Which Nvidia Cards....

[bernhard]

What specific Nvidia cards are recommended from Chaosgroup to use for maximum performance with Vray?
Any recommendations based on benchmark tests?

thanks a lot!

[zero-13]

I think 2080 Ti are the current top performing non Quadros, just as the previous 1080 Ti were.

Quadros just seem insanely expensive!

I don't know if it's because of double precision or more robustness, high amount of VRAM and/or reliability, who knows but you need Vanderbilt money for decent Quadros?

The price versus performance compared to the top end consumer GPUs makes me wonder how their high price is justified .

Found a couple benchmark posts:

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/ar...formance-1242/

http://www.redgamingtech.com/benchma...070-vs-pascal/

[^Lele^]

What specific Nvidia cards are recommended from Chaosgroup to use for maximum performance with Vray?
Any recommendations based on benchmark tests?

thanks a lot!

We don't directly recommend hardware.
You can however look at the benchmark site and make your own informed choice.

[Neilg]

Quadro's are not & have never been worth the money, get the good gaming cards. More you spend the better with a little diminishing returns at the very top end. memory pooling with the top end kind of kills the diminishing returns issue though - if you need that feature it's your only option.

[bernhard]

ok, thanks a lot folks. Did anyone already run two GPU's in one workstation?
If so.. what's your experience?
Can you say.... two GPU's are doubling render time?

Let me know your thoughts - appreciate it!
cheers and happy rendering!

[joconnell]

Your best bet is the vray gpu group on facebook and ask Tomasz Wyszolmirski from dabarti what he's currently using - previously he said to me that if you can fit a scene on gpu, it's about the same as 4 pcs.

[Neilg]

He's running 4x 2080ti's these days...

[JuhaHo]

Quadro's are not & have never been worth the money, get the good gaming cards. More you spend the better with a little diminishing returns at the very top end. memory pooling with the top end kind of kills the diminishing returns issue though - if you need that feature it's your only option.

Why is that? I have used Quadro cards since Elsa Synergy III with Quadro 2 graphic processor. That was, I think in late 90's. I have never questioned my choice. I bought accidentally once a workstation with Radeon, but that was poor choice. Also I have one GeForce in one of my rendering farm servers. That's not good at all. I see no reason to stop using quadro cards.

Edit:
I forgot to mention. In my main workstation I have Quadro P5000. On my secondary Quadro K4000 and on third Quadro 4000. On my laptop, there's Quadro K3000.

[Neilg]

They're bad the same way that an i9-9980 is.
It might be the fastest, but why buy that for $2500 when you could buy one which is 95% as fast for $800.

It's your money at the end of the day, but 2 2080Ti's will absolutely destroy that P5000 in GPU rendering speed & viewport performance for the same price.
The only area quadros get slightly faster than geforces is wireframe view, if you use shaded view in max the quadros are significantly slower.

[dgruwier]

As I understand it, you need Quadros mostly if you just absolutely need the most precise GPU computation with high reliability. They have error correction, better quality control and run at higher bit depths to weed out even tiny inconsistencies and errors, which could otherwise cause problems for applications where accuracy and precision are essential.

You might want Quadros for modeling world finances or simulating the spread of neutron particles, but for rendering images of sofas and spaceships, raw performance per dollar is more important.