Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 34

Thread: LuxMark - The OpenCL CPU&GPU benchmark

  1. #1
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Bulgaria, Varna
    Posts
    445

    Thumbs up LuxMark - The OpenCL CPU&GPU benchmark

    LuxMark is an OpenCL benchmark based on LuxRender. LuxRender is a physically based and unbiased rendering engine. Based on state of the art algorithms, LuxRender simulates the flow of light according to physical equations, thus producing realistic images of photographic quality - Gallery.

    Info and Download

    The default (start-up) benchmark mode is the GPU path.


    Here is the my GTX570 (825/2100MHz):



    Happy benchmarking!

  2. #2
    Xtreme Member Toysoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark
    Posts
    314
    GTX580 (900/2004MHz)

    AMD Phenom II 1100T ~ Noctua NH-D14
    GeForce GTX 680 ~ 301.25
    GIGABYTE GA-990FXA-UD5 ~ bios F6
    Zahlman ZM-1000HP PSU
    2 x 4 GB Mushkin Redline CL7 PC312800
    1 x Corsair CSSD-F120GB2
    1 x 1000 GB Samsung HD103SJ F3
    1 x 1000 GB WD Caviar Black WD1002FAEX
    Cooler Master CM 690 Case
    Creative X-FI XtremeGamer
    Logitech G19 keyboard
    Roccat Kone+ v2 Mouse
    Samsung Syncmaster 2493HM monitor

    Running Windows 7 Ultimate x64 OEM SP1

    Smartphone : Samsung Galaxy Nexus

  3. #3
    Xtreme Member Toysoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark
    Posts
    314
    GTX580 (772/2004Mhz - default speed)

    AMD Phenom II 1100T ~ Noctua NH-D14
    GeForce GTX 680 ~ 301.25
    GIGABYTE GA-990FXA-UD5 ~ bios F6
    Zahlman ZM-1000HP PSU
    2 x 4 GB Mushkin Redline CL7 PC312800
    1 x Corsair CSSD-F120GB2
    1 x 1000 GB Samsung HD103SJ F3
    1 x 1000 GB WD Caviar Black WD1002FAEX
    Cooler Master CM 690 Case
    Creative X-FI XtremeGamer
    Logitech G19 keyboard
    Roccat Kone+ v2 Mouse
    Samsung Syncmaster 2493HM monitor

    Running Windows 7 Ultimate x64 OEM SP1

    Smartphone : Samsung Galaxy Nexus

  4. #4
    Xtreme Member Toysoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark
    Posts
    314
    GTX580 (825/2100Mhz)

    AMD Phenom II 1100T ~ Noctua NH-D14
    GeForce GTX 680 ~ 301.25
    GIGABYTE GA-990FXA-UD5 ~ bios F6
    Zahlman ZM-1000HP PSU
    2 x 4 GB Mushkin Redline CL7 PC312800
    1 x Corsair CSSD-F120GB2
    1 x 1000 GB Samsung HD103SJ F3
    1 x 1000 GB WD Caviar Black WD1002FAEX
    Cooler Master CM 690 Case
    Creative X-FI XtremeGamer
    Logitech G19 keyboard
    Roccat Kone+ v2 Mouse
    Samsung Syncmaster 2493HM monitor

    Running Windows 7 Ultimate x64 OEM SP1

    Smartphone : Samsung Galaxy Nexus

  5. #5
    Xtreme Mentor Sam_oslo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oslo - Norway
    Posts
    2,868
    Here is my undervalued (0.987v) 24/7 setup

    GTX560 (910/2400MHz):

    ASUS P8P67 Deluxe (BIOS 1305)
    2600K @4.5GHz 1.27v , 1 hour Prime
    Silver Arrow , push/pull
    2x2GB Crucial 1066MHz CL7 ECC @1600MHz CL9 1.51v
    GTX560 GB OC @910/2400 0.987v
    Crucial C300 v006 64GB OS-disk + F3 1TB + 400MB RAMDisk
    CM Storm Scout + Corsair HX 1000W
    +
    EVGA SR-2 , A50
    2 x Xeon X5650 @3.86GHz(203x19) 1.20v
    Megahalem + Silver Arrow , push/pull
    3x2GB Corsair XMS3 1600 CL7 + 3x4GB G.SKILL Trident 1600 CL7 = 18GB @1624 7-8-7-20 1.65v
    XFX GTX 295 @650/1200/1402
    Crucial C300 v006 64GB OS-disk + F3 1TB + 2GB RAMDisk
    SilverStone Fortress FT01 + Corsair AX 1200W

  6. #6
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    4,068
    900/2200 - 100mhz pcie
    Last edited by NapalmV5; 03-02-2011 at 10:48 AM.

  7. #7
    Xtreme Enthusiast kaktus1907's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Istanbul
    Posts
    606
    @NapalmV5 sweet mother of mercy


    OpenCL GPU Only = 5092
    GTX 460 1GB @950/1900/4600MHz


    Native CPU = 2393
    Q9650 @4.00GHz


  8. #8
    I am Xtreme zalbard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    8,740
    2x 6970

    Donate to XS forums
    Quote Originally Posted by jayhall0315 View Post
    If you are really extreme, you never let informed facts or the scientific method hold you back from your journey to the wrong answer.

  9. #9
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,113
    very nice, very interesting. luxmark may have practical implications, unlike some synthetic benchmarks.

  10. #10
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    1,795
    And bringing up the bottom end just for fun.....AMD C50 1GZ dual core laptop.


    Last edited by freeloader; 02-28-2011 at 11:49 AM.
    As quoted by LowRun......"So, we are one week past AMD's worst case scenario for BD's availability but they don't feel like communicating about the delay, I suppose AMD must be removed from the reliable sources list for AMD's products launch dates"

  11. #11
    Would you like some Pie? Roadhog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    269
    Almost hit 20k on 3, 6970's @ 950/1450.

    Xeon W3520 @ 4.0Ghz ~ 3x 7970 ~ 12GB DDR3 ~ Dell U2711

  12. #12
    c[_] STEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    20,401
    GTX480 @ 800/2000 - 3800
    E5450's @ 3.6ghz (8 cores) CPU Native - 3450

    WinXP-64

    Doesnt want to run on my Win7 system with the westmere's and 4870x2..
    Heatware || 01.01.08; AND 111.2%

    Dead Z7S-WS? Click!. || XS Z7S-WS Thread || Current Dead Asus Z7S-WS count: 26+ ($15,000 in dead motherboards).
    All along the watchtower the watchmen watch the eternal return.
    Want to use my Anti-asus logo? Go ahead, but use this link please!: http://i853.photobucket.com/albums/a...sus/noasus.gif
    Bring back the game. http://reclaimyourgame.com/. EA are mean.

  13. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by NapalmV5 View Post
    900/2200
    30709 LuxMarks
    Hi NapalmV5, I'm one of the LuxMark developer. Your score is the highest I have seen up to now. Cheers, you have redefined my idea of BFG9000

  14. #14
    c[_] STEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    20,401
    hey dade any reason why the gtx480 gets half the score of a gtx570? does OS make that much difference, or could it be driver version?
    Heatware || 01.01.08; AND 111.2%

    Dead Z7S-WS? Click!. || XS Z7S-WS Thread || Current Dead Asus Z7S-WS count: 26+ ($15,000 in dead motherboards).
    All along the watchtower the watchmen watch the eternal return.
    Want to use my Anti-asus logo? Go ahead, but use this link please!: http://i853.photobucket.com/albums/a...sus/noasus.gif
    Bring back the game. http://reclaimyourgame.com/. EA are mean.

  15. #15
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by STEvil View Post
    hey dade any reason why the gtx480 gets half the score of a gtx570? does OS make that much difference, or could it be driver version?
    Are you using the latest drivers ? NVIDIA has highly improved their OpenCL support in the latest release.

    According Anandtech (http://www.anandtech.com/show/4135/n...-250-market/15), a 480gtx should score about the same value of a 570gtx with latest drivers.

    If you check older Anandtech's reviews (http://www.anandtech.com/show/4061/a...eon-hd-6950/23), you can see like NVIDIA as nearly doubled the scores with latest drivers.

    AMD has also improved the performance of HD6xxx family of a good 15-30% in the latest driver release.

  16. #16
    c[_] STEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    20,401
    Thats exactly what it was I guess.

    Went from 3800 with 260.69's to 8500 with 267.24's at 800/2000
    Heatware || 01.01.08; AND 111.2%

    Dead Z7S-WS? Click!. || XS Z7S-WS Thread || Current Dead Asus Z7S-WS count: 26+ ($15,000 in dead motherboards).
    All along the watchtower the watchmen watch the eternal return.
    Want to use my Anti-asus logo? Go ahead, but use this link please!: http://i853.photobucket.com/albums/a...sus/noasus.gif
    Bring back the game. http://reclaimyourgame.com/. EA are mean.

  17. #17
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    4,068
    Quote Originally Posted by kaktus1907 View Post
    @NapalmV5 sweet mother of mercy
    Quote Originally Posted by Dade View Post
    Hi NapalmV5, I'm one of the LuxMark developer. Your score is the highest I have seen up to now. Cheers, you have redefined my idea of BFG9000
    thanks guys score goes to show how well youve implemented multi gpu support

    950/2200 - 100mhz pcie
    Last edited by NapalmV5; 03-02-2011 at 10:49 AM.

  18. #18
    Xtreme Member jogshy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    277
    After taking a look at the code, I wonder how dependent is this test on the PCI express. I've been never a big fan of passing tons of data by the bus.
    Any of you can make a quick test pls? My BIOS does not allow to change the PCI multiplier... but I bet if you put a monster GPU and you put it to 2x a modest GPU running at 16x might be faster.

    Also, I think the automatically assigned work size of 64 thread/block may cause an slowdown.

    My ... strange.... results:

    OpenCL - GPUs only ( a Radeon 5750, catalyst 11.2 ) -------------> 1784 marks


    Native CPU ( an obsolete i7 920 ) ----> 3342 marks

    So, in my case, the CPU is 2x faster than the GPU... Shouldn't be a GPU faster than a CPU rendering? That's the whole point of Octane, VRayRT and other GPGPU renderers after all...
    Last edited by jogshy; 03-01-2011 at 02:19 PM.

  19. #19
    Xtreme Addict Brahmzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,315
    This is an awesome Benchmark - very useful.
    I'll post some screens later today..
    MAIN: 4770K 4.6 | Max VI Hero | 16GB 2400/C10 | H110 | 2 GTX670 FTW SLi | 2 840 Pro 256 R0 | SB Z | 750D | AX1200 | 305T | 8.1x64
    HTPC: 4670K 4.4 | Max VI Gene | 8GB 2133/C9 | NH-L9I | HD6450 | 840 Pro 128 | 2TB Red | GD05 | SSR-550RM | 70" | 8.1x64
    MEDIA: 4670K 4.4 | Gryphon | 8GB 1866/C9 | VX Black | HD4600 | 840 Pro 128 | 4 F4 HD204UI R5 | 550D | SSR-550RM | 245BW | 8.1x64

  20. #20
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by jogshy View Post
    After taking a look at the code, I wonder how dependent is this test on the PCI express. I've been never a big fan of passing tons of data by the bus.
    Any of you can make a quick test pls? My BIOS does not allow to change the PCI multiplier... but I bet if you put a monster GPU and you put it to 2x a modest GPU running at 16x might be faster.
    Every 5 seconds, the images rendered by each GPU are downloaded to the CPU memory to be merged a drawn on the screen. It is a very little amount of data for the bandwidth of PCIe bus.
    I have 2x5870 plus a 5850 installed on a 4x PCIe slot. I have done some test, moving the 5850 between 16x slots and 4x slot: I haven't experienced any performance difference.

    Jogshy, anyway we need a feature like GPU-to-GPU direct transfer announced for CUDA 4.0 to solve this problem (if it becomes a problem with many GPUs).

    Quote Originally Posted by jogshy View Post
    Also, I think the automatically assigned work size of 64 thread/block may cause an slowdown.
    A little trick: you can change that value by editing the file scenes/luxball/render-hdr.cfg. Just edit the following line:

    opencl.gpu.workgroup.size = 64

    Quote Originally Posted by jogshy View Post
    So, in my case, the CPU is 2x faster than the GPU... Shouldn't be a GPU faster than a CPU rendering?
    i7 920 is more expansive that a HD5750 and the GPU is still faster. I don't read it as a bad result for the CPUs Vs GPUs "holy war".

    Quote Originally Posted by jogshy View Post
    That's the whole point of Octane, VRayRT and other GPGPU renderers after all...
    Jogshy, I assume you are the same of ompf.org forums; you know that there have been a lot of discussion about this point. Many people believe there is a lot of marketing vaporware in CPUs Vs GPUs "holy war".

    My opinion is somewhat in the middle, GPUs computing offers great value (especially for home/office users) but it is no where near the 100x faster promised by the marketing.

  21. #21
    Xtreme Member Toysoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark
    Posts
    314
    I tried changing the work group size to the suggested value of 640 and it throws an error
    OpenCL ERROR: clEnqueueNDRangeKernel(-54)

    So I tried with different work group sizes :

    32 : OK ~ 7920
    64 : OK ~ 8780
    128: OK ~ 8650
    256: OK ~ 8412
    512: OK ~ 7580
    640: OpenCL ERROR: clEnqueueNDRangeKernel(-54)
    768: OpenCL ERROR: clEnqueueNDRangeKernel(-54)
    1024: Rendering thread ERROR: clSetKernelArg(-38)

    So it looks like 64 is the best workgroup size, at least on a GTX580 with the current codepath.
    AMD Phenom II 1100T ~ Noctua NH-D14
    GeForce GTX 680 ~ 301.25
    GIGABYTE GA-990FXA-UD5 ~ bios F6
    Zahlman ZM-1000HP PSU
    2 x 4 GB Mushkin Redline CL7 PC312800
    1 x Corsair CSSD-F120GB2
    1 x 1000 GB Samsung HD103SJ F3
    1 x 1000 GB WD Caviar Black WD1002FAEX
    Cooler Master CM 690 Case
    Creative X-FI XtremeGamer
    Logitech G19 keyboard
    Roccat Kone+ v2 Mouse
    Samsung Syncmaster 2493HM monitor

    Running Windows 7 Ultimate x64 OEM SP1

    Smartphone : Samsung Galaxy Nexus

  22. #22
    Xtreme Member jogshy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    277
    Quote Originally Posted by Dade View Post
    i7 920 is more expansive that a HD5750 and the GPU is still faster. I don't read it as a bad result for the CPUs Vs GPUs "holy war".
    Faster? My 5750 is actually 2x slower than the CPU as you can see in the screenshots.
    Ok, the i920 is 2x more expensive than a 5750 so, relatively, the ATI GPU==CPU. A bit dissapointing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dade View Post
    Every 5 seconds, the images rendered by each GPU are downloaded to the CPU memory to be merged a drawn on the screen. It is a very little amount of data for the bandwidth of PCIe bus.
    Taking a look to your code seems you're generating the rays in the CPU, then passing then to the GPU to perform the ray tests and then you bring back the results to the CPU. That implies a lot of PCI transfers, latency and synchronization. Can anybody with a decent BIOS test how much it scales, pls? My BIOS sux
    Last edited by jogshy; 03-02-2011 at 07:31 AM.

  23. #23
    Xtreme Enthusiast kaktus1907's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Istanbul
    Posts
    606
    pcie bandwith numbers
    16x pcie 2.0

    Idle


    Load

  24. #24
    Xtreme Member jogshy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    277
    Quote Originally Posted by kaktus1907 View Post
    pcie bandwith numbers
    Nak, can your BIOS change the PCI multiplier?
    Last edited by jogshy; 03-02-2011 at 09:22 AM.

  25. #25
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    117
    Hi guys,

    Do you know if a SLI Bridge is of advantage here?

    @Napalm

    Did you use one?

    I am hitting 15k on 3x 560 GTX (not overclocked).
    Last edited by soya_crack; 03-02-2011 at 08:58 AM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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