560ti vs 570 and 2500K vs 2600K
Posted: Mon May 21, 2012 2:03 am
I took my time and compared GTX560ti and GTX570 on same machine on same clip with same NeatVideo settings, to see if much more expensive graphics card pays off with faster rendering time.-
It does not (in most real life situations).
Here are links to quite some test results (performance optimizing in NeatVideo):
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9205816/NeatVid ... _560ti.txt
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9205816/NeatVid ... eo_570.txt
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9205816/NeatVid ... _570OC.txt
On short:
- Smaller the frame size, less difference between GPU's. Obviosly latency of ram and other components plays big role here. The bigger the frame size, the bigger the difference between GPU's.
- overclocking CPU and GPU does have obvious effects again only at big frame size like 4K.
- Differences in performance are visible when hit you "Optimize" NeatVideo filter, but in real life when you render clip, they are more or les gone in most of time. Rendering 200 frames with 570 finishes 2 seconds before 560ti or 4 seconds before if 570 is maximum overclocked. That means 8 minutes less rendering time if rendering 30 minutes of video (rendering time 133 min instead of 141). If that is worth buying much more expensive 570, everyone himself should consider.
Comparison of test I did.
from "optimize" option in Neat Filter.
HD= 1920x1080 [1080p]
SD= 720x576 [576p]
4K= "4K" option
8b = 8bit
32b = 32bit
Radus= always 1
570= [ENGTX570 DCII/2DIS/1280MD5]
570OC= overclocked to 900/4000 Mhz as is 560ti from [GV-N560OC-1GI]
[x]= fps best option calculated of "optimize"
SD8b = 560ti[50], 570[52,6], 570OC[52,6]
SD32b = 560ti[43,5], 570[45,5], 570OC[47,6]
HD8b = 560ti[11,5], 570[13,2], 570OC[14,5]
HD32b = 560ti[10,6], 570[11,2], 570OC[12,2]
4K8b = 560ti[2,98], 570[3,38], 570OC[3,51]
4K32b = 560ti[2,41], 570[2,7], 570OC[2,75]
It can be seen improvement from my previous posts. I changed version of NeatVideo from 3.1.0 to 3.2.0 and optimised (OCed) RAM from 9-9-9-27@1600 to 9-10-9-24@1866. All other things are same, I had latest nVidia driver.
My real life tests on a 1920x1080 clip. Rendering with 560ti = 40-42 sec. Rendering with overclocked 570 (which doubles the power consuption compared to 560ti) 37-39 sec.
In my various projects I need to clean as much as 50% 1440x1080 50i HDV, 30% 1280x720 50p HDV and 19% various SD footage and 1% fullHD. No 4k yet... So in most cases I operate in frame sizes where speed is held back with frame transport to processor and storage, rather than filter speed. 570 it seems was waste of my money.
I can now either start playing games in my free time (GPU's give huge difference in games, though!), sell the 570GPU and buy 560ti again, invest in super speed overclocked ram (My Asus P8Z86-V PRO can have up to 2200Mhz ram), or sell everything but GPU and go to SandyBridge-e with 4 chanel RAM.
Is there anyone tryed with realy tuned up X79 platform yet to see if any improvement in speed? Looking benchmarks of quad channel RAM the badwidth is much much bigger than with double channel.
**********
Regarding of 2500K vs 2600K:
2600K wins everytime at same clock, even if Neat chooses as best option to only 4 cores being used in i7. 2500K must be OCed much higher to cope with 2600K and saving here is not good favor (always buy i7 for video!). I have not exact figures with 2500K, but what is rendering 37-42 seconds on 2600K (@4500Mhz), that takes 120+ seconds on 2500K @4300Mhz. The only fugure I remembered as 2500K was so slow I didn't want to waste my time with this CPU. 2500K was used with 560ti on Same MoBo,Ram,SSD.
**********
REGARDS,
MIHAEL
It does not (in most real life situations).
Here are links to quite some test results (performance optimizing in NeatVideo):
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9205816/NeatVid ... _560ti.txt
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9205816/NeatVid ... eo_570.txt
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9205816/NeatVid ... _570OC.txt
On short:
- Smaller the frame size, less difference between GPU's. Obviosly latency of ram and other components plays big role here. The bigger the frame size, the bigger the difference between GPU's.
- overclocking CPU and GPU does have obvious effects again only at big frame size like 4K.
- Differences in performance are visible when hit you "Optimize" NeatVideo filter, but in real life when you render clip, they are more or les gone in most of time. Rendering 200 frames with 570 finishes 2 seconds before 560ti or 4 seconds before if 570 is maximum overclocked. That means 8 minutes less rendering time if rendering 30 minutes of video (rendering time 133 min instead of 141). If that is worth buying much more expensive 570, everyone himself should consider.
Comparison of test I did.
from "optimize" option in Neat Filter.
HD= 1920x1080 [1080p]
SD= 720x576 [576p]
4K= "4K" option
8b = 8bit
32b = 32bit
Radus= always 1
570= [ENGTX570 DCII/2DIS/1280MD5]
570OC= overclocked to 900/4000 Mhz as is 560ti from [GV-N560OC-1GI]
[x]= fps best option calculated of "optimize"
SD8b = 560ti[50], 570[52,6], 570OC[52,6]
SD32b = 560ti[43,5], 570[45,5], 570OC[47,6]
HD8b = 560ti[11,5], 570[13,2], 570OC[14,5]
HD32b = 560ti[10,6], 570[11,2], 570OC[12,2]
4K8b = 560ti[2,98], 570[3,38], 570OC[3,51]
4K32b = 560ti[2,41], 570[2,7], 570OC[2,75]
It can be seen improvement from my previous posts. I changed version of NeatVideo from 3.1.0 to 3.2.0 and optimised (OCed) RAM from 9-9-9-27@1600 to 9-10-9-24@1866. All other things are same, I had latest nVidia driver.
My real life tests on a 1920x1080 clip. Rendering with 560ti = 40-42 sec. Rendering with overclocked 570 (which doubles the power consuption compared to 560ti) 37-39 sec.
In my various projects I need to clean as much as 50% 1440x1080 50i HDV, 30% 1280x720 50p HDV and 19% various SD footage and 1% fullHD. No 4k yet... So in most cases I operate in frame sizes where speed is held back with frame transport to processor and storage, rather than filter speed. 570 it seems was waste of my money.
I can now either start playing games in my free time (GPU's give huge difference in games, though!), sell the 570GPU and buy 560ti again, invest in super speed overclocked ram (My Asus P8Z86-V PRO can have up to 2200Mhz ram), or sell everything but GPU and go to SandyBridge-e with 4 chanel RAM.
Is there anyone tryed with realy tuned up X79 platform yet to see if any improvement in speed? Looking benchmarks of quad channel RAM the badwidth is much much bigger than with double channel.
**********
Regarding of 2500K vs 2600K:
2600K wins everytime at same clock, even if Neat chooses as best option to only 4 cores being used in i7. 2500K must be OCed much higher to cope with 2600K and saving here is not good favor (always buy i7 for video!). I have not exact figures with 2500K, but what is rendering 37-42 seconds on 2600K (@4500Mhz), that takes 120+ seconds on 2500K @4300Mhz. The only fugure I remembered as 2500K was so slow I didn't want to waste my time with this CPU. 2500K was used with 560ti on Same MoBo,Ram,SSD.
**********
REGARDS,
MIHAEL