Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti OpenCL Benchmarks, 14-Way NVIDIA/AMD GPU Compute Tests

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • piotrj3
    replied
    Originally posted by vegabook View Post

    Wait till you see Vega II (Radeon VII)'s FP64 performance. It's 7x faster than the 2080ti. Basically if you can live without CUDA, Radeon VII is simply the best compute card on the market by a vast margin.

    Depends what you do. Actually you very rarely need FP64 performance in most stuff, while you really more often welcome int performance of RTXes and tensor cores.

    Leave a comment:


  • torsionbar28
    replied
    Originally posted by theriddick View Post
    Vega64 is pretty good value now, being only $30aud (20usd) more then the Vega56, if I didn't already own a 1080TI MINI it would certainly be the card to get, and some vendors even sell short form PCB AIB cards (HSF are still full sized).

    Shame Rad7 didn't go full AIB with custom PCB's, it probably would have made the card allot more interesting, but we all know stock is ultra low on that GPU (plus they cost more then 2080 here).
    I don't know about Vega 64, but AMD just dropped the price on Vega 56 to US$279 to compete with the new nvidia 1660ti. All the US retailers are sold out of Vega 56's now, lol.

    Leave a comment:


  • theriddick
    replied
    Vega64 is pretty good value now, being only $30aud (20usd) more then the Vega56, if I didn't already own a 1080TI MINI it would certainly be the card to get, and some vendors even sell short form PCB AIB cards (HSF are still full sized).

    Shame Rad7 didn't go full AIB with custom PCB's, it probably would have made the card allot more interesting, but we all know stock is ultra low on that GPU (plus they cost more then 2080 here).

    Leave a comment:


  • vegabook
    replied
    Originally posted by torsionbar28 View Post
    Wow, this really reinforces that you have to select the right tool for the job, and ignore all the marketing hype. AMD dominates floating point performance with the ROCm OpenCL stack, meanwhile Nvidia wins on integer performance. And of course AMD wins on open source, while the Nouveau open source Nvidia driver remains unusable for any accelerated workload.
    Wait till you see Vega II (Radeon VII)'s FP64 performance. It's 7x faster than the 2080ti. Basically if you can live without CUDA, Radeon VII is simply the best compute card on the market by a vast margin.

    Leave a comment:


  • rene
    replied
    Originally posted by tuxd3v View Post

    Woow nice setup
    What is exactly the card you are showing in the 1st video at ~5:30?
    A matrox graphics card?
    Yep, exactly. I have various vintage stuff from the last two decades, and for my YT content and hacking fun I even recently purchased one of the first ISA graphic accelerators (ET4000 w/32) and hacked some bare metal graphic acceleration code: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cqj_aF80gw and a Vesa Local Bus accelerated, also because I never had one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1_LDJvOhmM if you are interested in vintage stuff, I also showed, used and tested various other vintage stuff, from a real am386, SparcStation, Sgi Octane, and stuff like that ;-)

    Leave a comment:


  • tuxd3v
    replied
    Originally posted by rene View Post
    and I just came back with the cheapest, useful AMD GPU I could find ;-) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7C0INtRmfY hey, at least my cheap entry level card does not consume too many Watts and stays cool, ..! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wURWZpmgDV8
    Woow nice setup
    What is exactly the card you are showing in the 1st video at ~5:30?
    A matrox graphics card?

    Leave a comment:


  • tuxd3v
    replied
    Originally posted by JanW View Post
    My takeaway message would be "The GTX1660Ti is comparable in compute performance to the GTX1070 and RX590, except in OpenCL integer compute, where it is way ahead."
    Yes, I have the same feeling..
    In my opinion AMD played a safe bet, in Releasing the Rx590..

    Now NVidia has 2 cards with same performance GTX1660Ti, GTX1070 ..

    Leave a comment:


  • torsionbar28
    replied
    Wow, this really reinforces that you have to select the right tool for the job, and ignore all the marketing hype. AMD dominates floating point performance with the ROCm OpenCL stack, meanwhile Nvidia wins on integer performance. And of course AMD wins on open source, while the Nouveau open source Nvidia driver remains unusable for any accelerated workload.

    Leave a comment:


  • rene
    replied
    and I just came back with the cheapest, useful AMD GPU I could find ;-) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7C0INtRmfY hey, at least my cheap entry level card does not consume too many Watts and stays cool, ..! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wURWZpmgDV8
    Last edited by rene; 01 March 2019, 12:35 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • JanW
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael View Post

    See the OpenBenchmarking.org result file linked in the article, there are also some other cl-mem tests where the 1660 Ti does well, etc.
    So I exported the results from OpenBenchmarking.org and looked at this. I don't quite get the exact same numbers as you for the geometric mean, since I don't know how to tell which results you include in there. I excluded all power consumption and temperature tests, and those not run on any AMD card. Anyway, my results seem close enough to yours.

    Basically, in the overall geometric mean relative to the GTX1660Ti, I find the GTX1070 to be 17% slower and the RX590 is 13-14% slower. Excluding just the "pts/clpeak-1.0.1 - --compute-integer" results changes this to the GTX1070 being 4% slower and the RX590 being 3% faster.

    When results are that heterogeneous, I guess summarizing them in a single number does not make much sense. My takeaway message would be "The GTX1660Ti is comparable in compute performance to the GTX1070 and RX590, except in OpenCL integer compute, where it is way ahead."

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X