-
Titan v 690
Anyone put them up head to head in resolve?
Anyone know of a flashed bootable version? -
35 Replies
-
“Anyone put them up head to head in resolve?”
Yes. The Titan is about 50% faster than 680. It’s about 85% as fast as a full 690. If you’re using an expansion chassis doing high res work. Higher than 3K. Then the Titan is your best bet. But it doesn’t work on the Mac. Works fine on windows and Linux though.
“Anyone know of a flashed bootable version?”
How do you mean?Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author
-
If you don’t mind me asking, how did you get those results? From what I’ve read they were designed for different purposes and the Titan should theoretically be faster in resolve. (But slower in 3d stuff.) It’s design should theoretically be more geared to cuda stuff. Also it’s a single chip vs the 690 dual chip, which resolve may like better. (Or may work better in a cubix.) So I was surprised by your results.
You actually tried both cards?Flashing referred to putting Mac boot firmware on the card so it would load. But like you said, no drivers yet 🙁
-
I’ve got several of both cards. They are different classes of chips, the Titans are GK110, 690s are GK104. The 690s are basically two slightly slower 680s sharing one board.
The advantage of the 690s is the combined processing of multiple GPUs, if you’re running in a MacPro for example, and you put in one 690 and a GT120 or similar for GUI, using a full resolve license, you’d basically have the equivalent of 2/3rds of a cubix with three 680s available to you. Without having an external chassis.
The disadvantage is that the 690s only have 2GBs of RAM per GPU. This can become troublesome for larger image formats.
The Titans on the other hand are based on a different chip. Which as I mentioned doesn’t have driver support on the Mac, but which has a significant processing improvement over the GK104, as exhibited on my Resolve linux system. Even better though is the 6GBs of RAM, which not only seems to improve performance, but also reliability with large images.
But like I said, in terms of performances, 1 Titan = ~1.5 GTX680s (plus lots of ram), where as 1 690 (meaning two seperate chips on the same board, with both chips working together) = ~1.8ish GTX680 (with a limited amount of RAM). On the Mac, once you get into expansion chassis the 690 looses it’s advantage as you can only address 3 gpus on the Mac, and each 690 is two gpus. So with two 690s you loose half of one card. Titans on the other hand offer great performance and are only address as one GPU, so on systems that support it are ideal for an expansion chassis.
Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author
-
Cool thanks Juan!
According to Netkas, 10.8.4 beta has Titan drivers. So thats nice.
-
Are you saying this is only using three GPU’s on my Mac? GUI card is a Radeon 7950.
–John
-
Are you running a hackintosh?
Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author
-
What the what?! How is that possible?
http://www.4Kfinish.com | owner-colorist | Hollywood, CA
http://www.facebook.com/4kFinish -
Standard MacPro.
–John
-
Very interesting. 🙂 There may have been a stealth update somewhere. Will look into this.
Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author
-
John enlighten us please 🙂
—
Margus
https://iconstudios.eu
https://vimeo.com/iconstudioseu/videosDaVinci 9, OSX 10.7.4
MacPro 5.1 2×2,93 24GB
GTX 470 / Quadro 4000
Multibridge 2 Pro
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up