AE CS6 11.0.1 CUDA BENCHMARK PROJECT – test your graphics cards!

[Simon Gomes]

Ok Marc and Ian, thanks a lot for your opinion and advice 🙂

I finally made a deal with an computer scientist in my city. I will have a ASUS ROG GTX 780 TI MATRIX in my new tower.

Here is my config :

Cooler Master CM 690 III https://www.ldlc.be/fiche/PB00151205.html
ASUS X99-A https://www.ldlc.be/fiche/PB00174446.html
Intel Core i7-5820K (3.3 GHz) https://www.ldlc.be/fiche/PB00172897.html
Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 https://www.ldlc.be/fiche/PB00122034.html
WD Black 2 To SATA 6Gb/s https://www.ldlc.be/fiche/PB00156337.html
Samsung SSD 850 EVO 500 Go https://www.ldlc.be/fiche/PB00180182.html
Crucial 16 Go (2 x 8 Go) DDR4 2133 MHz CL15 DR X8 https://www.ldlc.be/fiche/PB00171844.html
ASUS ROG GTX780ti MATRIX https://www.asus.com/fr/Graphics_Cards/ROG_MATRIXGTX780TIP3GD5/
iiyama 27″ LED – ProLite XB2783HSU-B1 https://www.ldlc.be/fiche/PB00156564.html

at the price of 2200€ (2540$) I think it’s not bad 🙂

[Simon Gomes]

One final question before that i buy my new tower.

The computer scientist can only do an lower price on the ASUS ROG MATRIX GTX780 TI PLATINUM. In your opinion this card is properly supported like the others 780ti ?

Since yesterday i am searching some 780ti matrix opinion about using after effects, but i can’t found.

Here is some benchmark test and for the ray tracing https://www.hardwareluxx.com/index.php/reviews/hardware/vgacards/30499-test-asus-rog-matrix-radeon-r9-290x-and-geforce-gtx-780-ti.html?start=9 , the Matrix is the better card but i would love seeing an export with after effects ^^

Thanks.

[Ian Mapleson]

Simon, yes it’ll work fine, doesn’t matter what brand one uses.

Only thing I’d mention though is to bare in mind your future plans.
If you ever want to increase the GPU power by adding another card,
check whether the model you’re considering would block any relevant
PCIe slots. Some ASUS cards are 2.5 or 3 slot cards (ditto numerous
versions from other vendors). But if you’re content with a single
card, or your mbd has tri-slot spacing, then no problem.

Performance-wise, there’s not much difference between models for AE.
It’s more important to have an SSD for the AE cache, good CPU, RAM
at as high a clock as possible, etc.

Ian.

——–
SGI Guru

[Ian Mapleson]

Marc Gutt writes:
> MSI Lightning XE are rare to find in Germany. The last one was sold in the UK and at
> the moment there is only one auction in the US. But maybe I found two in Austria 😀

True, they don’t show up that often, and they do tend to sell for more than normal
3GB cards, often quite a bit more than 1.5GB cards. Note that with the release of the
900 series, it’s entirely possible for two good 3GB 580s to cost almost the
same or even more than a 780 or 780 Ti, so don’t pay too much when looking for these
cards, beyond a certain point it’s not worthwhile, though if I was going to get any
700 series card at all it would definitely be either a 6GB 780 or any 780 Ti.

> The same problem with Palit cards. In Germany you will find much more Gainward cards,
> but they should be the same (Palit is the parent company of Gainward). Most people
> like the low loudness of the Gainward.

Again though, watch out for the card width, eg. I think the Phantom uses 2.5 slots.

> The very last option would be the Asus DirectCUII, but its huge:

Exactly why I’d never buy it, too big for most mbds.

Ian.

PS. Some good X79 bargains to be had these days. Just bought two Rampage IV Extreme mbds
for 103 UKP each, a P9X79 Deluxe for 75 UKP (all ASUS, good for oc’ing) and a 3930K C2
for 225 UKP. Would love to use X99, but it’s way too expensive atm, especially DDR4.

——–
SGI Guru

[Marc Gutt]

[Ian Mapleson] “I think the Phantom uses 2.5 slots”

Yes, you’re right. I found an image:
https://www.hardwarezone.com.ph/review-gainward-gtx-580-phantom-3-1536mb-phantom-menace

The Palit is 2 slots?

[Simon Gomes]

Thanks 🙂

Finally it’s not the asus matrix platinum but the “asus matrix” only that he propose :

So i have now to make a choice, for the same price i can have that 3 graphic card.

The first is :

ASUS GTX 780 TI MATRIX 3G

with 2880 cuda cores

and

GPU Boost Clock : 928 MHz
GPU Base Clock : 876 MHz

or

EVGA GTX 760 4G FTW CX Cooler

with 1152 cuda cores

and

1085 MHz Base Clock

1150 MHz Boost Clock

or

GeForce GTX 780 6 Go

with 2304 cuda cores

and

889 base clock

941 MHz boost clock

I’ll have an SSD 500g and a I7 5820k(3,3 ghz).

So it is better to take the MATRIX 780ti, the asus strix 780 6g or the EVGA 760 4g who have better clock but less cuda core?

[Marc Gutt]

[Simon Gomes] “So it is better to take the MATRIX 780ti, the asus strix 780 6g or the EVGA 760 4g who have better clock but less cuda core?”

Benchmarks of this thread:
780 4:43
780 3:29
780 4:01
780 Ti 2:21

Nobody posted a benchmark of the GTX 760, but as you can see the 780 Ti is much faster than the rest.

The GTX 760 is nearly as fast as the GTX 580, but as the GTX 580 has only 512 CUDA cores the GTX 760 should be the better option for Adobe. What do you think Ian?

One advantage of the GTX 760 is a little bit less power consumption compared to the GTX 580 (-20%) and it supports a higher resolution.

[Simon Gomes]

The Asus 780 6g seems to be the best compromise in regard on cuda core and clock no?

The problem with the 760 is that it have 1152 cuda, so it’s should be less quicker than the 780.

Also, i read on review that the 780 made less noise with 2D work.

[Marc Gutt]

[Simon Gomes] “The problem with the 760 is that it have 1152 cuda, so it’s should be less quicker than the 780.”

Look at the details of the GTX 670
1344 CUDA Cores
915 Mhz Graphics Clock
980 Mhz Processor Clock

An now the benchmark found in this thread:
2GB GTX 670 6min 43s

As you can see this card is much slower with similar clockrates compared to the GTX 780 Ti. I think the memory bandwidth is an additional important spec and GTX 670/GTX 760 have the same (256-bit GDDR5 192.2 GB/sec).

My guess is, that the GTX 760 is only 5% faster or as fast as the GTX 670.

[Ian Mapleson]

I wish people would read my earlier posts… 😉

Ok, I’ll summarise this once again.

The GTX 580 uses the older shader architecture, employing a 2X higher shader
clock and a lot more bandwidth per core.

The GTX 580 is faster for CUDA in AE than ALL 600 series cards.

The GTX 580 is faster for CUDA in AE than all 700 series cards except the 780 Ti.

The 900 series use Maxwell CUDA Version 2, which the RayTrace3D does not support
at the moment, hence why they’re not yet suitable for AE. The OGL functions will probably
work ok, but not anything CUDA-related.

The only advantage of the Titan is RAM capacity, which isn’t necessary if you’re working
with HD or less. Could be useful for 4K work though. Two 580s are faster than a Titan, and
two good 580s are faster than a Titan Black (the latter being the model that has the same number
of shaders as the 780 Ti). I haven’t found any evidence so far that the Titan’s optional
higher 64bit fp mode helps for AE at all, so really any model of Titan for AE is a waste
unless one definitely benefits from the higher RAM. Hopefully in time Adobe can add Maxwell
CUDA V2 support and NVIDIA will release an 8GB card, that would be ideal for AE. Grud knows
when that’ll happen though, but if I had to guess I’d say NVIDIA is probably waiting until
AMD releases its 3K series.

Don’t bother with the 600 series cards at all. Total waste for AE/CUDA. I don’t why
people keep asking about them, since Teddy’s very first post in this thread showed
how slow a 680 is vs. a 580 for AE/CUDA.

A used 760 may be cheaper than a used 580 (depends), but its performance is nowhere near
as good for AE/CUDA. Unless there were specific power/heat/noise issues involved, I’d
get one or more 580s every time if the choice was between that and 760(s).

If you’re not going to bother with 580s, then try and get a 780 Ti. The 780 is quite a
lot slower than the 780 Ti, not worth the lower cost IMO.

Two 580s will be faster than a 780 no problem, but will use more power, generate
more heat, make more noise. Usually, two 580s will beat a 780 Ti aswell (depends
on the models in each case) However, multiple 580s will cost much less if one just
buys 1.5GB editions (for most users, this will be sufficient, but I always recommend
hunting for 3GB 580s if possible).

Any reference 3GB 580 will be a 2-slot card, including the standard 783MHz Palit.

Many top-end overclocked 580s will use more than 2 slots. Even the MSI Lightning
Xtreme, which is sold as a 2-slot card, is actually fractionally wider than that;
I had to use some stubs of paper to hold the four cards apart slightly to stop the
fan blades from hitting the back of the next card in line. By contrast, normal
780 or 780 Ti cards will not suffer from this, and likewise normal 580s will be ok.
Four Palit 3GB cards fits into a 4-way mbd just fine (I normally use the ASUS P9X79 WS).

The tradeoff/judgement about 580s is whether the increased power consumption over their
usage lifetime would offset the lower cost of buying them compared to a single 780 Ti.
For others, noise/heat may be a factor, ie. CPUs with air coolers may be affected by
internally dumped heat from multiple GPUs. Newer cards generate less heat, though some
models (including 580s) have external-only exhausts which are ideal for systems with
air cooled CPUs. Water-cooled systems are less affected, though one must note carefully
how heat is going to flow. I’ve switched entirely to use water coolers, namely the H80,
H100, H100i and H110 (my 4-way 580 system has an H110).

After the 500 series, NVIDIA halved the shader clock speed to make power delivery easier.
This meant the number of shader cores had to be at least twice as high as a 500 series
card in order to provide the same CUDA performance. In reality, it’s more like 2.5X to 3X.
Remember this discussion only applies to CUDA in apps like AE. For gaming, newer cards
will quicker than 580s, as my numerous results show nicely.

Never judge based on the number of cores. They cannot be compared across card generations.
You will make bad decisions if you choose a card based on the number of cores.

Check review links such as those I have linked earlier in this thread. Even for other types
of CUDA test, in most cases a 580 beats all other 600/700 cards except the 780 Ti (and even
then it’s close).

So, if you can afford it, and want maximum efficiency, minimum noise, etc., then try and
get a 780 Ti. If budget is a big problem but you still want maximum performance, then look
for two 580 3GB cards (or 1.5GB if you can’t find any 3GB units). I bought over a dozen 3GB
Palit cards in the last two years. Two good 580s like the MSI LX will be quicker, but still
not as noise efficient, and certainly use more power. Alas, the MSI LXs do dump heat inside
a case, so that’s a factor to consider with any choice.

Inbetween multiple 580s at the cheap end and the luxury world of one or more 780 Tis at the
other, there are all the inbetween mishmash options involving 760, 770 and the 780. Out of
these, the only one I would consider if I was doing 4K work would be the 6GB 780, though it’s
probably hard to find. However, if the budget can stretch to multiple 780s, but not multiple
780 Tis, then sure, go for the 780s.

NOTE: in all of these, do not neglect the rest of the system. The maximum possible RAM is
essential, 32GB preferably, certainly not less than 16GB, the more the better. An SSD for
the C drive, another high IOPS SSD for the AE and media cache, and I also use a lesser SSD
for the Window paging file to ease the paging load on the C-drive SSD (this is because PCs
with a lot of RAM need to have a large paging file, which wastes space, etc.) Atm a good
choice for this would be any used decent model or if buying new then the SanDisk X300 128GB
is good. I keep hunting for used Vertex4, Vector and Samsung 830/840/etc. SSDs for building
systems, they all work well.

Hope this helps!!

Right, I’m off to collect the P9X79 Deluxe board I won for a snip. 😀

Ian.

——–
SGI Guru