- Joined
- Feb 2, 2011
- Messages
- 43
- Mac
- Classic Mac
- Mobile Phone
Re: GTX 480 & 10.6.8 - QE, OpenGL/CL & CUDA Benches
very very thx for all hard work
whats about kona3g card ( aja system ) it can cut down my rendering times or not ?
again thanks
u r my new heroOkay I'm going to explain this as best as I can, so you can fully understand about "Gaming" cards vs "Workstation/Multimedia" cards and what their intended use is for.
Gaming Cards work to improve frame and graphic rates to make your game play more fluid, smooth and graphically appealing, (but you already know this).
Workstation/Multimedia Cards work to improve your rendering speeds to cut down on time when you're producing and exporting a video as well as saving and exporting a Photoshop-type file.
My older (now fried) Mac Intel Tower was able to render a 10 - 15 min video in about 55 to 65 min.WAY TOO LONG !!! My Mac Hak Pro (that I currently use) can render that same video in 20 to 30 min. Much better; that is in part because I have OC'd the CPU and increased the amount of RAM that I have in my unit. Using an ATI card would NOT improve anything to cut down my rendering times, so all the rendering "pressure" would still be on the CPU and RAM to render my videos.
Nvidia cards that use - CUDA and Mercury supporting drivers in their cards to make the CPU, RAM AND the GPU work together when rendering on apps (like Photoshop, Final Cut Pro, Motion, Lightwave, Maya 3D, Etc.) to cut your rendering times down 30 to 40% (sometimes up to 50 to 60% depending on the application being used). So that same 10 min video that took up to 30 min. to render now takes anywhere from 14 - 18 min. to render (and sometimes a little less, depending on the how you save the file). That's a considerable amount of time saved.
And THAT'S what I'm looking for in a GPU. Mind you, not all Nvidia cards can do this ONLY cards that utilize CUDA and Mercury support drivers to make ALL 3 units (CPU, RAM & GPU) work together to cut down on your rendering times.
The added extra bonus to the particular card is that it can also play almost ANY game out there that you can throw at it without a hitch on Hi-Res and still get amazing frame rates. The GTX 480 is ONE POWERFUL CARD. and if you water cool it and OC it; like in this video:
you can match and even surpass the power and performance of the GTX 570 or 580 Superclocked version by OC'ing this bad boy; very much like OC'ing a CPU. What's amazing about this video is that it's already a year old and I feel like I'm getting a "new" card and waterblock (as I ordered both today) and can't wait to install this in our unit.
Here are the specs for you to print out (if you would like) to compare the performance from GTX 480, 570 & 580 Superclocked GPUs. Then watch the video (again) and this time see the OC performance improvement that you'll receive using the GTX 480 and the waterblock from Koolance (which by the way, I'm a reseller for, so if you want the Koolance 480 waterblock, PM me and let me know). They're even selling this at a reduced price.
GTX 480 Superclocked:
http://www.evga.com/products/pdf/015-P3-1482.pdf
GTX 570 Superclocked:
http://www.evga.com/products/pdf/012-P3-1572.pdf
GTX 580 Superclocked:
http://www.evga.com/products/pdf/015-P3-1582.pdf
Also, something else I wanted to note, this whole thing started because I was looking into the Nvidia Quadro 4000 because that very card is an "Workstation/Multimedia Driven" card meant to cut down rendering times on those very hi-end apps I was talking about earlier - BUT the pricetag on the Quadro 4000... $700+ - OUCH !!!As I was on the "Download Drivers" page for this particular card, I read comment on this link:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/macosx-cud ... river.html
"Support for both Quadro FX 4800 for Mac and GeForce GTX 285 for MAC"
That confused me a bit and that started to make me wonder why they would mention that. Well, once I did a few minutes of research and googled around for an answer I quickly found out that the GTX 285 card was not only a gaming card but also a application rendering card and I found some amazing info right here:
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/26 ... ID=2675778
Read both pages see what I'm talking about. Mind you there were a couple of other sites like this one too. I also posted a comment and haven't heard back from DPArt (one of the guys who contributed his research to the link (above); pretty thorough). I don't know if he got offended because I have Mac Hack Pro or doesn't know how to answer the question after explaining things a bit more clearly to him about how my system is set up. I'd like to think it's the latter. BUT regardless, his point brought some validity to what I thought. That the GTX 285 card is basically the same (and in some cases better) at rendering projects than the overpriced Quadro 4000. So that made me wonder about the other cards (like GTX 470 & 480). My gut on right on this one as well. After doing some more reading on these cards and their support with using CUDA and Mercury drivers, I'm realizing there is more power to an OC'd Watercooled GTX 480 Card (that costs a total of $340.00 and runs near half the temp fully OC'd) over a Quadro 4000 that costs more than twice that amount. So I'm eager to try this out and see what it can do.
As is what's typical, I'm sure that a year or two from now there will be a card twice the speed and performance of this one, but here we are (a year later) and the GTX 480 is STILL - DA' BOMB !!!
Just to let anyone know (who reading this), if I'm incorrect on anything that I'm sharing here, please correct my research as I want to be as accurate as possible so I'm being a help, not a hindrance to anyone. Thanks for asking the question leluoch and anyone taking the time to read this. Hope this info helps to clear up some things on the performance of what these GPU's can do. They're MORE than just "gaming" cards... Later...
very very thx for all hard work
whats about kona3g card ( aja system ) it can cut down my rendering times or not ?
again thanks
Can't wait to get these parts and finally install this stuff... I'm amped !!! 
Don't "praise" me too much. Like I said before, even with the amount of homework I did into this, I could be a bit off on my research. I'm sure their are aspects about the Quadro 4000 (and higher models) that I'm sure perform better in different rendering aspects. But for the most part, the GTX 285 and MORE SO the GTX 470 & 480 definitely can go toe to toe and cost less than half the price tag. But like I said before it needs to be WATER COOLED because the history of these cards is THEY RUN HOT, VERY HOT !!! You saw the video; I mean 70° - 99°C ?!?! That's way too hot for any card, and will definitely shorten the life of that GPU. You simply can't beat Water Cooling !!! Did you see the results on that vid? Man, that water block cut the temps near 50% (@ 36° - 47°C) !!! That's amazing !!! 
