So I wanted to test my GPU now that i got it back running so I did test it on a past project that was a simple scene but the render times came up super backwards
Surprisingly the First is GPU and the second is CPU :spin:. The CPU was significantly faster than my GPU. How in the world could this be? I thought GPU was supposed to be much faster. Is it simply my GPU itself? I have a NVIDIA GT 750M 1024 MB. Thanks in advance guys.
A.
What is your CPU?
A high-end CPU will beat an aging middle-class GPU (like yours, which in addition to that is “just” a notebook card) any time of the day.
B.
Did you adjust the tile sizes? CPU = small tile sizes (e. g. 16 x 16), GPU = large tile sizes (e. g. 256 x 256).
In the case of laptops, its almost the opposite. Laptop videocards will be almost always slower than the cpu. And in your specific case, even more because that “GT” is not a good videocard and it is too old.
But the “M” in your graphics card’s model number clearly identifies it as a “mobile” = notebook card = nowhere near as powerful as a desktop graphics solution.
Is that an iMac, btw?
If so, then that’s the price you have to pay for the slim casing: While the CPU in iMacs is from Intel’s desktop line-up, the graphics solution is from the notebook segment, as no desktop card would fit into that “all-in-one” case (not to mention issues with heat dissipation for a powerful graphics card in such a slim case). Hence the superior performance of the CPU vs. the GPU…
Makes perfect sense. You guessed right. Macs have always been easier for me to use graphics wise but I didn’t realize the flaw in the iMac desktops structure. Thank you for explaining! might have to make a change on the next computer upgrade