The graphic above summarizes the median 512x512 render speed (batch size 1) for various GPUs. Filtering is for single-GPU systems only, and for GPUs with more than 5 benchmarks only. Data is taken from this database (thank you vladmandic!). Graph is color-coded by manufacturer:

  • NVIDIA consumer (lime green)
  • NVIDIA workstation (dark green)
  • AMD (red)
  • Intel (blue), seems there’s not enough data yet

This is an update/prettier visualization from my previous post using today’s data.

  • gamer@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Awesome graph! It’s a shame the consumer cards have such low amounts of vram. The 4090 kicks ass at compute, but is pretty limited for other AI applications due to the amount of memory.

    • FactorSD@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      To be fully fair; that’s kinda what you would expect of consumer cards compared to workstation cards. VRAM is expensive and while these days people are using more VRAM than they used to when playing games there is an upper limit there because devs don’t waste their time creating ultra huge textures that no-one will ever actually see.

      Tasks like AI and professional 3D rendering have always benefitted from lots of VRAM, so the cards tailored for them came with more RAM but also very very high markups.