CUDA GPU assisted processing

[johnnydep]

Hi all

I know people have been on about gpu processing and it rocks especially with cuda on multiple cards.

An example is octane gpu rendering... maybe the maths is similar but in terms of speed..


quad core 3 hour render.

Single gtx 280/285 - 21 mins

dual gtx 280/285 12 mins

triple gtx 280/285 6 mins


http://www.refractivesoftware.com/ - excellent software

Thats a model of 1.5gb textures and 1 billion polygons with photonic light simulation

Not bad and certainly a vast improvement of around 10-15 times per card vs a OC i7 920 at 3.5ghz

When it comes to gpu encoding we are looking at 6x speed increase and over multiple cards ... just do the maths but only one company does this for quadro only cards which really sucks in terms of costs.

http://www.elementaltechnologies.com/ne ... ed-encoder

Now if only neatvideo used CUDA ...

guess what I would of bought the software already and so would many others out there.

What is stopping me is working in 1080p from a canon 7d at iso 6400 (low light filming) and then using neatvideo to clean it up... downside is the amount of time to process is just to much for the very slow i7 920... its time to get CUDA doing the work... and then your customer base will greatly increase...

why ....

First justification for CUDA

3 x gtx 285 with 2gb of ram is cheaper than one quadro... neatvideo can work on 3 threads 3 frames per cycle... which should be around 10 frames a second approx if not more.

Second justification for CUDA

There are more people into video work with low end CUDA cards than quadro owners... more people to sell to

Third justification for CUDA

The price on your software is just excellent and value for money vs high performance will just make you all shining boys of the 21st century...:0)

Forth justification for CUDA

I havent got time to wait for 6 minutes of HD to process over 8 hours.... it just isn't practical...

Fifth justification for CUDA

From a marketing and business point of view "TIME IS MONEY" the software that does the job faster will always sell faster and also not lose neatvideo's excellence in clean videos even with the noisy video content.

Sixth...

It's plain common sense to do it.... intel/amd cpus suck at this game!

Anyway

Rant over .... do this you got yourself THE ONLY company providing high end results and low end costs...

Peace!

[mathewlisett]

I competely agree, and im wondering if not having anybody on their team that is able to do the needed cuda adjustments to the plugin. so if this is true maybe somebody can join the team to make this giant leap forward as its geatly needed as it takes ages to process.

oh and for a bit of useful fact. the quadro cards are only really useful for 3d rendering etc.

its the cards such as the evga gtx 480 thats far more useful as its the cuda cores that is the "cuda" that is used.

and the quadro cards dont even have half the amoutn of cores.

and now theres the evga gtx580 which is even more powerful.

[Rivai]

I also strongly suggest hardware accelerated engine. eg. Nvidia Cuda. Will be happy to jump in any time if it's available.

Please also consider plugin for higher end product like Smoke being a finishing system. I can see that i will be using this a lot on feature film.

[Pyramid Pyro]

Yes. This would be the cherry on the icing on the cake.

Erik

[vvulture]

Hopefully, us ATi users will not be left out in the cold. An OpenCL solution would be nice too. Current CPU render times are way too slow.

[NVTeam]

Some good news for CUDA users: please see the new major version of Neat Video.

Please post your benchmarks from the new Optimize feature of Neat Video 3.

Vlad

[actpower]

Just purchased the upgrade version, and tested the speed of processin, and this is really very fast!

I have a i7 920 with 12GB of RAM, and a Geforce GTX 260, is not the best card, but have cuda...and really works. Making the performance test, I sore 4.9 FPS in my system. I don´t know how many FPS can make a more powerful video card, so I keep an eye in this thread to know if I need to change my oldie card...

[NVTeam]

Thank you for upgrading and checking the speed. Please also post the log from the Optimize, it will show the frame size and temporal filter radius (parameters that significantly affect the speed) and also speeds corresponding to different combinations of cpu/gpu resources. This way the results will be comparable with those from other machines.

Thank you,
Vlad

[actpower]

This is the log:

Frame: 1920x1080 progressive, 32 bits per channel, Radius: 2 frames
Running the test data set on up to 8 CPU cores and on up to 1 GPU

CPU only (1 core): 1.18 frames/sec
CPU only (2 cores): 2.28 frames/sec
CPU only (3 cores): 3 frames/sec
CPU only (4 cores): 2.94 frames/sec
CPU only (5 cores): 3.39 frames/sec
CPU only (6 cores): 3.08 frames/sec
CPU only (7 cores): 3.25 frames/sec
CPU only (8 cores): 3.1 frames/sec
GPU only (GeForce GTX 260): 2.89 frames/sec
CPU (1 core) and GPU (GeForce GTX 260): 2.54 frames/sec
CPU (2 cores) and GPU (GeForce GTX 260): 3.38 frames/sec
CPU (3 cores) and GPU (GeForce GTX 260): 4.55 frames/sec
CPU (4 cores) and GPU (GeForce GTX 260): 4.69 frames/sec
CPU (5 cores) and GPU (GeForce GTX 260): 4.85 frames/sec
CPU (6 cores) and GPU (GeForce GTX 260): 4.88 frames/sec
CPU (7 cores) and GPU (GeForce GTX 260): 4.78 frames/sec
CPU (8 cores) and GPU (GeForce GTX 260): 4.9 frames/sec

Best combination: CPU (8 cores) and GPU (GeForce GTX 260)

[NVTeam]

Thank you very much. Yes, it is clear that GTX 260 is improving the speed. It almost as fast as that i7 when taken alone and together they are faster than each of them.

Vlad

[jpsdr]

Personnaly i have an i7@980+GT240, best is 8 cores (and not 12) without GPU.
I'll soon receive a GT520, i'll test.