, and I still argue with them on that. The HP I have at home (workstation) only has a 300watt power supply in it, but after doing the math, the minimum recommended should be 330. I don't know if that's why, but it gets the BSOD All the time when I'm using the video card heavily.

  9. #9
    David/ Andy--
    What gain over my Quadro FX1800 would a Kepler Quadro provide...approximately...like in multiples?
    Walter

  10. #10
    Senior Member andy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    781
    Can an FX1800 even render? I thought the minimum requirements were 1GB of memory, no?

    Well, just past 4 times the memory means you can render a decent sized scene on your GPU.
    If you are rendering currently with your CPU, here's some easy math that is pretty close to accurate. I'll use my machine as an example:

    If I have to render on my 3470 Mhz 12thread processor I can multiply those two numbers to get 41,640. My 700 Mhz 480thread (cuda cores) video card comes out to 336,000. Rendering with two of those video cards is Actually 16x faster. It isn't Quite linear, but you can show the math that way to get a Really close idea of how much faster you can expect things.

    For Now though, we can't say quite the same thing about Kepler. We'll have to wait to see if it's the same. But Dave said the Kepler cards are roughly 3x faster? If that's the case, and I had the same model video cards then it would be 48x faster than my single high end processor at roughly $1000 upgrade.

    OK, so assuming your 1800 can render in GPU mode, you should see nearly no increase in speed over your CPU if your clock speed is somewhere around 700 Mhz. For some reason that's not in the specs on nVidia's site. 700x48= 33600. CPU - 3400x12= 40800.
    Depending on your processor, they might be pretty darn close. But of course, your processor can use all of your system memory, so right now with the 1800 you should probably render with CPU.
    With a $250 upgrade on a current card you would see a night and day difference. If you swap for 2 new GTX 680's (and probably a new PSU) for around 1400 total, you will be blown away.

    Remind your boss also, that not only is rendering that much faster, but since you are working in real-time rendering quality will be higher as well because you can see the results faster. You can't put a number on that.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts