Not sure if there is an specific section for questions related to hardware…
I want to upgrade my computer… probably get an I7 920 or 950… how much faster is it with VRAY for Sketchup than a Quadcore Q9300?
Is that parsing time also reduced with a better processor?
Is there an useful benchmark to compare rendering time between different PC configs? (you know, everyone renders the SAME scene in different computers, than posts their rendering times, so users can have a good idea how faster a processor (or config) is above others…
Re: Will an I7 920 provide much better performance than a Q9300?
From what I know,
core i7 920 has 4core8threads compared to q9300 that has 4cores4threads
In overview, core i7 920, imo, has the advantage because it has intel hyperthreading where you can have a maximum of 2threads per core. that means a core i7 920 will have 8 rendering buckets versus 4 rendering buckets on a q9300.
another advantage is that core i7 920 uses triple channel ddr3 ram, while q9300 platform uses ddr2 dual channel.
Re: Will an I7 920 provide much better performance than a Q9300?
I recently upgraded from a Q6600 to an I7 950. I would say, definitely go for the I7. Not only for it’s processing cores and threads, but also for it’s memory improvements over standard DDR2 memory. I also had mine factory overclocked to 4.3 ghz.
Re: Will an I7 920 provide much better performance than a Q9300?
but will each one of the 8 buckets be as fast as each one of the four buckets in a quadcore?
I mean… hyperthreading uses the idle processing of a processor, doesnt it??
if the processor in a quadcore is fully occupied, even if it had hyperthreading, there wouldnt be free processing power to use for the hyperthreading, so the speed would be the same… or wouldnt?
gee, thats why I would like to see some benchmarks of different machine specs running the same scene in VRAY Sketchup.
Maybe ASGVIS can organize it? In this very forum? Create a scene and then all forum users download the scene and render it without changing any settings at all.
And then they write on the forum their PC specs as well as the parsing time and rendering time!
Re: Will an I7 920 provide much better performance than a Q9300?
I was thinking the same thing. The i7 has 4 cores, so really, the total processor speed is limited by those cores even if it has more threads. There are benchmarks against the 6 core AMD, and somehow the intel keeps even at the same frequency, so I’m guessing there’s better system architecture to allow it to process data better.
Re: Will an I7 920 provide much better performance than a Q9300?
I like the original idea of a typical scene that we can try on our various machines. That would be more useful as it’s specific to vray. The benchmarking tools don’t necessarily correlate to how vray uses a processor and memory.
*edit #2: RATS!! Stupid sketchup aspect ratio. I just tried this on another machine with a different SU screen size, and the image came out a different size. Anyway, to let you know, my image view size in SU is 1372x800, so you’ll need to adjust your SU screen ratio to get the correct 800x600 view.
My system:
AMD Phenom II x6 1055T overclocked at 3.0 Ghz, 4 GB ram OS and SU info: Win7 64-bit, SU 7.1
Re: Will an I7 920 provide much better performance than a Q9300?
I think this is a great idea. But I agree we need the same visopt. Perhaps put this in its own sticky thread. And add a couple stipulations ie. need to use the same visopt, no farms etc. I think it is very useful.
Re: Will an I7 920 provide much better performance than a Q9300?
Hi Andybot
You can share your “visopt” file??..I tried to render and gives a result different from yours… and the settings influences too much on the test results, both in time and as in appearance!
Re: Will an I7 920 provide much better performance than a Q9300?
I added the visopt to my earlier post, here it is again: _lighting-only_noSun_AO-on.visopt
Also, I added some notes about image size, since after testing on another machine, I found the size of the SU window makes a difference in the perspective that is taken. use “view1”
I installed the vray demo on another computer, and have the following result: