UPDATED BENCHMARK (ITS FASTER I PROMISE)

[jacksc02]

tom- how come you went for the 275's over the cheaper 265's?

[jujubee]

I'm confused - are these Dual Processor DualCore Opterons (2 processors on 1 MB meaning 4 cores total) or just 1 processor per rig? The term dual has to be better defined...

[jacksc02]

they are 2x dual core processors per rig = nice!

[DaForce]

yeah... pretty awesome stuff!!!

[TomC]

tom- how come you went for the 275's over the cheaper 265's?

Because the 280's weren't available

[Clifton Santiago]

Jujubee: The dual dual-core means two dual-core procs, which means 4 cores total, which means essentially a quad processor machine. Each core on my dual 280's are clocking at 3.3 Ghz each, as compared to my older Xeons. Which means basically that I have a 13.2 Ghz machine.

My machine rendered this scene at about 2 and a half minutes. I don't think I saved it. I will re-render and post later...

[dominiquelaksmana]

i just test it with my office dual xeon 2.8 ghz, it takes 6 minutes and 51 seconds, and i just bought a system with amd x2 4400+, it took 5 minutes, and 17 seconds. crazy??? what is intel doing these days???

[jacksc02]

they are doing nothing! thats the problem!

[DaForce]

Well they tried to do something and F*cked it up big time

[Da_elf]

arnt they working with mac too now? sheesh. if mac went from crappy ibm to intel it shows that someone high up in mac doesnt use his brain much

[DaForce]

Dont even get me started on macs and lack of brain usage.

[RE:FORM_STUDIOS]

Ayeeee. Got the pair of 265's (4Gb) at last! First attempt at the benchmark clocked in at 3m 44.6s

Not too bad.

I did receive a map load error when I opened the file, so there may be a difference in the model.

[DaForce]

The map load error can be ignored, its not actually used in the render

[Erik N]

Intels try: 2x Dual Core Xeon 2.8 HT

[priad]

Interesting humm