A new computer is probably called for: HELP

[cneville]

Hi
I fear a new computer is probably in my future. Not something that I'd dread if I didn't have to pay for it. But, moving forward seems to require it. I'm currently working on a 3-1/2 year old dual quad 3 gb machine with a moderatly fast Quadro video board.

I've just downloaded the beta and though I haven't even begun to explore the new options I'm certain that more computational capability will make the new features a practical alternative. Plus my clients are starting to talk annimation and all the frames necessary to do that task.

So my question becomes how much machine do I need? And can I reconcile that with how much I can afford?

First thoughts:
I know I'm going to a quad core. Are six cores worth the additional cost? I presume that's the practical limit (yes/no).

I know I need 64 bit but hoping that will not cause problems with older legacy programs. The cost increases that much more if I have to buy everything new. And somethings aren't even availble.

How much RAM? I'm thinking 12gb. But that comes with little insite.

Video cards. I've had good luck with Navidia Quadro board. The question is how much board can I afford and at what point is more Ram or more cores more productive?

Of course it's all a price trade off. I don't mind spending more to get more, but I'm not buying new machines every couple of years. So what makes sense? I'd be interested in your thoughts. What do you have and how well is it working? What would you buy if you could? You can leave off $10,000 + megamachines. My max is closer to 5k and that's a stretch. But the important part is where is it best to put the money. And a what point do you do the best you can and figure out 3-years out you'll try again.

chuck

[Micha_cg]

I think, you don't need a new graphic card, because Rhino can't use the power - look at the Rhino forum, also there is a Rhino wiki page.

For Vray you need CPU power. So try to buy what you can. If you don't render animations than slave computers are good. If you render animations often, where the render time per frame is short, than buy a the fastest computer you can get, because the DR initial time can be 15s..30s. If your render time per frame is 30 s, the DR initial time is a big problem.

I'm not up-tp-date about the CPU prices, but for example the i7 920 is quite cheap and run at 3.4GHz or more without problems here, if OC is an option for you.

RAM - 12 GB sounds good. I use 12GB too and like that I can open several instances of Rhino with large models and work in Photoshop at the same time.

My recommendation - buy a silent power unit (I use Enermax Modu82+ 625W) and the largest CPU fan (Noctua NH-D14) you can get. So can get a silent system that makes the work easier.

Also buy a SSD for the system drive, for example the OCZ Vertex 3.

[ledisnomad]

I'd definitely go for a six core computer. For $3,800, you can get an Alienware machine with i7 six core processor, 16 GB RAM, and an SSD. Knock off $850 if you don't get the SSD and buy two Dell XPS i7-2600 for $750 each and you're up to $4,500 for three great machines so you can use distributed rendering with 28 threads. One of those extra machines could serve dual purpose as part of a media center.

[dkendig]

for another $6,000 you can build a Nvidia Tesla super computer

[Micha_cg]

Here a german test quad core vs six core:

http://www.awardfabrik.de/prozessore...-i7-920-6.html

For me the much higher price is it not worth to upgrade from my current i7 920 @ 3.4GHz to a six core. Only 30% more speed, from 15.000 to 20.000 cinebench points.

[ledisnomad]

30% is quite a good time saver, especially if you are planning on doing animations:
1000 frames
Let's say a quad core takes 15 sec/frame = 4h10m
With 30% more speed with six cores that's 10 sec/frame, right? So that would be 2h40min
For 1.5 hours saved time, you'll pay off the capital expense after just a few jobs (depending on how much you charge) and spend less of your fee for future jobs.

[Micha_cg]

Right, and if you don't render animations often, than buy two quad cores and you get 100% speed more instead 30%.

[cneville]

Thanks for all the input.

What about clock speed vs. numbers of cores? How does a slower 6 core compare with a faster 4 core machine? Where 6 core machines seem to get much more pricy is with the highest clock speed units.

I notice Dell has some dual 6 core machines. The prices seem reasonable if you're not going for the 3.0+ Ghz clock speeds. I'm presuming that would allow you to run 12 threads. That seems like one heck of an upgrade from the dual core machine I'm now running. What's the thought on these?

chuck

[ledisnomad]

Wouldn't a dual 6 core machine have 24 threads (12 cores, 2 threads per core)?

It's always been my understanding that you should maximize threads to speed up rendering. So having slower dual 6 core processors would be better.

Here's what I understand: Most of the rendering calculations are done better with by parallel processing, so having more threads is a greater benefit than faster processors. That's why GPU-based real-time rendering has become so popular and why video games can render so quickly, since GPUs have some many more parallel processors. However, I think the drawback is that some calculations (caustics? can't remember...) can't leverage the parallel processing, so then it is restricted to the speed of an individual processor (and why the real-time and video game renderings aren't quite as realistic). That's what I remember reading at one time. Anybody feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

[Micha_cg]

I think it doesn't matter 4x3GHz or 6x2GHz it's like 1x12GHz. I would look for cinebench tests like here or the link above:

http://www.apple.com/de/macpro/performance.html

http://ht4u.net/reviews/2011/perform...11/index14.php

But if money isn't the problem than a Xeon dual processor machine with two 6 cores could be great. Only my impression was that this machines are not good value for money.

From the Vray side there is one little drawback - more threads means more LC passes that cause a longer time to filter and merge this passes.

[dkendig]

I really want to see V-Ray running on a Tesla... someone with a big enough budget to get one of these things, please send me a video of it in action.

[ledisnomad]

Running V-Ray on a computer with a Tesla won't make any difference, will it? It was my understanding that neither V-Ray nor RT use the GPU, so it doesn't matter what graphics card you have in there.

[dkendig]

No, you are right. V-Ray for Rhino's version of RT will not support the GPU in this next release. V-Ray RT for 3D Studio Max uses the GPU, and we will eventually as well. I've been looking for a video of V-Ray RT using a Tesla card, but I haven't seen one clearly labeled as using one yet.