Daz Studio Iray - Rendering Hardware Benchmarking

1568101123

Comments

  • RayDAntRayDAnt Posts: 863

    @pandapenguingames that's awesome! Any chance you could post your results for the benchmarks two more times (2. with just a single 2080Ti active for rendering, and then (3. with both cards active but no NVLink enabled. That way we can see how all the different scenarios measure up in terms of performance.

  • outrider42outrider42 Posts: 2,861

    Going by previous dual 2080ti posts, it doesn't look like much of a penalty at all for Nvlink. That's quite interesting indeed. 

    I would love to know how much VRAM is available. Does it report this in the help log? Have you been able to render a scene normally too large for a single 11GB card?

  • RayDAntRayDAnt Posts: 863

    @outrider42 see this post. The answer to both your questions is already there.

  • outrider42outrider42 Posts: 2,861

    Maybe I am overlooking it but I don't see where it says how much VRAM is available between the two cards.

  • RayDAntRayDAnt Posts: 863

    Maybe I am overlooking it but I don't see where it says how much VRAM is available between the two cards.

    Oops - my mistake. Yeah, don't see any mention of amount free (total - used from GPU-Z?) reported there either.

  • pandapenguingamespandapenguingames Posts: 13
    edited June 2020

    NVLink enabled!
    System Configuration
    System/Motherboard: ASRock X299 Extreme4
    CPU: Intel i7-7800X @ Stock
    GPU: GPU1 INNO3D RTX2080TI iCHILL Frostbite @ stock
    System Memory: 64GB Crucial Ballistix Elite DDR4 @ 2400
    OS Drive: Samsung 960 EVO 250GB NVMe SSD
    Asset Drive: 2x Crucial MX500 480GB (JBOD)
    Operating System: Windows 10 Pro x64 Build 1909
    Nvidia Drivers Version: SRD 442.92 WDDM
    Daz Studio Version: 4.12.1.117
    Optix Prime Acceleration: N/A

    Benchmark Results
    DAZ_STATS
    2020-06-06 10:49:48.734 Finished Rendering
    2020-06-06 10:49:48.786 Total Rendering Time: 4 minutes 24.91 seconds

    IRAY_STATS
    2020-06-06 10:50:09.158 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : Device statistics:
    2020-06-06 10:50:09.158 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 0 (GeForce RTX 2080 Ti): 1800 iterations, 2.763s init, 255.506s render


    Rendering Performance: (1800 / 255.506) = 7.045 iterations per second
    Loading Time: ((0 * 3600 + 4 * 60 + 24.91) - 255.503) = 9.407 seconds
     

    NVLink disabled!
    System Configuration
    System/Motherboard: ASRock X299 Extreme4
    CPU: Intel i7-7800X @ Stock
    GPU: GPU1 INNO3D RTX2080TI iCHILL Frostbite @ stock
    System Memory: 64GB Crucial Ballistix Elite DDR4 @ 2400
    OS Drive: Samsung 960 EVO 250GB NVMe SSD
    Asset Drive: 2x Crucial MX500 480GB (JBOD)
    Operating System: Windows 10 Pro x64 Build 1909
    Nvidia Drivers Version: SRD 442.92 WDDM
    Daz Studio Version: 4.12.1.117
    Optix Prime Acceleration: N/A

    Benchmark Results
    DAZ_STATS
    2020-06-06 11:08:35.866 Finished Rendering
    2020-06-06 11:08:35.905 Total Rendering Time: 4 minutes 21.19 seconds

    IRAY_STATS
    2020-06-06 11:09:02.918 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : Device statistics:
    2020-06-06 11:09:02.918 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 1 (GeForce RTX 2080 Ti): 1800 iterations, 2.727s init, 252.256s render


    Rendering Performance: (1800 / 252.256) = 7.136 iterations per second
    Loading Time: ((0 * 3600 + 4 * 60 + 21.19) - 252.256) = 8.934 seconds

     

    NVLink disabled!
    System Configuration

    System/Motherboard: ASRock X299 Extreme4
    CPU: Intel i7-7800X @ Stock
    GPU: GPU1 INNO3D RTX2080TI iCHILL Frostbite @ stock, GPU2 INNO3D RTX2080TI iCHILL Frostbite @ stock
    System Memory: 64GB Crucial Ballistix Elite DDR4 @ 2400
    OS Drive: Samsung 960 EVO 250GB NVMe SSD
    Asset Drive: 2x Crucial MX500 480GB (JBOD)
    Operating System: Windows 10 Pro x64 Build 1909
    Nvidia Drivers Version: SRD 442.92 WDDM
    Daz Studio Version: 4.12.1.117
    Optix Prime Acceleration: N/A

    Benchmark Results
    DAZ_STATS
    2020-06-06 11:16:25.821 Finished Rendering
    2020-06-06 11:16:25.857 Total Rendering Time: 2 minutes 19.65 seconds

    IRAY_STATS
    2020-06-06 11:16:40.572 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : Device statistics:
    2020-06-06 11:16:40.572 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 1 (GeForce RTX 2080 Ti): 894 iterations, 2.974s init, 130.255s render
    2020-06-06 11:16:40.572 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 0 (GeForce RTX 2080 Ti): 906 iterations, 2.840s init, 130.918s render



    Rendering Performance: [(894 + 906) / 130.918] = 13.749 iterations per second
    Loading Time: [(0 * 3600 + 2 * 60 + 19.65)] - 130.918 =  8.732 seconds

     

     

    so regarding the questions about the available VRAM, the only lines I could find in the DAZ log regarding this:

    NVLink disabled:

    ​2020-06-06 11:12:15.736 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 1 (GeForce RTX 2080 Ti): compute capability 7.5, 11.000 GiB total, 9.040 GiB available, display attached 2020-06-06 11:12:15.737 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 1 (GeForce RTX 2080 Ti): WDDM driver used, consider switching to TCC driver model if no display needed (via 'nvidia-smi -dm 1'), to increase rendering performance 2020-06-06 11:12:16.116 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 0 (GeForce RTX 2080 Ti): compute capability 7.5, 11.000 GiB total, 9.095 GiB available

     

    NVLink enabled:

    2020-06-06 11:23:07.563 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : Setting NVLINK peer group size to 2.
    2020-06-06 11:23:07.563 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 0 (GeForce RTX 2080 Ti): compute capability 7.5, 11.000 GiB total, 9.011 GiB available, display attached
    2020-06-06 11:23:07.567 WARNING: ..\..\..\..\..\src\pluginsource\DzIrayRender\dzneuraymgr.cpp(353): Iray [ERROR] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend error: CUDA device 0 (GeForce RTX 2080 Ti): SLI is enabled, may render slowly or behave erratically (it is strongly recommended to disable SLI with iray if not using NVLINK)
    2020-06-06 11:23:07.568 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 0 (GeForce RTX 2080 Ti): WDDM driver used, consider switching to TCC driver model if no display needed (via 'nvidia-smi -dm 1'), to increase rendering performance
    2020-06-06 11:23:07.571 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 1 (GeForce RTX 2080 Ti): compute capability 7.5, 11.000 GiB total, 9.011 GiB available, display attached
    2020-06-06 11:23:07.571 WARNING: ..\..\..\..\..\src\pluginsource\DzIrayRender\dzneuraymgr.cpp(353): Iray [ERROR] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend error: CUDA device 1 (GeForce RTX 2080 Ti): SLI is enabled, may render slowly or behave erratically (it is strongly recommended to disable SLI with iray if not using NVLINK)
    2020-06-06 11:23:07.575 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 1 (GeForce RTX 2080 Ti): WDDM driver used, consider switching to TCC driver model if no display needed (via 'nvidia-smi -dm 1'), to increase rendering performance
    2020-06-06 11:23:07.576 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : NVLINK peer access enabled for 1 groups with 2 devices each


    so it's basically reporting 9GB ready for use in both cases, just that with NVLink you can evenly spread out the texture memory consumption across both GPUs
    and to get the "just switch to TCC then" argument off the table right away: so far, NVLink only establishes in WDDM and on top of that, TCC can't be enabled on GeForce cards in Windows anyway

    Post edited by pandapenguingames on
  • outrider42outrider42 Posts: 2,861
    edited June 2020

    Thank you kindly for taking the time to post. We finally have answers to some lomg standing questions about Nvlink. This is great information.

    That's impressive, the difference in performance between having Nvlink on vs off is so small there is little reason to disable it for small scenes. That's something I've been wondering.

    I'm guessing the theoretical VRAM limit must be 19 GB, minus the data that has to be duplicated. For most users, texture data is the bulk of their scene, so this still a big win all around!

    Now I wonder how the 2080 and 2070 Super hold up. These two support Nvlink as well, but their connection is a little slower. It would be interesting to know if that effects the performance. The price of the 2070 Super makes it quite appealing in this regard. Two 2080 Supers should beat a single 2080ti AND offer more VRAM as well while costing roughly the same. The chart has two 2060's on it, which match up with a 2080ti, so it stands to reason that two 2070 Supers should easily beat a 2080ti.

     

    This also changes the conversation around upgrading from a 2080ti. Conventional thought would be to buy the future 3080ti when it releases. But Nvlink could change that since you can effectively "upgrade" your VRAM capacity with a 2nd 2080ti in Nvlink mode. You can't do that if you buy a 3080ti, though a 3080ti+2080ti should be faster. It now becomes a decision as to whether you want the extra speed or the extra VRAM.

    Post edited by outrider42 on
  • robertswwwrobertswww Posts: 245
    edited June 2020

    @pandapenguingames Just to clarify, as I think the red hightlighted NVLink tags may be mis-labeled... the first 2 configurations shown use a single CUDA device (i.e. 1 x RTX 2080 Ti) and therefore should be labeled "NVLink disabled" (note: the first example you give with only CUDA device 0 has the red highlight saying "NVLink enabled").  These single cards take about 9-seconds to load the scene and then about 4.5-minutes to render the scene.


    The final configuration has both CUDA device 1 and CUDA device 0 (i.e. 2 x RTX 2080 Ti), but appears to be mis-labeled as "NVLink disabled".  These dual cards (i.e. NVLink enabled) cards take close to 9-seconds to load, but take about 2-minutes less time to render the same scene, that would be nearly twice as fast (about 1.9 x) as a single card... correct?

    Post edited by robertswww on
  • outrider42outrider42 Posts: 2,861

    You can compare PPG's marks to the other dual 2080ti configurations on the first page and see it gets nearly the same results as those non Nvlink systems. So if anybody happens to have two 2080tis, it looks like a no brainer to buy that Nvlink connector and get some more VRAM capacity. Iray has always scaled pretty well, so you've always been able to get that kind of performance when doubling up GPUs before Nvlink came along.

    For anyone with a single 2080ti, your options have grown. The 3080 will be releasing this year, without any doubt. You can wait until then to buy a new card or look at buying a 2080ti at a reduced price. I am quite confident in saying that the 2080ti will drop in price pretty rapidly once the 3080 and 3080ti arrive. Also, AMD has confirmed their new lineup will launch before the new consoles do. That means we could be looking at September or October, which has long been rumored a target date. It could even be August, but that may be pushing it. Some people believe the top AMD card might actually dethrone the 2080ti, which could cause a major price shift regardless of when the 3080ti arrives. So much hardware is coming this year its crazy.

  • RayDAntRayDAnt Posts: 863

    @pandapenguingames Just to clarify, as I think the red hightlighted NVLink tags may be mis-labeled... the first 2 configurations shown use a single CUDA device (i.e. 1 x RTX 2080 Ti) and therefore should be labeled "NVLink disabled" (note: the first example you give with only CUDA device 0 has the red highlight saying "NVLink enabled").  These single cards take about 9-seconds to load the scene and then about 4.5-minutes to render the scene.


    The final configuration has both CUDA device 1 and CUDA device 0 (i.e. 2 x RTX 2080 Ti), but appears to be mis-labeled as "NVLink disabled".  These dual cards (i.e. NVLink enabled) cards take close to 9-seconds to load, but take about 2-minutes less time to render the same scene, that would be nearly twice as fast (about 1.9 x) as a single card... correct?

    It's all labeled properly. @pandapenguingames has so far posted numbers for 4 different NVLink related benchmark scenarios. Consisting of:

    • NVLink enabled, both cards used for rendering
    • NVLink enabled, card #1 only used for rendering
    • NVLink disabled, card #2 only used for rendering
    • NvLink disabled, both cards used for rendering

    The middle two use cases may not be very practical, but are perfectly valid. And useful to know about at this early stage of performance discovery.

  • robertswwwrobertswww Posts: 245
    RayDAnt said:

    @pandapenguingames Just to clarify, as I think the red hightlighted NVLink tags may be mis-labeled... the first 2 configurations shown use a single CUDA device (i.e. 1 x RTX 2080 Ti) and therefore should be labeled "NVLink disabled" (note: the first example you give with only CUDA device 0 has the red highlight saying "NVLink enabled").  These single cards take about 9-seconds to load the scene and then about 4.5-minutes to render the scene.


    The final configuration has both CUDA device 1 and CUDA device 0 (i.e. 2 x RTX 2080 Ti), but appears to be mis-labeled as "NVLink disabled".  These dual cards (i.e. NVLink enabled) cards take close to 9-seconds to load, but take about 2-minutes less time to render the same scene, that would be nearly twice as fast (about 1.9 x) as a single card... correct?

    It's all labeled properly. @pandapenguingames has so far posted numbers for 4 different NVLink related benchmark scenarios. Consisting of:

    • NVLink enabled, both cards used for rendering
    • NVLink enabled, card #1 only used for rendering
    • NVLink disabled, card #2 only used for rendering
    • NvLink disabled, both cards used for rendering

    The middle two use cases may not be very practical, but are perfectly valid. And useful to know about at this early stage of performance discovery.

    @RayDAnt, thanks for clarifying.  Those middle two benchmark tests with only a single card used threw me off.  I found the most interesting part to be the first test with both cards and NVLink enabled was a little slower in render time, slower in loading time, and had slightly less iterations per second than the fourth test with both cards and NVLink disabled.  From those benchmarks, it appears that having 2 cards with NVLink disabled is slighty faster.

  • RayDAnt said:

    @pandapenguingames Just to clarify, as I think the red hightlighted NVLink tags may be mis-labeled... the first 2 configurations shown use a single CUDA device (i.e. 1 x RTX 2080 Ti) and therefore should be labeled "NVLink disabled" (note: the first example you give with only CUDA device 0 has the red highlight saying "NVLink enabled").  These single cards take about 9-seconds to load the scene and then about 4.5-minutes to render the scene.


    The final configuration has both CUDA device 1 and CUDA device 0 (i.e. 2 x RTX 2080 Ti), but appears to be mis-labeled as "NVLink disabled".  These dual cards (i.e. NVLink enabled) cards take close to 9-seconds to load, but take about 2-minutes less time to render the same scene, that would be nearly twice as fast (about 1.9 x) as a single card... correct?

    It's all labeled properly. @pandapenguingames has so far posted numbers for 4 different NVLink related benchmark scenarios. Consisting of:

    • NVLink enabled, both cards used for rendering
    • NVLink enabled, card #1 only used for rendering
    • NVLink disabled, card #2 only used for rendering
    • NvLink disabled, both cards used for rendering

    The middle two use cases may not be very practical, but are perfectly valid. And useful to know about at this early stage of performance discovery.

    @RayDAnt, thanks for clarifying.  Those middle two benchmark tests with only a single card used threw me off.  I found the most interesting part to be the first test with both cards and NVLink enabled was a little slower in render time, slower in loading time, and had slightly less iterations per second than the fourth test with both cards and NVLink disabled.  From those benchmarks, it appears that having 2 cards with NVLink disabled is slighty faster.

    this test was less about speed and more about memory pooling for me, I only did the benchmark on request of others
    I don't care about render speed if I can't fit the scene in my VRAM and since the NVLink is not adding significantly much to the render times, I will run on NVLinked cards from now on

  • robertswwwrobertswww Posts: 245
    RayDAnt said:

    @pandapenguingames Just to clarify, as I think the red hightlighted NVLink tags may be mis-labeled... the first 2 configurations shown use a single CUDA device (i.e. 1 x RTX 2080 Ti) and therefore should be labeled "NVLink disabled" (note: the first example you give with only CUDA device 0 has the red highlight saying "NVLink enabled").  These single cards take about 9-seconds to load the scene and then about 4.5-minutes to render the scene.


    The final configuration has both CUDA device 1 and CUDA device 0 (i.e. 2 x RTX 2080 Ti), but appears to be mis-labeled as "NVLink disabled".  These dual cards (i.e. NVLink enabled) cards take close to 9-seconds to load, but take about 2-minutes less time to render the same scene, that would be nearly twice as fast (about 1.9 x) as a single card... correct?

    It's all labeled properly. @pandapenguingames has so far posted numbers for 4 different NVLink related benchmark scenarios. Consisting of:

    • NVLink enabled, both cards used for rendering
    • NVLink enabled, card #1 only used for rendering
    • NVLink disabled, card #2 only used for rendering
    • NvLink disabled, both cards used for rendering

    The middle two use cases may not be very practical, but are perfectly valid. And useful to know about at this early stage of performance discovery.

    @RayDAnt, thanks for clarifying.  Those middle two benchmark tests with only a single card used threw me off.  I found the most interesting part to be the first test with both cards and NVLink enabled was a little slower in render time, slower in loading time, and had slightly less iterations per second than the fourth test with both cards and NVLink disabled.  From those benchmarks, it appears that having 2 cards with NVLink disabled is slighty faster.

    this test was less about speed and more about memory pooling for me, I only did the benchmark on request of others
    I don't care about render speed if I can't fit the scene in my VRAM and since the NVLink is not adding significantly much to the render times, I will run on NVLinked cards from now on

    @pandapenguingames Ok, I see the benefits now… the main benefit of the 2 cards with NVLink Enabled is to be able to load more texture data into the GPU memory (i.e a larger scene), while only sacrificing very little in regards to speed.

  • kenshaw011267kenshaw011267 Posts: 3,805

    You can compare PPG's marks to the other dual 2080ti configurations on the first page and see it gets nearly the same results as those non Nvlink systems. So if anybody happens to have two 2080tis, it looks like a no brainer to buy that Nvlink connector and get some more VRAM capacity. Iray has always scaled pretty well, so you've always been able to get that kind of performance when doubling up GPUs before Nvlink came along.

    For anyone with a single 2080ti, your options have grown. The 3080 will be releasing this year, without any doubt. You can wait until then to buy a new card or look at buying a 2080ti at a reduced price. I am quite confident in saying that the 2080ti will drop in price pretty rapidly once the 3080 and 3080ti arrive. Also, AMD has confirmed their new lineup will launch before the new consoles do. That means we could be looking at September or October, which has long been rumored a target date. It could even be August, but that may be pushing it. Some people believe the top AMD card might actually dethrone the 2080ti, which could cause a major price shift regardless of when the 3080ti arrives. So much hardware is coming this year its crazy.

    I think the owners of any NVLink capable card has to give serious thought to adding a matching card and an NVLink bridge rather than upgrqading, unless the Ampere cards carry substantially more VRAM at the same price points.

    The 2070 Super might just be the sweet spot for this. 2 2070 S and the bridge is $1100 which is right at the same price point as a 2080 ti. But the pair has 5120 CUDA and 14+ gb of VRAM compared to the 2080ti's 4352 CUDA and 11Gb of VRAM.

  • outrider42outrider42 Posts: 2,861
    RayDAnt said:

    @pandapenguingames Just to clarify, as I think the red hightlighted NVLink tags may be mis-labeled... the first 2 configurations shown use a single CUDA device (i.e. 1 x RTX 2080 Ti) and therefore should be labeled "NVLink disabled" (note: the first example you give with only CUDA device 0 has the red highlight saying "NVLink enabled").  These single cards take about 9-seconds to load the scene and then about 4.5-minutes to render the scene.


    The final configuration has both CUDA device 1 and CUDA device 0 (i.e. 2 x RTX 2080 Ti), but appears to be mis-labeled as "NVLink disabled".  These dual cards (i.e. NVLink enabled) cards take close to 9-seconds to load, but take about 2-minutes less time to render the same scene, that would be nearly twice as fast (about 1.9 x) as a single card... correct?

    It's all labeled properly. @pandapenguingames has so far posted numbers for 4 different NVLink related benchmark scenarios. Consisting of:

    • NVLink enabled, both cards used for rendering
    • NVLink enabled, card #1 only used for rendering
    • NVLink disabled, card #2 only used for rendering
    • NvLink disabled, both cards used for rendering

    The middle two use cases may not be very practical, but are perfectly valid. And useful to know about at this early stage of performance discovery.

    @RayDAnt, thanks for clarifying.  Those middle two benchmark tests with only a single card used threw me off.  I found the most interesting part to be the first test with both cards and NVLink enabled was a little slower in render time, slower in loading time, and had slightly less iterations per second than the fourth test with both cards and NVLink disabled.  From those benchmarks, it appears that having 2 cards with NVLink disabled is slighty faster.

    Yes, that was expected. The actual numbers were of most interest here. Nvidia explained at the very start during the launch of Turing that Nvlink would incur a performance hit compared to that of a single card, or for Iray, running multiple cards without the Nvlink. You have to consider what is happening here. The CPU needs to feed data two separate cards, and it has to decide which data is duplicated or not and get everything straight before a render. That's going to take a little longer. The actual render the cards have to talk to each over over the Nvlink because they share that data. So as each card works, it needs to be able to address data over the Nvlink bridge, and while Nvlink is fast, it is still not as fast as the GDDR6 that is located on the card right beside the GPU chip. So it takes a fraction of a second longer to retrieve this data, and that adds up over the course of render.

    Other render engines that support Nvlink have all shown that performance drops a little compared to running without Nvlink. The big advantage to Nvlink that we have all been looking forward to is pooling VRAM to be able to render larger scenes. I posted Vray Nvlink tests some time ago, which showed I believe a 5% or so performance hit with Nvlink. Even 5% is pretty small.

    However, just going by PPG's numbers, it looks like the performance hit for Iray using Nvlink is quite small. Maybe its because the bench scene renders so fast, but its only 3 seconds longer for the Nvlink devices to render.

    I have been quite hard on Iray, but it looks like they have done a solid job of getting Nvlink. It took 2 freaking years, but they did it.

     

    You can compare PPG's marks to the other dual 2080ti configurations on the first page and see it gets nearly the same results as those non Nvlink systems. So if anybody happens to have two 2080tis, it looks like a no brainer to buy that Nvlink connector and get some more VRAM capacity. Iray has always scaled pretty well, so you've always been able to get that kind of performance when doubling up GPUs before Nvlink came along.

    For anyone with a single 2080ti, your options have grown. The 3080 will be releasing this year, without any doubt. You can wait until then to buy a new card or look at buying a 2080ti at a reduced price. I am quite confident in saying that the 2080ti will drop in price pretty rapidly once the 3080 and 3080ti arrive. Also, AMD has confirmed their new lineup will launch before the new consoles do. That means we could be looking at September or October, which has long been rumored a target date. It could even be August, but that may be pushing it. Some people believe the top AMD card might actually dethrone the 2080ti, which could cause a major price shift regardless of when the 3080ti arrives. So much hardware is coming this year its crazy.

    I think the owners of any NVLink capable card has to give serious thought to adding a matching card and an NVLink bridge rather than upgrqading, unless the Ampere cards carry substantially more VRAM at the same price points.

    The 2070 Super might just be the sweet spot for this. 2 2070 S and the bridge is $1100 which is right at the same price point as a 2080 ti. But the pair has 5120 CUDA and 14+ gb of VRAM compared to the 2080ti's 4352 CUDA and 11Gb of VRAM.

    That depends. If the 3080 or 3080ti are significantly faster than the 2080ti, which I expect them to be, then people who want pure speed may look at adding the 3080ti to the 2080ti. There is little doubt that this combo will be a lot faster than two 2080tis. And if VRAM is not a huge concern, I can see people doing that instead.

    But if VRAM is a big concern, then the choice is pretty easy to buy a second 2080ti. Unless of course they have the cash to buy two 3080tis or 3080s and use Nvlink on them.

    Certainly the 2070 Supers are very interesting. For anyone kind of on a budget, that's a great deal. But nobody has actually tested it yet, so I cannot advise people to jump on it. We do know that Nvlink works on the 2070 Super, games have been tested with it, and at least in games, the combo beats a single 2080ti pretty easily, but not by that huge a margin. Iray would probably scale better, but we don't know for certain.

    The trouble is that this all comes out right at the end of the Turing generation. Most people have probably forgot about Nvlink at this point, or given up on it. A lot of people here didn't think VRAM pooling would happen, and if they don't check the forums a lot, they might never find out.

  • the5amkebabthe5amkebab Posts: 101
    edited June 2020
    This is great news, last month I bought a new PC with a 2070S with VRAM pooling in mind in case i needed it in future, I don't need a 2nd GPU just yet, I'm struggling to fill just the one in 99.99% of scenes I render. I did try the benchmark scene out of curiosity though and found I was getting almost one iteration less per second than benchmarks posted here. I have the latest drivers, latest version of Daz and the card brand I have (Galax) even shows very slightly faster speeds than most other 2070S's including founders editions in other benchmarks I found (non Daz tests), what do you think could be causing my card to be slightly slower?
    Post edited by the5amkebab on
  • outrider42outrider42 Posts: 2,861
    Well you aren't alone in that regard, just look several posts before the Nvlink started. I've seen slower rendering for a while, and several others have too. In fact, this 2080ti is the first one in a while to score marks that resemble earlier ones. I'm not sure what's going on here, but it looks like a driver issue to me. I still have several previous versions of Daz installed, and those will run slower too. When I roll back my GPU driver to 436, my render speed comes back to what it used to be in them. The problem with that is the newest Daz Studio will not work with 436 at all.

    The 2080ti is different Chooser from other cards. It and the Titan RTX use the GT102 die. The 2070 Super uses the GT104. So it could be that perhaps the 2080ti is not effected like the other cards that have been so far. Or there could be some other factor. I tried installing drivers multiple times and I got the same result every time. Going to 436 always got my speed back. Going to current ones lost it. I tried some other drivers, too, basically all of the drivers that the new version of Daz requires saw a performance drop for my PC.

    If you have previous versions of Daz installed (before 4.12.1.109) you can also experiment with this. I'd really like to know if others can duplicate what I'm getting. Sadly Daz does not offer previous versions to download, for unknown reasons.
  • the5amkebabthe5amkebab Posts: 101

    AHh glad its not just me or something wrong with my new GPU then. I've asked Daz for version 4.12.0.86 as that is what's currently on my old PC and doesn't have the newly introduced animation bugs but I can't find a way to transfer it to my new PC, I unfortunately had "delete package" ticked on DIM when I initially installed it. Its been nearly a week and no response from them yet though.

  • RayDAntRayDAnt Posts: 863
    edited June 2020

    AHh glad its not just me or something wrong with my new GPU then. I've asked Daz for version 4.12.0.86 as that is what's currently on my old PC and doesn't have the newly introduced animation bugs but I can't find a way to transfer it to my new PC, I unfortunately had "delete package" ticked on DIM when I initially installed it. Its been nearly a week and no response from them yet though.

    Go to "C:\Program Files\DAZ 3D" on the machine with the older relase and copy the folder "DAZStudio4" onto a flash drive (I suggest also compressing/backing it up to a more permanent location with a name like "DAZ Studio Pro 4.12.0.086.zip" or something for future use.) Plug the flash drive into the machine with the newer relase and overwrite the "DAZStudio4" folder found in the same place with the folder copy you just made.

    Alternatively, you can also just copy that folder to any location on the other machine and run the previous DS version simply by double-clicking "DAZStudio.exe" found inside the folder. That way you don't have to worry about possibly breaking the newer installation or DIM overwriting it without your knowledge.

    Post edited by RayDAnt on
  • ThorThor Posts: 37
    edited June 2020

    Where can I get the B25STTop shirt and textures used in the benchmark scene?
     

     

    Screen Shot 2020-06-09 at 8.21.40 AM.png
    403 x 240 - 45K
    Post edited by Thor on
  • SevrinSevrin Posts: 5,547
    Thor said:

    Where can I get the B25STTop shirt and textures used in the benchmark scene?
     

     

    Everything used in the benchmarking scene is included with the DS base files.

  • nicsttnicstt Posts: 11,122
    edited June 2020

    @RayDAnt

    Would you mind if I share a conversion of your scene I did for Blender? Someone was asking. It isn't possible to get a good comparrison of times; I merely wanted an idea to judge if it was worth it to me; besides the character was transferred using Diffeimorphic, and that has very custom shaders, designed to replicate the look of Iray in Studio.

    two wildly different 'itteration' renders and one ran through the denoiser (Intel's).

    CPU 128 samples No Denoise 1-32.84.png
    900 x 900 - 2M
    CPU 128 samples 1-32.84.png
    900 x 900 - 834K
    CPU 1000 samples No Denoise 11-55.27.png
    900 x 900 - 2M
    Post edited by nicstt on
  • RayDAntRayDAnt Posts: 863
    nicstt said:

    @RayDAnt

    Would you mind if I share a conversion of your scene I did for Blender? Someone was asking. It isn't possible to get a good comparrison of times; I merely wanted an idea to judge if it was worth it to me; besides the character was transferred using Diffeimorphic, and that has very custom shaders, designed to replicate the look of Iray in Studio.

    two wildly different 'itteration' renders and one ran through the denoiser (Intel's).

    Sure - share away!

  • ThorThor Posts: 37
    edited June 2020

    System Configuration
    System/Motherboard: MacPro5,1 (Mid 2010)
    CPU: 2x 6-Core Intel Xeon @ 2.66 GHz (Westmere)
    GPU: AMD Radeon HD 7950 (3072 MB)
    System Memory:  32 GB 1333 MHz DDR3 ECC
    OS Drive: Hitachi HDS722020ALA330 2 TB                
    Asset Drive:  Hitachi HDS722020ALA330 2 TB (not system drive)
    Operating System: Mac OS X 10.11.6
    Nvidia Drivers Version: N/A
    Daz Studio Version: 4.12.1.086 64-bit
    Optix Prime Acceleration: N/A


    Benchmark Results
    2020-06-09 10:09:30.721 Finished Rendering
    2020-06-09 10:09:31.129 Total Rendering Time: 1 hours 6 minutes 35.33 seconds
    2020-06-09 16:01:23.633 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : Device statistics:
    2020-06-09 16:01:23.633 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CPU:      1800 iterations, 6.004s init, 3982.505s render

    Iteration rate: 0.45197683367629 iteration per second
    Loading Time: 3995.66 seconds

    Note: Did several tests with and without running other programs and multitasking. There was little to no difference in benchmarks with multiple apps running (3 web browsers, Mail, Text editor, utility apps)

     

    bmark3.png
    900 x 900 - 1M
    Post edited by Thor on
  • TheKDTheKD Posts: 2,593
    edited June 2020

    System/Motherboard: GIGABYTE B450 AORUS PRO WIFI-CF
    CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 2600X @ 4.0 ghz
    GPU: MSI GTX 1070 Armor OC/Aero OC @ 1648mhz clock  2230mhz memory,  GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 960 OC 4GB @ 1276mhz clock  1810mhz memory   MSI RTX 2080 Super Gaming X Trio
    System Memory: Corsairw DDR4-3200 8gb x2   gskill DDR4-3200 8gb x2   
    OS Drive: Samsung 960 EVO 250gb
    Asset Drive: Seagate 2TB 7200 rpm
    Operating System: Win10 Enterprise 18363
    Nvidia Drivers Version: 442.19
    Daz Studio Version: 4.12.2.6

    Benchmark Results
    Optix Prime Acceleration: N/A
    DAZ_STATS
    2020-06-10 19:14:12.384 Finished Rendering
    2020-06-10 19:14:12.417 Total Rendering Time: 5 minutes 21.42 seconds

    IRAY_STATS
    2020-06-10 19:17:57.186 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : Device statistics:
    2020-06-10 19:17:57.186 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 0 (GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER):      1800 iterations, 3.869s init, 313.386s render

    Iteration Rate: (1800 / 313.386) 5.743 iterations per second  
    Loading Time: ((0* 3600 + 5 * 60 + 21) - DEVICE_RENDER_TIME) 7.614 seconds

     

    Benchmark Results
    DAZ_STATS
    2020-06-10 20:05:59.587 Finished Rendering
    2020-06-10 20:05:59.623 Total Rendering Time: 14 minutes 27.36 seconds

    IRAY_STATS
    2020-06-10 20:13:18.863 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : Device statistics:
    2020-06-10 20:13:18.863 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 1 (GeForce GTX 1070):      1800 iterations, 3.534s init, 860.528s render

    Iteration Rate: (1800 / 860.528) 2.091 iterations per second
    Loading Time: ((0 * 3600 + 14 * 60 + 27.36) - DEVICE_RENDER_TIME) 6.832 seconds

     

     

     

     

    DAZ_STATS
    2020-06-10 19:39:22.883 Finished Rendering
    2020-06-10 19:39:22.915 Total Rendering Time: 4 minutes 3.80 seconds

    IRAY_STATS
    2020-06-10 19:39:39.989 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 0 (GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER):      1324 iterations, 4.123s init, 236.338s render
    2020-06-10 19:39:39.989 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 1 (GeForce GTX 1070):      476 iterations, 4.545s init, 235.826s render

    Rendering Performance: [1800 / 236.338] 7.616 iterations per second
    Loading Time: [(0 * 3600 + 4 * 60 + 3.80) - DEVICE_RENDER_TIME_(largest value)] 7.462 seconds

    Post edited by TheKD on
  • outrider42outrider42 Posts: 2,861

    So TheKD also lost time, with the device render time going from 283 seconds with driver 436 and 4.12.0.067 to 313 seconds with driver 442 and 4.12.2.6. Almost exactly 30 seconds slower. The loading time is actually faster, but the overall time is still much slower.

    This trend is disturbing.

  • bebez71bebez71 Posts: 4

    Hi, here my stats

    System Configuration
    System/Motherboard: ASUSTek PRIME X370-PRO
    CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 1700 @ 3700 MHz
    GPU: GPU1 Manli GeForce RTX 2060 Super 8GB Gallardo @ stock, GPU2 Manli GeForce RTX 2060 Super 8GB Gallardo @ stock
    System Memory: G.Skill DDR4 8GB x4 (32GB total) @ 1600 MHz
    OS Drive: MyDigitalSSD bpx NVMe 118GB
    Asset Drive: SanDisk SDSSDHII480G 480GB
    Operating System: Windows10 64bit, Version 1909 (Build 18393.900)
    Nvidia Drivers Version: 442.92 Driver Studio
    Daz Studio Version: 4.12.1.117 64bit
    Optix Prime Acceleration: N/A

    Benchmark Results
    DAZ_STATS
    2020-06-19 21:14:54.795 Finished Rendering
    2020-06-19 21:14:54.842 Total Rendering Time: 3 minutes 56.0 seconds

    IRAY_STATS
    2020-06-19 21:15:25.581 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 1 (GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER):                901 iterations, 4.014s init, 228.153s render
    2020-06-19 21:15:25.581 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 0 (GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER):                899 iterations, 3.555s init, 228.424s render

    Iteration Rate: [(901+899) / 228.424] 7.880 iterations per second
    Loading Time: (0*3600 + 3*60 + 56.0) - 228.424 = 7.576 seconds

    Note:
    Device 0 used for display, and its connected on a PCI Express 2.0 x16, instead Device 1 is on a PCI Express 3.0 x16

  • the5amkebabthe5amkebab Posts: 101
    RayDAnt said:

    AHh glad its not just me or something wrong with my new GPU then. I've asked Daz for version 4.12.0.86 as that is what's currently on my old PC and doesn't have the newly introduced animation bugs but I can't find a way to transfer it to my new PC, I unfortunately had "delete package" ticked on DIM when I initially installed it. Its been nearly a week and no response from them yet though.

    Go to "C:\Program Files\DAZ 3D" on the machine with the older relase and copy the folder "DAZStudio4" onto a flash drive (I suggest also compressing/backing it up to a more permanent location with a name like "DAZ Studio Pro 4.12.0.086.zip" or something for future use.) Plug the flash drive into the machine with the newer relase and overwrite the "DAZStudio4" folder found in the same place with the folder copy you just made.

    Alternatively, you can also just copy that folder to any location on the other machine and run the previous DS version simply by double-clicking "DAZStudio.exe" found inside the folder. That way you don't have to worry about possibly breaking the newer installation or DIM overwriting it without your knowledge.

    Sorry I missed this, didn't get a notification for some reason. I ended up getting an earlier version of Daz but I've been in Blender so much recently I haven't even installed it, that E-Cycles render engine leaves iray for dead.

  • outrider42outrider42 Posts: 2,861
    edited June 2020

    New Driver 451.48 release. My hardware is the same.

    Windows 10 1903 Daz 4.12.1.109

    CPU: i5 4690K

    GPU #1:  EVGA 1080ti SC2

    GPU #2: MSI 1080ti Gaming  <--this is my display, yes, I use GPU 2 for display.

    RAM 32GB HyperX

    OS Drive Samsung 860 EVO 1TB

    Asset Drive: Samsung 860 EVO 1TB and WB 4TB Black HDD

    2020-06-24 18:42:02.192 Total Rendering Time: 4 minutes 35.58 seconds

    2020-06-24 18:42:08.709 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : Device statistics:

    2020-06-24 18:42:08.709 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 0 (GeForce GTX 1080 Ti): 902 iterations, 6.272s init, 265.262s render

    2020-06-24 18:42:08.709 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 1 (GeForce GTX 1080 Ti): 898 iterations, 6.632s init, 264.731s render

    Virtually identical times to the last driver, and thus still a lot slower than driver 436. I'm thinking that performance is not going to come back.

    Post edited by outrider42 on
  • nicsttnicstt Posts: 11,122

    New Driver 451.48 release. My hardware is the same.

    Windows 10 1903 Daz 4.12.1.109

    CPU: i5 4690K

    GPU #1:  EVGA 1080ti SC2

    GPU #2: MSI 1080ti Gaming  <--this is my display, yes, I use GPU 2 for display.

    RAM 32GB HyperX

    OS Drive Samsung 860 EVO 1TB

    Asset Drive: Samsung 860 EVO 1TB and WB 4TB Black HDD

    2020-06-24 18:42:02.192 Total Rendering Time: 4 minutes 35.58 seconds

    2020-06-24 18:42:08.709 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : Device statistics:

    2020-06-24 18:42:08.709 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 0 (GeForce GTX 1080 Ti): 902 iterations, 6.272s init, 265.262s render

    2020-06-24 18:42:08.709 Iray [INFO] - IRAY:RENDER ::   1.0   IRAY   rend info : CUDA device 1 (GeForce GTX 1080 Ti): 898 iterations, 6.632s init, 264.731s render

    Virtually identical times to the last driver, and thus still a lot slower than driver 436. I'm thinking that performance is not going to come back.

    The cynic in me, is going to wonder about the upcoming release of a new GPU architecture line due soon. Pure guesswork on my part of course, although it's something we've seen before. Of course, the more an item can do, the more it's given to do.

Sign In or Register to comment.