Graphics card or cards
I would like to know whether it is better to have one brilliant graphics card (like a GeForce GTX 1080) or two somewhat simpler ones (like the GeForce GTX 1060). The price would similar, but what would make C1 better? Would it help when SLI could be used? If someone is in the know, please let me know.
0
-
AMD shine with C1
See this thread 😊
viewtopic.php?f=62&t=24241&p=1128880 -
Anyone else? @Christian Gruner: do you have experiences with multiple (SLI coupled) GPUs? 0 -
SLI doesn't make any difference for CO. CO identifies all GPU's separately, and uses them (if supported) in a distributed manor according to their respective benchmark-result.
In general, it is best to use similar cards for best performance. However, in the case of 1060+1080, there aren't any problems. It is more if 1 card is very slow, and the other very fast, i.e. example 2 R9 Nano's and a on-board second gen. intel GPU. Here, even though the on-board only gets a single image-tile to process, the R9's have processed all the remaining tiles before the Intel one has processed its only tile. That means that the R9's are unnecessarily idle for that duration.
Removing the on-board card would, in this case, make the processing faster. (this is all given that the disk and cpu are not bottlenecks).
As a rule of thumb, if using multiple GPU's for processing in CO, and benchmarks are a factor 10x apart (i.e. 0.5 vs 0.05), try disabling/removing the slowest adapter, and time the processing with/without.
With regards to your specific case, I don't know the respective benchmarks of the 2 cards, so I can't help on that one.0 -
I'm not looking for a super speedy card, due to my ideas as to the perceived trade-offs, price and power supply needs and especially the fan noise that many top end cards suffer from.
So I'm interested in a good trade off, something that might not be super fast compared to the best, but has low requirements for power, even it there is one, a card that can get by with just the PCI bus provided voltage and one that is very quiet. But I'd really like it to benefit, from GPU acceleration.
Under that criteria, what might be a good card or three to consider?0 -
[quote="Pavel" wrote:
I'm not looking for a super speedy card, due to my ideas as to the perceived trade-offs, price and power supply needs and especially the fan noise that many top end cards suffer from.
So I'm interested in a good trade off, something that might not be super fast compared to the best, but has low requirements for power, even it there is one, a card that can get by with just the PCI bus provided voltage and one that is very quiet. But I'd really like it to benefit, from GPU acceleration.
Under that criteria, what might be a good card or three to consider?
I think you need an update on modern graphics cards 😉 Most of the high end card have quite large fans, that push a lot of air in a not very noisy manner (read, slow moving, less noise), and some even got dedicated water-cooling units with 120 or 140 mm fans. The days of the radial fan design are over.
I run 2 very potent R9 Nano's in my machine with a i7 5930k (hex core). They are double the speed of the D700 GPU's in a top end MacPro chimney. During burn-in tests where basically everything is loaded and saturated, the total (as in the whole machine) wattage never goes beyond 400 watts.
The CPU is water-cooled, and in a noisy configuration never goes above delta 5 degrees of it no-load temperature. If I wanted to have a very quiet setup, I would have no problem with delta 15 degrees.0 -
I don't hear my case or R9 390 above my music
but the R5 series of AMD have passive coolers?0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
6 comments