by 
Redshift Benchmark results are not easy to find, that is why I compiled a list for everyone to take a look at. I myself use Redshift for Rendering Projects on a daily basis and recently purchased a new Rendernode with lots of GPUs.
When you build a new PC or Rendernode for Rendering, there is no way around digging deep into benchmarks.
Cinebench Scores are great for comparing CPU Rendering performance, but if you use Redshift heavily, these benchmark results will be invaluable:
Redshift Benchmark Results
| GPU(s) | OS | CPU Threads | CPU GHz | Time (Minutes) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8x RTX 2080Ti 11GB | Windows | 32 | 2.1 | 01.29 |
| RTX 2070 8GB | Windows | 32 | 2.1 | 12.50 |
| 4x GTX 1080Ti 11GB | Windows | 32 | 2.1 | 03.25 |
| 8x GTX 1080Ti 11GB | Windows | 32 | 2.1 | 01.57 |
| 8x RTX 2070 8GB | Windows | 32 | 2.1 | 01.56 |
| 8x GTX 1080 8GB | Windows | 40 | 2.2 | 02.26 |
| 4x GTX 980 Ti 6GB | Windows | 56 | 2.3 | 04.48 |
| Quadro K5200 8GB | Windows | 24 | 2.6 | 38.50 |
| 2x GTX 1060 6GB | Windows | 32 | 2.6 | 11.07 |
| RTX 2080 8GB | Windows | 36 | 2.6 | 10.59 |
| RTX 2080 Ti 11GB | Windows | 36 | 2.6 | 08.38 |
| GTX 1080 8GB | MacOS | 8 | 2.9 | 16.00 |
| 4x GTX 1080Ti 11GB | Windows | 36 | 2.35 | 03.21 |
| GTX 960 2GB | Windows | 4 | 2.68 | 44.56 |
| 8x Tesla V100-SXM2 16GB | Linux | 64 | 2.74 | 01.03 |
| GTX 780 3GB | Windows | 8 | 2.81 | 31.05 |
| Titan V 12GB | Linux | 12 | 2.90 | 07.06 |
| 2x GTX 1080 Ti 11GB | Windows | 16 | 2.99 | 06.15 |
| 2x RTX 2070 8GB | Windows | 16 | 3.0 | 06.29 |
| Quadro RTX 6000 | Windows | 20 | 3.1 | 08.47 |
| 2x GTX 1080 8GB | Windows | 12 | 3.2 | 07.26 |
| 2x TITAN Xp 12GB | Linux | 16 | 3.2 | 06.16 |
| 2x GTX 1070 Ti + 1x GTX 1070 | Windows | 12 | 3.2 | 06.12 |
| GTX TITANX 12GB | Windows | 32 | 3.3 | 17.33 |
| 1x GTX 1070 + 1x GTX 1070 Ti | MacOS | 12 | 3.3 | 08.17 |
| GTX 780Ti 3GB | Windows | 12 | 3.4 | 25.58 |
| GTX 1080 Ti 11 GB | Windows | 12 | 3.4 | 11.44 |
| GTX TITANX 12GB | Windows | 12 | 3.5 | 15.40 |
| Quadro M6000 24GB | Windows | 12 | 3.5 | 15.42 |
| 2x Quadro P6000 24GB | Windows | 12 | 3.5 | 06.28 |
| 4x GTX 1070 8GB | Windows | 12 | 3.5 | 04.15 |
| GTX 1070 8GB | Windows | 12 | 3.5 | 17.11 |
| GTX TITANX 12GB | MacOS | 12 | 3.5 | 14.25 |
| GTX 980 4GB | Windows | 12 | 3.5 | 23.21 |
| GTX 970 4GB | MacOS | 12 | 3.5 | 27.22 |
| Quadro M6000 24GB TCC | Windows | 12 | 3.5 | 14.33 |
| GTX TITANX Pascal 12GB | Windows | 12 | 3.5 | 11.59 |
| Quadro M6000 12GB | Linux | 12 | 3.5 | 14.23 |
| Quadro P6000 24GB | Windows | 12 | 3.5 | 12.30 |
| 2x Quadro GP100 16GB TCC | Windows | 12 | 3.5 | 04.25 |
| Quadro P6000 24GB TCC | Windows | 12 | 3.5 | 11.31 |
| GTX TITANX Pascal 12GB TCC | Windows | 12 | 3.5 | 10.54 |
| Quadro GP100 16GB | Windows | 12 | 3.5 | 09.57 |
| 2x Quadro GP100 16GB | Windows | 12 | 3.5 | 05.04 |
| 2x Quadro P6000 24GB TCC | Windows | 12 | 3.5 | 05.55 |
| Quadro GP100 16GB TCC | Windows | 12 | 3.5 | 08.43 |
| GTX 1060 6GB | Windows | 8 | 3.6 | 23.11 |
| RTX 2060 6GB | Windows | 8 | 3.6 | 15.04 |
| GTX 1660Ti 6GB | Windows | 8 | 3.6 | 24.53 |
| RTX 2060 Super 8GB | Windows | 16 | 3.6 | 12.17 |
| RTX 2070 Super 8GB | Windows | 16 | 3.6 | 11.17 |
| RTX 2070 8GB | Windows | 6 | 3.6 | 11.35 |
| 4x GTX 1080Ti 11GB | Windows | 12 | 3.6 | 03.07 |
| RTX 2080 Super 8GB | Windows | 16 | 3.6 | 10.15 |
| 2x RTX 2080Ti 11GB | Windows | 16 | 3.8 | 04.28 |
| GTX 1070 8GB | Linux | 12 | 3.8 | 15.05 |
| 4x RTX 2080Ti 11GB | Windows | 16 | 3.8 | 02.28 |
| GTX TITAN X 12 GB | Linux | 12 | 3.78 | 14.07 |
| 2x GTX 1070 8GB | Linux | 12 | 3.79 | 07.39 |
| 2x GTX 1070 8GB | Windows | 8 | 4.0 | 08.06 |
| 2x GTX 1080 Ti 11GB | MacOS | 8 | 4.00 | 06.30 |
| 4x GTX TITANX 12GB | Linux | 12 | 4.1 | 03.36 |
| 2x GTX 980Ti 6GB | Windows | 20 | 4.3 | 07.35 |
| 4x GTX TITAN X 12 GB | Windows | 16 | 4.3 | 04.28 |
| GPU | OS | CPU Threads | CPU GHz | Time |
Some interesting findings are, that Different OS’s have an impact on rendering performance.
Linux, for example, seems to be doing somewhat better than Windows. These benchmarks are also great in analyzing what CPU is best for GPU Rendering in Redshift and how low the Clock Speed can go before major performance impact is inevitable.
Multi-GPU Scaling seems to work quite well in Redshift, though with those 1-2 minute Results the benchmark probably is just too short to make good use of all that power.
This list is also available on the Redshift Forums, where some of these Scores originate from, so head on over if you have an account and get a good talk with all of the great Users.
If you are thinking about getting a new GPU Rendering Computer altogether, be sure to check out this article on what hardware to get for the best GPU Rendering Workstation.
Missing any GPU Benchmark Results or having trouble with one of your builds? Let me know in the comments.
Where is the 8×2080 TI?
Added! 🙂
Does this thread update according to the redshift forums or is it manually updated?
I posted a while ago my benchmark with a 1060 6g crushing the current 1060 (19 Minutes vs 23) minutes and this says it was updated some days ago, and there are multiple setups that i dont see updated.
Someone also did a x8 1060s with a 3 minute benchmark thats also not added
Hey there,
The table and the post itself are independent from each other. Will update the table soon, thanks for the heads-up! 🙂
Cheers,
Alex
Have noticed that there are multiple results faster in the forums that match the hardware from your list, the engine has changed the code multiple times and it is natively faster now. Do you want me to compile said results for you to make the job easier? The first post compiles some of the benchmarks but it hasn’t been updated in years by this point.
That would be extremely helpful! 🙂 I’ll get to it at some point, though am currently finishing up lots of 3D Projects, so am just a bit time-poor right now.
If you’d like to help out that would be excellent!
Thanks,
Alex
Hi Alex,
Building a 8 GPU workstation for my Redshift animation renders on a dual Xeon motherboard with gpu’s having 1 slot spacing in between.
I’m leaning towards asus turbo models of 2060 super and 2070 super. Which current card has the best price\performance ratio and which one would you recommend?
P.S. Thanks a lot for all the information you share in your website. I learned a lot from you.
Cheers,
Cihan
Hey Cihan,
The following perform very similarly and have build quality that is about on par: Asus Turbo, Zotac Blower, Gigabyte Turbo, MSI Aero.
Personally I’ve had great experience with Asus Turbo (haven’t had any of those cards die on me yet) but I’ve heard good things about MSI Aero too. Zotac Blower is usually the cheapest of those but also seems to have the most issues.
Out of curiosity, what board and cpu are you using?
Cheers,
Alex
Hi Alex,
Thanks for listing all options and your valuable experience.
How do you feel about 2060 super vs. 2070 super? I don’t require too high vram in my workflow. My shaders are fairly complex as I render cars most of the time. I’m leaning towards 2060 super for it’s single 8 pin connector and it’s easier to cool TDP.
Another confusion is constantly seeing used but really clean 1080ti’s for the same price as new 2060 super. Going new and future proof feels better for sure but I would love to hear your input on this.
Supermicro X10DRX motherboard with a pair of E5-2637 v3 processors.
Some notes on this setup, at first it looks like it has 11 pci (yay!) but if you look closely, first pci isn’t directly linked to the cpu. Second and third pci slots has a cap at the end of it. One option is to cut the ends of the slots but I’d rather not do that. I’ll use Thermaltake 16x risers and I guess another option would be to cut the risers instead of pci slots but I think I’ll be happy with 8 for now.
Case is TGC-D600 6U 8 GPU DUAL MINING SERVER but I’ll modify the rear part with 2x20cm fans.
Cheers,
Cihan
2060 Super has better value than 2070 Super, but as always, if you want a specific amount of performance and can only reach that with higher-tier cards, you’ll need the higher tier cards.
1080 Tis are about on par with a 2070 rtx, but as you already said, the RTX part of the newer gpus will be utilized in most gpu render engines soon enough so they should get a good speedboost (with raytracing cores). So the newer architecture should improve the performance while the 1080ti will stay the same.
Cool looks good! 🙂
Cheers,
Alex
Hey Alex,
Ran again on a Custom build with a 1080ti I just picked up. Very impressed with the results. Let me know if I should bench on a different Redshift version.
Redshift 3.0.17 (OSX)
CPU: 16 threads, 3.60 GHz, 64.00 GB
9900k (3.6GHz – 8 core)
64GB DDR4
1080ti + 1070ti
Time: 00h:05m:57s
* UPDATE: *
Wow. Out of curiosity I added a 3rd card I had laying around (1070 8gb) with an old 1x riser card. Not even expecting the OS to be stable, I ran the benchmark again and here are the results:
Redshift 3.0.17 (OSX)
CPU: 16 threads, 3.60 GHz, 64.00 GB
1080ti + 1070ti + 1070 (on a 1X GPU riser card)
Time: 00h:04m:20s
Hey Matt,
In the benchmark scene which is fairly simple and has small textures and barely any cpu-gpu communication, the pcie-lane speed indeed isn’t as important as it is when rendering more complex scenes. That is probably why your 1070 over a x1 bus performs quite well.
I’ll have to add new benchmark stats for Redshift v3 Versions, as there have been quite some improvements here that cant’ well be directly compared to 2.6.xx versions results.
Your score really good!
Cheers,
Alex
Hi Alex,
Does my GPU support Redshift and Octane for Cinema 4d?
My GPU is https://www.zotac.com/gt/product/graphics_card/zotac-gaming-geforce-gtx-1650-super-twin-fan
tnx
Jup it does! 🙂 It’s not all that strong but will work with both redshift and octane.
Cheers,
Alex
tnx
Hi Alex,
I have GTX 1660 Super on ASROCK Z77
Need to work on Redshift and Octane for Cinema 4D
Kindly Guide me which version will work on it.
Thanks & Regards
Hey Rajib,
Any Version of Redshift will work with that GPU, and since it’s no RTX gpu you don’t have to worry about raytracing compatibility.
Octane Version should best be newer than 3.07, get Octane 4 vor the newest features.
Cheers,
Alex
Hi Alex, I didn’t see a benchmark for 2 x GTX TITANX in there. Only for 2 xTITAN Xp.
Would you say 2 x GTX TITANX would outperform a single GTX 1080 Ti?
Hey Niels,
Yes 2 Titan X GPUs will surely outperform a single 1080 Ti. They are already quite close in just single config, and two of them will be fairly faster than a single 1080ti.
Cheers,
Alex
Hello, Alex, I am a student who occupies a new system to render a short film of at least 5 minutes, there are currently rumors of the new Nvidia architecture, which makes me think if it is better to wait or invest in a new PC, I would appreciate it in advance a tip as to the investment that I plan to make and what kind of equipment I could acquire, my only concern in general would be the temperature of the cards when having to work continuously, since only a single equipment would be available to render. I have at least $ 4000 available.
I plan to render in Maya, I have an i7 6700K CPU, GTX 1070, 32 RAM 3200 and in Windows. Thank you
Hi José,
Thanks for dropping a line!
True, there are rumours about the upcoming 7nm NVIDIA Ampere architecture but these won’t get launched until late March, if the rumours are to be believed. However, the first Ampere products alleged to get released are thought to be for the datacenter and will be AI-focused. Once that happens, we might see the introduction of RTX 30-series cards. Sad to say, there are no specifics on that just yet.
If you want to wait for the next generation of NVIDIA GPUs, that’s one option for you to take. If you want to build a workstation now, we can come with a build for you with a great upgrade path. You can then just opt to upgrade the GPU to an RTX 30-series card once they become available.
Here’s a powerful build the won’t even use up your full $4,000 budget:
Parts List: https://www.cgdirector.com/pc-builder/?=Db1Gf0i0jib
CPU: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X 3.5GHz 16-Core Processor ($749.00)
CPU Cooler: be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4 AM4 ($89.90)
Motherboard: Gigabyte X570 Aorus Elite ATX AM4 ($179.99)
GPU: NVIDIA RTX 2080 TI 11GB – MSI Gaming X ($1249.00)
Memory: 64GB (4 x 16GB) Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-3200 CL16 ($302.54)
Storage PCIe-SSD: Samsung 970 EVO PLUS 1TB M.2 Solid State Drive ($199.99)
Power Supply: Corsair RMx Series RM650x 650W ATX 2.4 Power Supply ($109.99)
Case: Corsair Carbide Series 275Q ATX Mid Tower Case ($89.98)
This build will set you back $2970.39 which is considerably lower than your $4,000 budget but it doesn’t necessarily mean that the performance will also be lower. In fact, it’s the opposite because this build gets you nothing but the best components.
It has a very powerful 3950X CPU coupled with 64GB of RAM to ensure that your workflow is always fast and smooth. Not only that, the high core count of the 16-core 3950X will definitely deliver a great Maya CPU render performance. No worries on GPU temperature though as the MSI RTX 2080 Ti Gaming X Trio comes with three (3) fans to help with heat dissipation. All in all, this is a beast of a build that will handle any task you throw at it with ease.
Cheers,
Alex
Hi Alex,
Greetings from Costa Rica!
The only thing that I didn’t clarify to you, was that I’ll be rendering in Redshift for Maya, so which could be an optimal build? Taking into account that I will use this system for at least 2 to 3 months of rendering for the short film with just this PC.
Thank you very much for the support.
Hey José,
If the main thing you will be doing is rendering, you could optimize the system for that. You could get a threadripper with 4 gpus, the maximum amount of gpu performance possible within your budget.
If you also want to use that pc for active work and want smooth / responsive / fast active work speed, your build might have to go into a direction like the one recommended above (ryzen 3rd gen e.g. 3950x).
If gpu render power is more important to you, here is a build that would be very fast in redshift:
CPU: AMD Threadripper 2920X 3.5GHz 12-Core Processor ($454.95)
CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-U14S TR4 ($79.90)
Motherboard: Gigabyte X399 Designare EX ATX TR4 ($454.00)
GPU: NVIDIA RTX 2070 8GB – Asus Turbo ($520)
GPU #2: NVIDIA RTX 2070 8GB – Asus Turbo ($520)
GPU #3: NVIDIA RTX 2070 8GB – Asus Turbo ($520)
GPU #4: NVIDIA RTX 2070 8GB – Asus Turbo ($520)
Memory: 64GB (4 x 16GB) Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-3200 CL16 ($348.59)
Storage SSD: Crucial MX500 2TB 2.5″ Solid State Drive ($209.99)
Power Supply: be quiet! Dark Power Pro 11 1200W ATX 2.4 Power Supply ($279.90)
Case: Fractal Design Define XL R2 Titanium Big Tower Case ($151.51)
~ 4000$
Hope this helps,
Alex
Hi Alex. I have a GTX 1660 ti but it doesn’t work with my octane 3.07 and I got this error “there is no CUDA device which is selected” and unfortunately I have no budget to buy a higher octane version like Octane 4 that may solve the problem of CUDA. So do you think that might I have to overcome this problem with RedShift engine? Does Redshift support GTX 1660 ti? Thank you in advance for any advice!
Hey John,
Octane supports the 1660ti and the 1660ti also has cuda cores. You will need Octane 3.08 at a minimum, better octane 4 to make it run though. Also be sure you have the newest nvidia drivers installed.
Redshift too supports the gtx 1660ti.
Cheers,
Alex
Thank you so much Alex!
Hi there,
an extremely interesting topic. I am currently planning a new workstation build and generally I am pretty certain what tech I need. But what I cannot guess at this point is the following. If I should get a single 1080Ti vs 2070 or higher model.
Basically, how much and if the future integration and optimization of OptiX into Redshift, Blender (Cycles, EEVEE), Houdini GPU accelerated calculations, etc. will boost significantly the performance of the RTX lineup. Can you comment on that?
Regards,
Ivan
Hey Ivan,
You can test the Redshift beta with integrated RTX optimizations already. There are cases where it is 40% faster, some cases where it is barely faster. All depending on how your scene is set up.
If your scene is heavy on:
– Shading (complex shaders, lots of layering, blending etc)
– Volumes (lots of VDBs)
– Particles or hairs (lots of primitives)
– Deformation blurring (lots of deformed objects in the scene)
– Point-based techniques like irradiance point or photons or point based SSS
… then you will probably not see big speed gains. It doesn’t mean it will render slower but you might see little to no benefit.
1080Ti vs 2070 of course also is a question of vram, though in general I find redshift to perform well even if vram is full and it has to outsource to system ram.
Also, it depends on how much you are paying for the gpus, as the sweet spot currently is the 2070 super, and that gpu is slightly faster than a 1080ti and quite reasonably priced usually.
Personally I’d go with the RTX generation unless you are getting a great deal on the 1080Ti. I wouldnt go higher than 2070 super, as the performance/price gets a lot worse higher up. Better to get a second or more 2070 supers to add to the build.
Cheers,
Alex
Thanks a lot! Yes the question was related to the fact that I have an offer for 1080Ti at 50% the price of 2070 Super, therefore I needed an estiamtion of the RTX capabilities to get faster with the future OptiX adoption.
I found a more detailed andwer here:
https://techgage.com/article/testing-blender-2-81-alpha-with-nvidia-rtx/
Regards,
Ivan
Hey Ican,
Given that RTX Rendering in Blender is still in the early stages and already showing a good speedup through the line, I could fathom it becoming even more potent in the future, while with a 1080ti you would be stuck on the “older” path. 50% of a 2070 super, though is quite a nice price, I must say. Benchmark scenes of course aren’t always the best indicator of real world performance, so if you know what type of scenes you usually render, it might be interesting to do some testing on those. Feel free to send me a scene of yours if this is something you would want me to test.
Cheers,
Alex