First, let's look at the composite results for the GPU and CPU. If you take all the intermediate results together (sub-composites), the Quadro RTX 4000 proves to be the best all-rounder. The Radeon VII is definitely not supported, contrary to Edelman's press release, because RealView (rightly, because driver-related) simply refuses to use a consumer card. By the way, this distinguishes the full version of the program from the fragments from the compiled, free SPECviewperf. One also has a nice comparison between the driver-optimized benchmarks for the people and the actual programs. Just once as a reminder for later. Everyone can compare this themselves.
The CPU composite is also much better than the other two Quadro cards, which is a very interesting finding. In the end, the load distribution is also indirect here, especially because Solidworks 2017, unlike in 2019, still has to do every little pup with the CPU and not even really multi-threaded. However, I would not have suspected that the difference would be so clear.
And since we were talking about the final results: I have listed all the sub-results below, because here too it is worth looking at the detail. Because while the two Pascal cards can still hold their own in normal shading, the addition of Ambient Occlusion Turing-Party is the order of the day at the latest. Incidentally, I also had to get Solidworks to play along manually in 2017, because without my own intervention not much is possible ("Workaround by igor'sLAB accelerates Solidworks 2017 with all RTX Quadros and the RTX Titan")
- 1 - Einführung und Datenblatt
- 2 - Tear Down: Platine und Kühler im Detail
- 3 - Visualize 2019, Arion, Luxmark
- 4 - Solidworks 2017
- 5 - Autodesk AutoCAD 2018 , Maya 2017 und 3ds Max 2015
- 6 - Creo 3 (M190)
- 7 - SPECviewperf 13
- 8 - GDI und Treiberdurchsatz
- 9 - Leistungsaufnahme, Lastspitzen und Netzteilempfehlung
- 10 - Takt und Temperaturen
- 11 - Lüfter und Lautstärke
- 12 - Zusammenfassung und Fazit
Kommentieren