anybody has some info if the 1070 ti is a better option than the RTX 2070?
seems the rxt have a lower cuda core.
This might help you (indirectly):
https://opendata.blender.org/query/fastest-gpu
The 2070 isn’t on there, but you can see where the 1070 is at in relation to the 2080, and extrapolate from there. Not a direct answer, but it’s something to look at.
Unfortunately, I don’t have a GTX 1070 as I usually go for full die silicons. As you can see the results vary by render engine / scene. The RTX 2070 can better even the GTX 1080 Ti, but in some Blender scenes it can fall short.
http://boostclock.com/show/000234/gpu-rendering-nv-gtx980ti-gtx1080-gtx1080ti-rtx2070-rtx2080.html
I plan to do a huge review round-up with all the Blender test scenes. BTW, I wouldn’t go for Pascal now, if RT Core support finds it way into Blender, the RTX line-up will wipe the floor with the Pascal GTX series in GPU rendering.
1 Like
Doesn’t rtx 2070 cost two times as much as gtx 1070? I just googled the prices. It’s gotten a lot cheaper now. 2070 seems like a better deal. Will faster memory help in bigger more complex scenes?
Here’s a comprehensive comparison of current GPUs when used with blender by the german site HardwareLuxx:
Just click it you don’t need to know German to understand the listing.
I replaced my Vega 64 with two RTX 2070s based on that listing and can confirm the timings stated there. Based on that I assume that the results for 1070 / ti are also correct and then the 2070 is a clear winner.
Edit: P.S.: This test is about a OC Card. I have that exact model and a ASUS RTX 2070 Turbo (The blower style card) They perform very similar. The Turbo in classroom is 4 seconds slower than the OC one. I hope this helps with your decision.
1 Like
I read a post on the devtalk forum that someone upgraded from GTX1060 to RTX2060 and the render times got worse!
So maybe the time has not come yet.
Yes, we have that thread here in the forum to and I posted yesterday there. I believe, there is another problem with that particular setup. But we are talking about 1070ti or 2070 here. With the xx60 cards the situation is even more obscure.
I would go with the 2070, which I own as well. According to the Octane tests you can expect about 2X to 4X speed up with the RT cores turned on, depending on the scene. That is a significant boost in speed by any measure. Even without the RT cores, I have seen a doubling of speed when compared with my old 980.
So with less cuda cores the 2070 is still faster and one can use the raytracing cores for rendering too?
How so ?
1 Like
It has to be supported by the renderer, in the case of Cycles the devs would have to add RT core support at some point. You can see the Octane results here if you’re interested:
In general the 2070 will be faster even with less CUDA cores because it runs at a faster clock speed and memory/bandwidth.
Thank you for the info.
The cad will be funded by the university (research) and it seems the raytracing module is going to be an interesting technology.
Now I only have to make sure that it runs in macOS high Sierra - but it seem apple and Nvidia are now working together on a driver.
Thank you for the link. I currently run a 970.
I am glad that I did not buy the GZT 1070 to last year.
It seems that the rtx 2070 is while price wise only a tick more than the gets 1070 a good chunk faster.
If I can I might put a dual 2070 in for final renderings.
This hopefully will also speed up eeVee vs the older gets 970.
That’s pretty true ! Just faster cuda results is fine for me.
To bad blender cannot use 2 GPUs inside the view port.
hey were you able to do your round-up?
I might have to go with the gtx 1070 ti anyway because I think NVIDA did not release drivers for the 2070 yet for mac os.
What’s holding you back to use a Linux? Is it a requirement of your teaching (facility) to use MacOS?
I have windows too - it would just not be ideal to have to boot into Windows all the time when I want to render.
So ideally the card I would like to use on both OS.
Well, I don’t have any insight to Macs. They are just out of my financial league.
Anyway, from all I’m reading about it I get the impression it may be time for Blender users to switch platforms. I am also aware that you are a serious user and I’d appreciate to hear your opinion about holding on to Macs.
Edit: I was under the impression that this is a new machine you are building.
Good questions.
Because I teach in different areas Interior Design and Industrial Design but also Graphic / Interface Design I am kinda split across both OS. I don’t really think one is superior to the other. Win10 really caught up in many areas to be quite honest.
But from a designer standpoint I still think in terms of file handling, file preview etc macOS still beats Win10 in many aspects - but this is more minuscule.
The Mac is have is from 2010 and 2012 those old cheese grater boxes. They work rock solid, are not very loud and are still I find very powerful. Till recently I worked on a 2008 machine. Google does not get faster and rendering via GPU well the CPU is not important than either.
If the CPU is really important it might be a question of those older macs are a good option. I have a 12 core Xeon and todays i7 are pretty powerful too.
Where the older Macs have issues is simply that they do not support eGPU as good because there are no cable ports to connect a macPro to a eGPU casing.
And that is why I am looking for internal GOU solutions like GTX 1070 Ti or the new 2000 series.
I really like the ability to boot between macOS and WinOS. A normal PC would not allow this or I would have to make a hackintosh.
My client work when I render also I upload to render.st when needed and bill the client for it.
It have taken more time than I thought. I hope to have data to show by the middle of next week!
no rush ! i was just curious