Printable View
http://davibu.interfree.it/opencl/sm...mallptGPU.html
download the .tgz at the bottom of the page and extract.
note: this is not cinebench, the render will never finish!
http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/7351/oclrt.png
you dont have to do 5,000 passes.:p:
sample/sec: 1,123K
Thanks for the post! :)
Looks good... Searching for an extractor app now.
This worked:
http://download.cnet.com/IZArc/3000-...ml?tag=lst-0-1
Looks like the app uses 1 GPU, and at least 4 cores on a CPU...
http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/9163/smallix.th.jpg
4890 seems to do well in this one.
Indeed!!
And this one: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=241794
I think ATI is rocking on OpenCL right now...
Could you verify that you are also just using 1 GPU, with GPU-z?
Actually, I only have one. I forgot to update my sig when I sold the second one :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Talonman
--Matt
I can't get this thing to run right... it's all fuzzy and runs really slow. I extracted with winrar and ran the app.
It does start out fuzzy...
It is still rendering getting better with each pass.
This is after letting it run about 10 minutes:
http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/1645/longtime.jpg
Wow... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by mattkosem
Thanks!
I hope it supports multi-GPU's soon.
I could use the extra speed. :up:
For trivia, the 1/2 of my air cooled 295 that is working, heated up to 64C max. (Room currently 72.1F)
Even though my GPU's utilization was 99%, it's temp never got excessive.
I think for what it's doing, the app runs rather cool.
I hit 36c at the end with a room temp of 23c. I'm under water though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Talonman
--Matt
http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=91863
We are currently exploring the idea that ATI is running OpenCL apps much faster, but the Nvidia boys seem to have higher CPU utilization in more app than 1.
If it helping us, or hurting us, I can't say, but would love to know...
How does your CPU utilization look?
Note that my Q6600@3.81GHz is at 26% utilization in post #2.
I see 0%.
--Matt
Thanks again Matt...
So where is an expert when you need one? :)
Could that CPU work be hurting our performance, and better suited for the GPU?
I think our OpenCL driver could be miss-routing work, or maybe some funky global memory accessing, also causing higher CPU utilization?
I really have no idea. :shrug:
Nvidia doesn't support OpenCL on the CPU, only the GPU.
yeah, according to gpu-z and ccc, my 2nd gpu is doing nothing. also not seeing any load on the cpu as it runs
Thanks for the post. :)
4870 @ 512mb, 790mhz.
http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/1856/13195137.png
http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/2631/25247002.jpg
http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/6707/gpuzwe.jpg
>> Q9450 @ 3608MHz
>> CPU utilization: ~0%
Code:OpenCL Platform 0: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
OpenCL Device 0: Type = TYPE_GPU
OpenCL Device 0: Name = Cypress
OpenCL Device 0: Compute units = 20
OpenCL Device 0: Max. work group size = 256
Reading file 'rendering_kernel.cl' (size 2997 bytes)
OpenCL Device 0: kernel work group size = 256
I was board... and I'm a list guy.
DosDuoNo ---------- GTX 260 --- Sample/sec --- 1093.2K
Chumbucket843 ---- GTX 260 --- Sample/sec --- 1123.2K
Talonman --------- 1/2 a 295 --- Sample/sec --- 1159.2K
NovoRei ------------ 4870 ------ Sample/sec --- 5616.1K
PyrO ----------- 1/2 a 4870X2 -- Sample/sec --- 5796.2K
mattkosem --------- 4890 ------ Sample/sec --- 6751.6K
fellix bg ------------ 5870 ------ Sample/sec -- 13719.6K
Another outstanding ATI Score... :)
DosDuoNo ---------- GTX 260 --- Sample/sec --- 1093.2K
Chumbucket843 ---- GTX 260 --- Sample/sec --- 1123.2K
Talonman --------- 1/2 a 295 --- Sample/sec --- 1159.2K
NovoRei ------------ 4870 ------ Sample/sec --- 5616.1K
PyrO ----------- 1/2 a 4870X2 -- Sample/sec --- 5796.2K
mattkosem --------- 4890 ------ Sample/sec --- 6751.6K
fellix bg ------------ 5870 ------ Sample/sec -- 13719.6K
Toysoldier ---------- 5870 ------ Sample/sec -- 13719.6K
FYI - The programmer is looking to fix us Nvidia guys up:
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=55913
"Hi, I'm David, the author of SmallptGPU. I think I can clarify few points:
- About the poor performances on Nvidia, I have developed SmallptGPU on an ATI HD4870. Both ATI and NVIDIA OpenCL drivers are in a early stage of the development and have their fair amount of problems/bugs/etc. I have avoided problematic paths on ATI because is my card while I have never tested SmallptGPU on NVIDIA. I assume I'm doing something that the NVIDIA OpenCL driver doesn't like at all. The high CPU usage is a good hint of this problem.
- The sources are available on the web site, so if anyone has a fix for NVIDA cards, I will be happy to apply it.
- SmallptGPU uses the first GPU device available (there is a command line option to run on CPU device). About all the load should be on GPU, CPU is nearly unused. It is not able to use multiple devices at the same time so any SLI/CrossFire configuration will be used only at 50% of its capabilities.
- 5870 is horrible fast ... I' trying to not buy one ;)"
a single 5970
Sweet! :)
DosDuoNo ---------- GTX 260 --- Sample/sec --- 1,093.2K
Chumbucket843 ---- GTX 260 --- Sample/sec --- 1,123.2K
Talonman --------- 1/2 a 295 --- Sample/sec --- 1,159.2K
NovoRei ------------ 4870 ------ Sample/sec --- 5,616.1K
PyrO ----------- 1/2 a 4870X2 -- Sample/sec --- 5,796.2K
mattkosem --------- 4890 ------ Sample/sec --- 6,751.6K
safan80 ------------ 5970 ------ Sample/sec -- 11,012.8K
fellix bg ------------ 5870 ------ Sample/sec -- 13,719.6K
Toysoldier ---------- 5870 ------ Sample/sec -- 13,719.6K
I'd like to update my score.
--Matt
I don't know if we are officially recording them... :)
But glad to!
DosDuoNo ---------- GTX 260 --- Sample/sec --- 1,093.2K
Chumbucket843 ---- GTX 260 --- Sample/sec --- 1,123.2K
Talonman --------- 1/2 a 295 --- Sample/sec --- 1,159.2K
NovoRei ------------ 4870 ------ Sample/sec --- 5,616.1K
PyrO ----------- 1/2 a 4870X2 -- Sample/sec --- 5,796.2K
mattkosem --------- 4890 ------ Sample/sec --- 7,520.9K
safan80 ------------ 5970 ------ Sample/sec -- 11,012.8K
fellix bg ------------ 5870 ------ Sample/sec -- 13,719.6K
Toysoldier ---------- 5870 ------ Sample/sec -- 13,719.6K
i'f you're going to have the scores in a list, i think it might be best to have clock speeds listed too
New beta is out (1.5) -- read more here!
Users with NV cards - report in. ;)
My score...
Version 1.5 scores
(still only using 1 core of my X2 card)
RUN_SCENE_CORNELL_32SIZE : 3626.3K
http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/7074/c32.th.jpg
RUN_SCENE_CORNELL_64SIZE : 6955.5K
http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/9216/c64.th.jpg
RUN_SCENE_CORNELL_128SIZE : 5976.7K
http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/83/c128.th.jpg
RUN_SCENE_SIMPLE_64SIZE : 31614.8K
http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/9903/s64.th.jpg
V1.5 scores...
5850 1.05ghz core/1200 mem.
ATi users should go along with 64 work group size.
I agree...Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyr0
But being a Nvidia guy, and knowing we need some work in this benchmark yet, think we should mess around in this thread until we have a version better suited for both GPU vendors...
Then we should start a new fancy thread, with clocks and all.
I will be glad to if we need a 'list guy'. :)
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=55913&page=2Quote:
Originally Posted by fellix_bg
Working on it! :)
RUN_SCENE_CORNELL_32SIZE = 2072.2k
RUN_SCENE_CORNELL_64SIZE = 2898.2K
run_scene_cornell_96size = 2662.0k
RUN_SCENE_CORNELL_128SIZE = 2898.2K
run_scene_cornell_160size = 2898.1k
run_scene_cornell_192size = 2898.7k
run_scene_cornell_224size = 2318.5k
run_scene_cornell_256size = 2526.3k
run_scene_cornell_320size = 2813.9k
run_scene_cornell_384size = 2813.9k
RUN_SCENE_SIMPLE_64SIZE = 113,564.9K
Correct!Quote:
Originally Posted by fellix_bg
RUN_SCENE_CORNELL_64SIZE = 6955.5K HD4870@790/900mhz 512MB :up:
Note that us Nvidia guy's did save some face, running the RUN_SCENE_SIMPLE_64SIZE test in his v1.5 BETA directory. http://davibu.interfree.it/opencl/sm...u-v1.5beta.tgz
This was running on 1/2 of my 295@ C=621, Shaders=1512, and Memory=1152.
http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/4175/highc.jpg
114,154K...
It was posted by fellix, that his 5870 was getting 70,000K in that scene.
Likewise, Sinistar posted that he was getting 71,000K on his 5870, so there is yet hope for a performance increase.
In all the other tests, still not so good.
Not much real work to be done in this particular scene. Most of the rays are terminated right on in the void. Still, the CPU load time is worrisome.
http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/7351/oclrt.png
nice increase in performance but cpu usage is still high.
This is me on the latest version... :)
http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/6147/latesthz.jpg
5770@950/1200 :)
HD4850 @ 800/2250
EDIT: Sorry, here's group size 64...
http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/7810/groupsize64.jpg
I believe this is what we are looking at so far...
freeloader ---------- 5850 ------ Sample/sec -- 17,298.6K v1.5 (GPU=1007, M=1152)
freeloader ---------- 5850 ------ Sample/sec -- 13,719.6K v1.4 (GPU=1007, M=1152)
Toysoldier ---------- 5870 ------ Sample/sec -- 13,719.6K v1.4 (GPU=875, M=1300)
fellix bg ------------ 5870 ------ Sample/sec -- 13,719.6K v1.4 (GPU=900, M=1250)
safan80 ------------ 5970 ------ Sample/sec -- 11,012.8K v1.4 (Unknown)
redrumy3 ---------- 4870 ------- Sample/sec --- 7,769.6K v1.5 (GPU=875, M=1100)
SocketMan --------- 5770 ------ Sample/sec --- 7,535.1K v1.4 (GPU=950, M=1200)
mattkosem --------- 4890 ------ Sample/sec --- 7,520.9K v1.4 (GPU=1056, M=1000)
BeepBeep2 --------- 4850 ------ Sample/sec --- 7,172.0K v1.5 (GPU=800, M=1125)
Mechromancer ------ 4870 ------ Sample/sec --- 6,955.5K v1.5 (GPU=790, M=900)
PyrO --------- 1/2 of a 4870X2 - Sample/sec --- 6,955.5K v1.5 (GPU=790, M=915)
redrumy3 ---------- 4870 ------- Sample/sec --- 6,375.8K v1.4 (GPU=875, M=1100)
PyrO --------- 1/2 of a 4870X2 - Sample/sec --- 5,796.2K v1.4 (GPU=790, M=915)
NovoRei ------------ 4870 ------ Sample/sec --- 5,616.1K v1.4 (512mb, 790mhz)
Talonman ----- 1/2 of a 295 ---- Sample/sec --- 2,898.1K v1.5 (C=621, SH=1512, M=1152)
m0da ----------- 8400M GS ---- Sample/sec --- 2,808.0K v1.5 (C=514, SH=1028, M=760)
Chumbucket843 -- GTX 260 ----- Sample/sec --- 2,068.7K v1.5 (C=602, SH=1369, M=1159)
Talonman ------ 1/2 of a 295 --- Sample/sec --- 1,159.2K v1.4 (C=621, SH=1512, M=1152)
Chumbucket843 -- GTX 260 ----- Sample/sec --- 1,123.2K v1.4 (C=602, SH=1369, M=1159)
DosDuoNo ------- GTX 260 ----- Sample/sec --- 1,093.2K v1.4 (C=655, SH=1125, M=1125)
If you guy's want me to start a new thread taking these scores over, linking back to here, and recording all new posts, give the word...
I can serve as an excellent 'list guy', but I would rather update the OP. :up:
If Chumbucket843 want's the action, that's fine too. I'm easy...
Feel free to copy and paste.
I don't want to seem pushy! ;)
I still am not sure if we want to record this app 'benchmark wise', or just throw some numbers up to get a feel of our performance based on our GPU.
It is fun to see how we progress on the new versions. I find it to be a charming app.
I do have to say that the 114,154.1K Samples/sec I can produce running the 'RUN_SCENE_SIMPLE_64SIZE', has me wondering just how wild of a ride OpenCL is going to be on performance.
FYI- You DO get your picture rendered darn fast in that one! :D
It looks like to me so far that ATI or Nvidia has an opportunity to shine, based on exactly what type of calculations the app is doing. Strap in!
I imagine this all could change as we get new versions of OpenCL released to us, along with diver updates.
There may currently be certain types of calculations that we are not handling the best way, but just like a switch thrown, now runs greasy fast? Hard to say.
Actually, the program is not ray tracer, but a path tracer instead. That's why the image quality is noisy at first, but improves as the number of render passes grows.
Thanks for the heads up though. :up:
"Path tracing is essentially a form of ray tracing whereby each ray is recursively traced along a path until it reaches a light emitting source where the light contribution along the path is calculated. This recursive tracing helps for solving the lighting equation more accurately than conventional ray tracing..." :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
BTW: Talonman, you can change my "2250" to 1125, it's only 2250 effective.
I would like to give some results with my GFX card but i just cant get this to work, keeps saying that its missing the OpenCL.dll
Just cant figure this out, im on 9.12 and i did instal the hotfix but still without result.
Thanks for the tip's boys... ;)
I have no problem with 'path tracer', if it's a more accurate term.
2250 changed to 1125 too. :up:
have you installed the ati stream sdk ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Earzz
http://developer.amd.com/gpu/ATIStre...s/default.aspx
doesn't look like it kicks on 3d mode on nvidia cards, or even loads the card- look at cpu usage too
8400M GS - 2808ks/s
http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/7...llptgpu.th.png
Odd...
I just checked mine, and it goes to 3D Performance speed when the app starts.
http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/8166/clocks.jpg
I do run with 'Prefer max performance'. in the control panel too. That might help?
http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/2...trolpanela.jpg
High CPU utilization on systems with Nvidia GPU's installed, is still largely considered an official mystery I believe...
Thanks for the post:
m0da ------------ 8400M GS ---- Sample/sec --- 2,808.0K v1.5 (C=514, SH=1028, M=760)
Yep i had it already installed, this version:Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyr0
ati-stream-sdk-v2.0-vista-win7-64.exe (77.4MB)
1.5
4870 875/1100
7,769K
http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/6581/40445768.th.jpg
redrumy3 ---------- 4870 ------- Sample/sec --- 7,769.6K v1.5 (GPU=875, M=1100)
if it installed correctly, that should have opencl.dll's included :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Earzz
i see 2 dll's on my sys...
one in "C:\Program Files (x86)\ATI Stream\bin\x86_64\OpenCL.dll"
the other "C:\Program Files (x86)\ATI Stream\bin\x86\OpenCL.dll"
Thanks guys i finally got it to work, seems like something went wrong with my previous install :confused:
Well here are my results with my XFX 5750 512MB @ 870/1338
http://i281.photobucket.com/albums/k...amR/opencl.png
strange...
on my system the bench refuse to run...
tell me: OpenCl.dll is not aviable....
Thanks... :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Earzz
I believe this is what we are looking at so far...
Lightman ----------- 5870 ------ Sample/sec -- 19,088.2K v1.6 (GPU=1056, M=1247)
freeloader ---------- 5850 ------ Sample/sec -- 17,298.6K v1.5 (GPU=1007, M=1152)
freeloader ---------- 5850 ------ Sample/sec -- 13,719.6K v1.4 (GPU=1007, M=1152)
Toysoldier ---------- 5870 ------ Sample/sec -- 13,719.6K v1.4 (GPU=875, M=1300)
fellix bg ------------ 5870 ------ Sample/sec -- 13,719.6K v1.4 (GPU=900, M=1250)
safan80 ------------ 5970 ------ Sample/sec -- 11,012.8K v1.4 (Unknown)
redrumy3 ---------- 4870 ------- Sample/sec --- 7,769.6K v1.5 (GPU=875, M=1100)
SocketMan --------- 5770 ------ Sample/sec --- 7,535.1K v1.4 (GPU=950, M=1200)
Earzz -------------- 5750 ------ Sample/sec --- 7,535.1K v1.5 (GPU=870, M=1338)
mattkosem --------- 4890 ------ Sample/sec --- 7,520.9K v1.4 (GPU=1056, M=1000)
BeepBeep2 --------- 4850 ------ Sample/sec --- 7,172.0K v1.5 (GPU=800, M=1125)
Mechromancer ------ 4870 ------ Sample/sec --- 6,955.5K v1.5 (GPU=790, M=900)
PyrO --------- 1/2 of a 4870X2 - Sample/sec --- 6,955.5K v1.5 (GPU=790, M=915)
redrumy3 ----------- 4870 ------ Sample/sec --- 6,375.8K v1.4 (GPU=875, M=1100)
PyrO --------- 1/2 of a 4870X2 - Sample/sec --- 5,796.2K v1.4 (GPU=790, M=915)
NovoRei ------------ 4870 ------ Sample/sec --- 5,616.1K v1.4 (512mb, 790mhz)
Talonman ----- 1/2 of a 295 ---- Sample/sec --- 2,898.1K v1.5 (C=621, SH=1512, M=1152)
m0da ----------- 8400M GS ---- Sample/sec --- 2,808.0K v1.5 (C=514, SH=1028, M=760)
Chumbucket843 -- GTX 260 ----- Sample/sec --- 2,068.7K v1.5 (C=602, SH=1369, M=1159)
Talonman ------ 1/2 of a 295 --- Sample/sec --- 1,159.2K v1.4 (C=621, SH=1512, M=1152)
Chumbucket843 -- GTX 260 ----- Sample/sec --- 1,123.2K v1.4 (C=602, SH=1369, M=1159)
DosDuoNo ------- GTX 260 ----- Sample/sec --- 1,093.2K v1.4 (C=655, SH=1125, M=1125)
Just for trivia boys, we are up to v2.0 Alpha, with multi-GPU support for this app.
If you have any interesting results, I would be glad to point David to this thread.
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=55913&page=5
My precious:
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/8...61248v1664.png
Soon I'm going to try V2.0;)
Nice... What was your GPU set to?
Lightman ----------- 5870 ------ Sample/sec -- 19,088.2K v1.6 (GPU=???, M=????)
the new version doesn't seem to be working very well here
http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/9233/29202213.th.jpg
I love the workload load balancing between my CPU and GPU. This new version works quite well for a single GPU config. Pyr0, did you try a larger work group size? Such a small size is probably not giving the second GPU much to do. Try 160 and 256 (160 = 800/5 clusters that our GPUs have).
http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r...-v20alpha1.jpg
Thanks for the posts guys, going to put the word out now to David, to look this way too.
Update: Done, and I'm sure he is looking at your results now! :)
Note that Dave posted this: "This version should run on all GPUs (and CPUs on Apple/ATI) available. It is highly untested and I'm experiencing a problem under Windows: my PC resets after few seconds like if my power supply couldn't sustain the load Everything works fine under Linux ... quite strange. Well, it may crash but you can give it a try."
If any Windows ATI guy has the system power off, please put the word out. (He is on Windows XP)
2.0 does seem better on single card at least for my 4870
875/1100 need better cooling for my 4870 if i want to push it more but this is my 24/7 clock on stock cooler.
no problems here running on windows 7
8,396.1K
http://img706.imageshack.us/img706/435/19787543.th.jpg
i've tried different sizes, but they don't make any difference...
i notice when i first start any of the tests, it looks like this and has good cpu utilization too:
http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/1158/runx.th.jpg
but after approx 5 or 6 seconds, the display window changes to look like my previous post and cpu usage drops to around 20% or less:
http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/9233/29202213.th.jpg
It takes a few seconds for the program to load balance all the different OpenCL devices. Because the CPU is so much slower at these calculations, it gets a very small percentage of work to do. The GPUs appropriately handle the heavy stuff ;). They'll probably fix how the GPU workload is split between multiple GPUs in the Beta and final release (crosses fingers).Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyr0
Everything is in the pic :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Talonman
GPU - 1056MHz
MEM - 1247MHz
for some reason my 285's dont throttle up?
That is odd, both sides of my 295, and 280 all go into 3D Performance Mode correctly.
http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/2783/v2alpha7.jpg
Pyr0, my sounds strange but the problem is that some of the hardware here is just "too" fast for a so simple scene. It looks like the automatic profiling isn't able to correctly evaluate the performances of your GPUs/CPUs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyr0
As suggested by Lightman, I'm going to add hand tunable workload % so, even the profiling doesn't work well, you can hand tune the % of work assigned to each device.
Thanks for joining David!! Make no mistake, we are glad to have you as a member here... :up:
Same as Pyr0, cpu usage drops out. But all 4 GPU's are clocking up and working great.
http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/867/rt20.jpg
A manual GPU workload distribution feature has been added, to insure optimum performance by hand tuning.
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=55913&page=6
(Post 137 to download.)
http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/4...alphab1.th.jpg
Might want to give it a run if you have more than 1 GPU to task!
i think my problem might be driver related or something :shrug:
with the new build, it starts just as before, only showing half of the scene, then a few seconds later it changes to show approx 1/10th (just like the pics in my previous post)
even using the manual load balancing can't fix it
i cannot get it to display a full scene. it's like one half of my X2 card is not working
samples/sec fluctuates wildly anywhere from 4800 to 8000, and again only one half of my X2 card is using 3d clocks
http://i2.sqi.sh/s_1/AE/gpu.jpg
As you can see in my post above, with auto load balancing, only a small sliver of the scene at the bottom is visible. With v2.0 Alpha2, the more I increase the load on the cpu, more of the scene becomes visible.
The same happens when I increase the load on the fourth OpenCL device "GPU'. So, the more I increase the loads on devices 4 and 5, more of the scene becomes visible. Have no idea why, just what I noticed.
Your problems seem to be coming from broken OpenCL install or you are simply still using Beta4 version of AMD Steam SDK.
If that's the case just uninstall old beta and install final version.
On my rig SmallPT works correctly and displays whole image.
Previous versions work fine. It's only v2.0 Alpha's 1 and 2 that this happens with. With multi GPU's.
Lightman... :)
http://www.luxrender.net/wiki/index....der_and_OpenCL
FYI - "SmallptGPU is a porting of original Kevin Beason's [1] to OpenCL. The performances were again quite impressive: SmallptGPU was about 10 time faster than the SmallptCPU. A video of SmallptGPU can be find here or here. It has attracted a noticeable amount of interest and has been published on the front page of Khronos group too. It has been used as benchmark at Beyond3D, XtremeSystems and in other websites. Some really impressive results have been achieved by running SmallptGPU on an overclocked ATI HD5870 by Lightman: "
Looks like it paid off to be 'King of the List'!
Oh nooo!
Now I'm sure someone will beat my score today!
;)
ps: You're mentioned as well!
Yepper... How fun! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
Well, I really like new and improved SmallPT 2.0 Beta 2 :smile:
Thanks Dade:!:
Here is what I promised to Talonman:
http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/243...071282pnga.jpg
and to show it's not suicide shot ...
http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/239...71282pngay.jpg
:razz:
I think I've also found small bug. As you can see on my second screen the average score is really low but you can trace from GPU load graph as well as CPU load graphs that everything was full bore for over 6000 passes. That counter just reset itself around 5900-6000 pass. It started to climb upwards from 0. :mad:
From other observations, sometimes GPU and CPU usage fluctuates a lot, especially at the beginning (first 1000 passes) but then stabilizes.
My GPU is golden! Not so much my memory ... (it's not stable at stock, luckily SmallPT seems to not care about that) Mr. Baumann I will need HD5890 quite soon so I can send my card for RMA ;]
The app reacts quite nicely to GPU mem overclock.
PS. I have an idea how to improve my score some more! Stay tuned in the next day or 2 ;)
Hey....another 58x0 user who can do 1.1ghz on their core! :clap:
On stock cooler with 20C ambient and everything in a case :)Quote:
Originally Posted by freeloader
BTW I haven't find my max. GPU clock yet.
This clock was only set to reach 20000k+ samples/sec.
Where did you get the 2.0 beta from?
I'd like to give it a shot at 1.1ghz on my 5850 as well. :) (air cooled as well.)
Right here... :up:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talonman
Talonman....what batch file were you running? cornell 32/64/128 or simple?
I love my 4850:
I don't think this is the max, I got curious so I set it to 825 and ran the benchmark.
Radeon 4850 @ 825/1132
Single 6-pin PCIE connector, anyone? :P
http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/319...core825mem.jpg
I normally rust run the 'smallptGPU' file.Quote:
Originally Posted by freeloader
The various .bat files were just for forcing a certain work group size, for testing.
The 'RUN_SCENE_SIMPLE_64SIZE' renders a different picture, and is also just for testing...
(That is the 1 test, that Nvidia shines.)
In the earlier versions, when the res was still smaller, I was getting 114,000K Samples/sec.
This was only running on 1/2 of my 295@ C=621, Shaders=1512, and Memory=1152.
http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/4175/highc.jpg
114,154K...
Now that the res is greater, I get 90,000K Samples/sec using all 3 GPU's in my system.
http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/7893/simple2alphab.jpg
'smallptGPU' is the main event.
Looking forward to whatever you might have up your sleeve... :devil:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
would anyone with a gtx480/470 like to bench this? these cards should be ray tracing beasts.
Two overclocked GTX480s in SLi:Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t241/bobytt/test.png
About twice faster than a similar setup with HD5870 in CF.