Gtx 980 -4GB vram - 2048 shadin units - 4.6 GFLOPS - maxwell Gtx 770 -2GB vram - 1536 shadin units - 3.2 GFLOPS - kepler K2200 - 4GB vram - 640 shading units - 1.3 GFLOPS - maxwell
Gtx 750Ti - 2GB vram - 640 shading units - 1.3 GFLOPS - maxwell gtx -750 - 1GB vram - 512 shading units - 1.1 GFLOPS - maxwell gtx -560 - 1GB vram - 336 shading units - 1.1 GFLOPS - kepler
So you claim that a gtx 560 (kepler) is faster as a brand new K2200 (maxwell) quadro and at the same time the gtx 750 (maxwell) is 5x slower ?!! Let us take a look at 10M polygon test in Win8.1: What does this FPS ration thing even mean? Let me tell you in a proper maner that this is not helpful AT ALL, and the informations is not correct I think. Let me give you a note, that its not a problem on our side, because we run a test in Maya and we got a performance increse from 69fps to 116fps which was expected. He is using a brand new 4790K cpu with 4.4GHz and 16GB of ram so there is nothing such as CPU botleneck.
GTX 980 OPENGL 4.4 TO GTX OPENGL 4.5 UPGRADE
I demand an explanation for my client, why was his upgrade in vain (wasted money) ** also the redraw cicle for shadows seems to be longer/slower We have in the same model orbiting at same distance 50-55 on 980 55-60FPS orbiting around the model on the 770 We did document the 770 performance before the upgrade on a normal neigbourhood model, with a couple of trees and houses with enabled sun shadows ofc. Let me list the specifications for each card first:
My client is using the new Archicad 19 and just went through an upgrade from
0 kommentar(er)
