Forum

Author Topic: Benchmarking a GPUs  (Read 81168 times)

Wishgranter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1202
    • View Profile
    • Museum of Historic Buildings
Re: Benchmarking a GPUs
« Reply #45 on: December 21, 2012, 03:22:37 PM »
Kris,my 7970 working flawlesly under W2012 datacenter, under win7 its problematic, will explain later. few results

results for DEPHT MAP stage

Win7
560Ti 1761 sec
7970 690 sec

W2012Datacenter
560Ti 1390 sec
7970 650 sec

So please see where the problem is, mostly under drivers, but depend on hw config, it can be a hw related problem......

Im wil dig very deep intro this over the next 14 days.....
----------------
www.mhb.sk

kris3d

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 91
    • View Profile
Re: Benchmarking a GPUs
« Reply #46 on: December 21, 2012, 07:37:51 PM »
Very interesting.
Another system, a very large difference in the calculation.
Is this is a question of drivers? are different for Windows Server 2012.?
Is the system itself can have an impact on the calculation.
Do other stages calculations also work better in Windows Server 2012?

Matt

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 100
    • View Profile
Re: Benchmarking a GPUs
« Reply #47 on: December 23, 2012, 03:37:44 AM »
I have got similar performance results running both windows 7 and 8 64 bit.
I am running an Asus Matrix Platinum 7970 at 1250 mhz on my system but it took some effort to get it running at maximum potential.

You really need to totally uninstall all the windows ATI Drivers before you start especially the generic windows ones.

The blow link describes the process pretty well even though its for a 7970m.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/alienware-m17x/698471-ati-amd-7970m-drivers-windows-8-server-2012-a.html

Note they recommend using driver version 12.10

Hope it helps

Porly

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: Benchmarking a GPUs
« Reply #48 on: January 04, 2013, 04:14:27 PM »
Hello,

I also bought the HD7970(1100/1500) using Windows 7 64, 3770k@4,2 32GB-1600MHZ. My problem is that Photoscan recognized the card with 2gb instead of 3gb. So the result of the benchmark showed "only" 325 mio. samples per second for the graphic device. Had anyone the same problem???

Thanks!


Wishgranter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1202
    • View Profile
    • Museum of Historic Buildings
Re: Benchmarking a GPUs
« Reply #49 on: January 04, 2013, 05:09:28 PM »
yes, that courious to me too, why just 2GB instead of 3GB, will digg intro that....

What drivers  version you used for testing ?

Have set to ULTRA ?
----------------
www.mhb.sk

Porly

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: Benchmarking a GPUs
« Reply #50 on: January 04, 2013, 07:38:52 PM »
I have downloaded the latest package from amd.com (with catalyst) revision number 12.10, installed driver version is 9.2.0.0

the result about 325 mio samples/s was on high

I guess that something is wrong, because the CPU is also very weak (100 mio. samples/second) my 2700k had about 30% more power.

(2 cores of CPU are disabled for one GPU 6/8)

I made it also on Ultra and the benchmark showed 400mio. for the card device. So, is the full perfomence only reachable on Ultra???

Thanks a lot!

Wishgranter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1202
    • View Profile
    • Museum of Historic Buildings
Re: Benchmarking a GPUs
« Reply #51 on: January 05, 2013, 01:24:14 AM »
Yes, only on ultra, if you watch CPu and GPU utilization you will see that on lover levels (HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW) they are not used on 100 %.

And the 2GB are recognized in other benchmarks too....
----------------
www.mhb.sk

Porly

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: Benchmarking a GPUs
« Reply #52 on: January 05, 2013, 02:27:08 AM »
So, i solved the problem with the recognizing of only 2 GB. I had to switch off the onboard gpu in BIOS. Now I have 3 GB but without any improvement in performence. But even better than the gtx580.

Last question ;) : How can it be that the navigation in photoscan became worse with a better CPU (2700k-->3770k) and GPU (GTX580-->HD7970) (32GB/Same Memory). Rotating the Modelview is lagging even with a small facecount (2.000.000). I already checked the memory with some diagnostic-tools, seems to be ok...

thanks a lot for your help Wishgranter!




Wishgranter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1202
    • View Profile
    • Museum of Historic Buildings
Re: Benchmarking a GPUs
« Reply #53 on: January 05, 2013, 04:32:42 AM »
Thats something that worry my - the LAG with 7970, im using for primary monitor the 560Ti, and for computation the 7970. That is because AMD have problem with implementing the VBO feature in its consumer cards, so the problem is driver related and mean AMD cannot/want implement it right ( at least in drivers that have tested. im searching for solution in this...... So for best viewing performance use the Nvidia cards ( more GPU RAM and bigger models is the way ) and for computation the ATI ones.... It could be interesant to test some professional ATI card Fire pro in Pscan....
----------------
www.mhb.sk

Wishgranter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1202
    • View Profile
    • Museum of Historic Buildings
Re: Benchmarking a GPUs
« Reply #54 on: January 05, 2013, 05:07:10 AM »
hmm propably have found the problem with VBO, will test it today afther morning coffe and let you know....
----------------
www.mhb.sk

Wishgranter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1202
    • View Profile
    • Museum of Historic Buildings
Re: Benchmarking a GPUs
« Reply #55 on: January 06, 2013, 02:48:31 PM »
Hello all, the problem seems to be related to the OpenGl. dll file, becasue of conflict for hardware what file to use. becasue Nvidai OpenGl and ATI openGl are not the same the system have problem to use the proprer one. im on the way to test it, so afthre few day im will repost what have found out...
----------------
www.mhb.sk

Wishgranter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1202
    • View Profile
    • Museum of Historic Buildings
Re: Benchmarking a GPUs
« Reply #56 on: January 06, 2013, 04:46:02 PM »
VBO is "vertex buffer object".  It's an OpenGL feature used in rendering for programs using the OpenGL rendering architecture such as Second Life.  Enabling VBO should give better performance for your graphics....but the key word is "should".  Some video cards and the associated drivers show problems with VBO and by turning the feature off in your preferences you get a noticable increase in performance and quality.  Both nVidia and ATI (now known as AMD) cards have occassional issues with VBO enabled in preferences...........most to the time the problem is fixed with a driver version that doesn't have the problem.  ATI/AMD cards have historically had more problems than nVidia in the past........that's probably why you were told to turn off VBO in preferences.  If you've done that it fixed your problem then leave it off.  Over time a new driver will be released for your card and if you update to it, you might try VBO again to see if that driver fixed the previous issue (that would be up to you).
The reason you don't see any issues with VBO in your other games is that those other games are not rendered with the OpenGL rendering architecture..........they are most likely DirectX (especially if you are using a Windows machine).  You won't have any problems or issues with a rendering engine that use the VBO feature because DirectX doesn't have that feature.
----------------
www.mhb.sk

Wishgranter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1202
    • View Profile
    • Museum of Historic Buildings
Re: Benchmarking a GPUs
« Reply #57 on: January 06, 2013, 08:08:12 PM »
VBO performance:

For every 1 GB of VRAM ( on board of GPU ) you can use aprox 45-50 mil trias = that fit in memory and can get fast response in viewport.....
----------------
www.mhb.sk

Wishgranter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1202
    • View Profile
    • Museum of Historic Buildings
----------------
www.mhb.sk

Matt

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 100
    • View Profile
Re: Benchmarking a GPUs
« Reply #59 on: February 05, 2013, 02:53:09 PM »
Hi Wishgranter,

Just wondering where those GPU benchmarks are?
I guess you are pretty busy but its been around 6 months now 
I am still tweaking the 7970 Matrix/GTX 590 combo.

Latest result below

Using device: GeForce GTX 590, 16 compute units, 1535 MB global memory
  max work group size 1024
  max work item sizes [1024, 1024, 64]
  max mem alloc size 383 MB
  max workgroup size c1: 1024 c3: 1024 zero: 1024 hamming: 1024 filter: 1024 box: 1024
  max workgroup size zero: 1024 costs: 1024 b1: 1024 bn: 1024 wta: 1024 transpose: 1024
Using device: GeForce GTX 590, 16 compute units, 1535 MB global memory
  max work group size 1024
  max work item sizes [1024, 1024, 64]
  max mem alloc size 383 MB
  max workgroup size c1: 1024 c3: 1024 zero: 1024 hamming: 1024 filter: 1024 box: 1024
  max workgroup size zero: 1024 costs: 1024 b1: 1024 bn: 1024 wta: 1024 transpose: 1024
Using device: Tahiti, 32 compute units, 2048 MB global memory
  max work group size 256
  max work item sizes [256, 256, 256]
  max mem alloc size 512 MB
  max workgroup size c1: 256 c3: 256 zero: 256 hamming: 256 filter: 256 box: 256
  max workgroup size zero: 256 costs: 256 b1: 256 bn: 256 wta: 256 transpose: 256
initializing...
selected 16 cameras from 16 in 0.004 sec
Loading photos...
Reconstructing depth...

--->deleted to save space

finished depth reconstruction in 458.607 seconds
Device 1 performance: 161.974 million samples/sec (CPU)
Device 2 performance: 176.341 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX 590)
Device 3 performance: 170.51 million samples/sec (GeForce GTX 590)
Device 4 performance: 615.622 million samples/sec (Tahiti)
Total performance: 1124.45 million samples/sec
Generating mesh...
generating 1638x1636 grid (0.0061235 resolution)
setting sample weights
adding points
updating levels
merging levels
triangulating... 528602 points 1057063 faces done in 2.178 sec
filtering mesh (1057063 -> 1057063)
Finished processing in 483.345 sec (exit code 1)