Thread: New quadro "K"4000 vs gtx titan

Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 34
  1. #1 New quadro "K"4000 vs gtx titan 
    Senior Member Karim_Nassar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    182
    Hello I have been looking into buying a new graphic card for my computer and I must say it is quite confusing.


    From the Resolve configuration guide:

    Graphics Processor for CUDA GPU

    NVIDIA Quadro 4000, or
    NVIDIA Quadro 5000, or
    NVIDIA Quadro 6000, or
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 3072 MB, or
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 4096 MB


    Since this list was written we now have access to two options that cost the same.
    The new quadro "K"4000 and the gtx titan:


    _________________CUDA_____Memory____Bandwith______ ___Floating point performance

    Gtx titan__________2688____6 GB_______288 Gbps__________?
    Quadro "K"4000____768_____3 GB________134 GBps__________1,246
    Quadro 4000______256_____2 GB_________90 GBps____________486


    From the specs the gtx titan seems like the obvious choice but I have read that the quadro architecture makes a difference and that nvidia gaming cards are crippled in creative applications?

    Which of these two cards would yield the best performance in resolve/adobe creative suite?

    many thanks for the help
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    The Titan seems to be working well with resolve as drivers improve. Definitely much more powerful than the Quadro K5000, which is more powerful than the K4000. K4000 replaces the prior generation "Fermi" Quadro 4000. Depending on what other apps you use, each card will have its advantages. The Quadro K6000 has yet to be released and it is the Quadro card based on the GK110 Kepler GPU, the same GPU used on the Titan. Quadro's typical advantages are faster memory I/O and better internal throughput, tougher QC process and better warranty, also have 3D sync and genlock ports on most models. Quadro firmware and drivers are tuned for increased "pro" OpenGL performance, often at a compromise in other areas. For CUDA, both GeForce and Quadro are on the same playing field other than memory I/O. Improved memory throughput is nice, but the more powerful GPU usually wins out. The Titan is a very powerful CUDA compute card and nVidia is marketing it as such. It's the first GeForce series GPU that they're positioning for use in pro systems as a compute card alongside the Tesla. The $3300 Tesla K20 uses the same GK110 Kepler GPU as well and the Titan gets us 80% of the way there in terms of memory capacity, internal throughput and overall performance at a bit less than 1/3 the price. Definitely something to consider if CUDA is your primary concern. If you're doing a lot of OpenGL stuff, working in Maya or other CAD applications and CUDA/ editing, etc.. is mostly secondary, you will do better with the Quadro. But I would really recommend the K5000! If you spend most of your time in Premiere, Resolve and tend to play an occasional game or do general media tasks, the Titan, or even a GTX680, would be a better choice.
    - Jeff Kilgroe
    - Applied Visual Technologies, LLC | RojoMojo
    - EPIC-M Package Available! Over 1TB SSD media, RPP's & more.


    List of all current RED software tools.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member Karim_Nassar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    182
    thank you for the thorough response much appreciated
    for my needs it is the titan then.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member Kemalettin Sert's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Turkey
    Posts
    1,928
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Kilgroe View Post
    The Titan seems to be working well with resolve as drivers improve. Definitely much more powerful than the Quadro K5000, which is more powerful than the K4000. K4000 replaces the prior generation "Fermi" Quadro 4000. Depending on what other apps you use, each card will have its advantages. The Quadro K6000 has yet to be released and it is the Quadro card based on the GK110 Kepler GPU, the same GPU used on the Titan. Quadro's typical advantages are faster memory I/O and better internal throughput, tougher QC process and better warranty, also have 3D sync and genlock ports on most models. Quadro firmware and drivers are tuned for increased "pro" OpenGL performance, often at a compromise in other areas. For CUDA, both GeForce and Quadro are on the same playing field other than memory I/O. Improved memory throughput is nice, but the more powerful GPU usually wins out. The Titan is a very powerful CUDA compute card and nVidia is marketing it as such. It's the first GeForce series GPU that they're positioning for use in pro systems as a compute card alongside the Tesla. The $3300 Tesla K20 uses the same GK110 Kepler GPU as well and the Titan gets us 80% of the way there in terms of memory capacity, internal throughput and overall performance at a bit less than 1/3 the price. Definitely something to consider if CUDA is your primary concern. If you're doing a lot of OpenGL stuff, working in Maya or other CAD applications and CUDA/ editing, etc.. is mostly secondary, you will do better with the Quadro. But I would really recommend the K5000! If you spend most of your time in Premiere, Resolve and tend to play an occasional game or do general media tasks, the Titan, or even a GTX680, would be a better choice.
    which titan you have Jeff?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    I have the EVGA GTX Titan SuperClocked Signature edition. It was pretty flakey until the 314.22 WHQL drivers. The new 320.x beta drivers are rockin' on this card. With that I've started dabbling with some of the overclocking abilities, but it seems to run just great all by itself. The GTX690 still outperforms it for games or certain apps that can utilize multiple GPUs or SLI configurations. So for gamers, I would actually recommend the 690. The Titan is better for CUDA, Premiere, Resolve. Seems to give about a 15% boost over a GTX680 in Resolve... Of course, it's almost 2X the price... It's only about 15% or so slower than a Tesla K20X for CUDA processing and that Tesla is 3X the price. So as usual, pricing and performance are hardly linear. :)

    So far it's a nice card. I'm happy with it now that the drivers are improving.
    - Jeff Kilgroe
    - Applied Visual Technologies, LLC | RojoMojo
    - EPIC-M Package Available! Over 1TB SSD media, RPP's & more.


    List of all current RED software tools.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    137
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Kilgroe View Post
    I have the EVGA GTX Titan SuperClocked Signature edition. It was pretty flakey until the 314.22 WHQL drivers. The new 320.x beta drivers are rockin' on this card. With that I've started dabbling with some of the overclocking abilities, but it seems to run just great all by itself. The GTX690 still outperforms it for games or certain apps that can utilize multiple GPUs or SLI configurations. So for gamers, I would actually recommend the 690. The Titan is better for CUDA, Premiere, Resolve. Seems to give about a 15% boost over a GTX680 in Resolve... Of course, it's almost 2X the price... It's only about 15% or so slower than a Tesla K20X for CUDA processing and that Tesla is 3X the price. So as usual, pricing and performance are hardly linear. :)

    So far it's a nice card. I'm happy with it now that the drivers are improving.
    Jeff, which application are you seeing the k20x as being faster? Small sample size here, but we pitted a Titan SC against a K20x + K5000 in ArionBench, and the Titan was about 10% faster than the pair together.
    EPIC-M #1350
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    My only direct comparison I've done personally is with Davinci Resolve. K20X uses the same GK110 GPU as the Titan, but has a beefier and a bit faster memory I/O path. The Titan, if you buy the EVGA Superclocked edition, is clocked a bit faster and that's the one I have. Granted, I did the comparison more than a month ago with beta drivers. But per hardware match-up on paper, the results seemed to fit. I guess I could re-visit that one... Will have to borrow the K20X again as I don't own one myself. I find it curious that the Titan would report faster than the K5000 + K20X combo. That doesn't add up at all, not if both the Quadro and Tesla were being used in tandem. Are you sure it was the K20X and not a base K20 or K20C ?

    I'm not all that familiar with Arionbench. I played with it a while back and didn't have much luck with it, so have never really kept tabs on it or bought a license.
    - Jeff Kilgroe
    - Applied Visual Technologies, LLC | RojoMojo
    - EPIC-M Package Available! Over 1TB SSD media, RPP's & more.


    List of all current RED software tools.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    137
    Here you go. Arionbench is free so there is no purchase required. It is a GPU renderer so is a good proxy for Arion, Octane, iRay, etc.

    Single Titan gets 2240
    Quadro K5000 + Tesla K20Xm gets 1995.74

    Weird. Maybe the K5000 is holding the Tesla back due to its lower compute level of 3 vs 3.5.
    Attached Images
    EPIC-M #1350
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Senior Member AndreasOberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    599
    Dj Meyer, I found that benchmarking perforcmance often needs you to really test the card in the program you plan on using. For example for grading test it in Davinci, for 3d test it in 3ds Max, Maya, for editing test it in the different editing programs.
    The results are often not so correlated between programs due to their implementation being different.
    So Jeff for Davinci it sounds like 2 680 cards would be a better bet in Davincin than a Titan if the speed difference isn't so big.
    How well does Davinci scale with multiple GPUs btw?
    Best wishes
    /Andreas
    www.WildlifeRescueMovie.com- Saving the animals of the Rainforest!
    www.THUNDOOR.com- Visually poetic images and stories that matter
    Epic X #3734, Strummer Bright Tangerine, Red Primes, Clutch, Sachtler Video 20 S1
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Two GPUs is almost worthless for DaVinci because of how it uses GPUs. If you have one GPU, it will use it for both GUI and CUDA. If you have two, it will only use the primary for GUI and the secondary for CUDA. You might only gain about 5% performance. So, to really kick up the GPU performance, you need to have a third GPU! Only then will DaVinci actually use two cards for CUDA compute. :(

    Money and power requirements taken into consideration, I would go for dual GTX690's. That's the same as having 4 standard (less 7.5% on the clock speed) GTX680's in your system. First card gets one onboard GPU dedicated to your GUI. The other onboard GPU for CUDA, both onboard GPUs on the second card used for CUDA as well. The upcoming Premiere Pro CC will support multiple GPUs as well.

    Titan is a powerful card. It has some serious advantages, although, other than speed, none of those advantages help with Resolve or Premiere. The Titan seems to be about 65-75% more powerful than a capable GTX680. For Resolve, you'll get a lot more out of dual 690's for the same price, actually a small bit less, than dual Titans.

    If you only put one GPU in a system, make it a titan. :)
    - Jeff Kilgroe
    - Applied Visual Technologies, LLC | RojoMojo
    - EPIC-M Package Available! Over 1TB SSD media, RPP's & more.


    List of all current RED software tools.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts