Does Substance Painter perform well on AMD GPUs?

RikkB

I am using an nvidia 4GB GTX 970 on my PC with 32GB ram and an AMD 8 core cpu @ 4GHZ but I am getting bad performance in Substance Painter when Im working on 4K maps although 2K maps dont give me any trouble what so ever. I read that Substance Painter works better with GPUs that have a lot of VRAM so I was thinking about buying the 8GB AMD RX 480 when its released. Would this GPU perform better in Substance Painter than my 970? I know that the RX 480 isnt out yet but Is there anyone here who uses Substance Painter with an AMD card if so what is your impressions performance wise?

Treidge

You could see this discussion to get some insights on your question: http://polycount.com/discussion/167844/recommend-gpu-for-substance-painter-2

In short - it seems that AMD GPUs like R9 290X or R9 390X can work just fine, though NVIDIA cards are generally recommended. I see no reasons why RX 480 would perform different. Still, on AMD GPU you will not get a GPU-accelerated iRay rendering in SP, and it will render much slower on CPU only (something to keep in mind).

In terms of raw GPU performance, RX 480 is expected to be somewhere between the GTX 970/980, so no major gain here. On the other hand, you probably could get a better and smoother experience due to larger ammount of VRAM. I'd say that this wouldn't feel as a real upgrade, but if you could try RX 480 without a major investment, maybe it's worth to try and see.

RikkB

Treidge said:

You could see this discussion to get some insights on your question: http://polycount.com/discussion/167844/recommend-gpu-for-substance-painter-2

In short - it seems that AMD GPUs like R9 290X or R9 390X can work just fine, though NVIDIA cards are generally recommended. I see no reasons why RX 480 would perform different. Still, on AMD GPU you will not get a GPU-accelerated iRay rendering in SP, and it will render much slower on CPU only (something to keep in mind).

In terms of raw GPU performance, RX 480 is expected to be somewhere between the GTX 970/980, so no major gain here. On the other hand, you probably could get a better and smoother experience due to larger ammount of VRAM. I'd say that this wouldn't feel as a real upgrade, but if you could try RX 480 without a major investment, maybe it's worth to try and see.

Hi TREIDGE Thanks for the info I appreciate it I have decided to buy an AMD Radeon R9 390  8GB card I hope it gives me better performance than my 4GB GTX 970 because I found it struggles performance wise in Substance Painter 2 I hope I made the right decision buying a R9 390

Treidge

Any particular reason why you decided to go with R9 390 instead of RX 480? From this two, I'd say it's worth to wait for RX 480 - it will offer roughly the same performance, but will be much more energy efficient.

RikkB

Treidge said:

Any particular reason why you decided to go with R9 390 instead of RX 480? From this two, I'd say it's worth to wait for RX 480 - it will offer roughly the same performance, but will be much more energy efficient.

Treidge said:

Any particular reason why you decided to go with R9 390 instead of RX 480? From this two, I'd say it's worth to wait for RX 480 - it will offer roughly the same performance, but will be much more energy efficient.

I decided to go with the 390 because I need it for work the GTX 970 is too slow in SP2 I have to get a lot of work done within 2 weeks and the 480 wont be out until then. 

m4dcow

They have mentioned that the 970 has issues when getting into the slow 512mb of its video memory. I also know that they tended not to recommend AMD GPUs because the drivers break a lot of shit whether that is the case more recently I'm not sure.

arsmod

I have a Mac Pro with the AMD D700 cards and Painter performs poorly. From what I've read, Substance Painter seems to run better on Nvidia cards.

Jerc

You should be fine with a consumer AMD GPU. It's mostly the FirePro series that have driver issues with SP.