PDA

View Full Version : lw 9.6 update to handle more than 16 threads?



cresshead
03-15-2010, 10:43 AM
lw 9.6 update to handle more than 16 threads?

with the new 6 core i7 cpus in dual socket formation you'll get 24 threads...can lightwave use all of them or will it need a point update?

http://www.tuaw.com/2010/03/11/mac-pro-hexacore-xeon-core-i7-debutes-tuesday/

biliousfrog
03-15-2010, 11:08 AM
I doubt that it's much of a priority as very few people will be able to afford one and it would still be faster/cheaper to render on a couple of machines than a single über-core machine.

cresshead
03-15-2010, 11:25 AM
i surpose you can fire up 2 instances of lightwave...that would be a workaround if you have enough ram onboard for the scenes

3dworks
03-15-2010, 12:34 PM
is 16 threads the limit, currently?

cresshead
03-15-2010, 12:42 PM
it's tops out at 16 threads i believe..it also has an automatic setting but i/m not sure if this just looks at what's availaable from 1-16 or can go higher

gerry_g
03-15-2010, 01:32 PM
'I doubt that it's much of a priority as very few people will be able to afford one'

Doubt they'll be any different in cost to previous generation of Macs Pros from what I've read, and never mind six cores now what about the eight core chips due mid year a dual hyper-threaded set up like that will run 32 threads I'm guessing.
Bottom line is, if the new Macs are out tomorrow as is speculated I'm buying for one. and if I have to go else where to render so be it.

cresshead
03-15-2010, 01:34 PM
well Chuck has stated that lightwave is still being developed so i'd expect to see 32 threaded lightwave update pretty soon..can't be too hard to code it...

3DGFXStudios
03-15-2010, 01:53 PM
I don't think there are any motherboards for a dual i7 setup? Or am I wrong?

calilifestyle
03-15-2010, 01:57 PM
Yeah but the point of the 6 threads plus the hyper threads, which gives you 12 threads right. The hyper threads are only there for any one process that can divide across the single core of the 6. If and when your rendering, the processor is always using 100% .Then you will not have a percentage left to hyper thread. If this makes any sense .

cresshead
03-15-2010, 02:22 PM
I don't think there are any motherboards for a dual i7 setup? Or am I wrong?

mac pro dual 6 core i7 due ot tomorow..tuesday

cresshead
03-15-2010, 02:30 PM
just to prove it..at GDC 24 threads....

http://www.luxology.com/community/blog/images/GDC_2010_resize008.jpg

Andyjaggy
03-15-2010, 03:05 PM
Now that is sexy.

Something to think about. WE had two i7 machines here at work, one had hyperthreading disabled and one had it enabled, now you would expect the render times to still be the same right? Wrong. The machine with hyperthreading disabled (disabled from the bios) was about 30% slower at rendering in 3D Max. That shocked me actually, and just to be sure I went into the bios and enabled hyperthreading support. Boom, immediately the rendering sped up by about 30% and matched our other i7.

Ernest
03-15-2010, 03:47 PM
Meh, Who would pay for 24 cores when you can have 48 cores for free?

http://blogs.amd.com/work/2010/03/03/48-cores-contest/

Chuck
03-15-2010, 03:51 PM
The next builds that we issue of LightWave HC and LightWave v9.6.1 will have the renderer thread support increased.

3dworks
03-15-2010, 04:09 PM
The next builds that we issue of LightWave HC and LightWave v9.6.1 will have the renderer thread support increased.

:thumbsup:

cresshead
03-15-2010, 04:28 PM
The next builds that we issue of LightWave HC and LightWave v9.6.1 will have the renderer thread support increased.


excellent news!:thumbsup:
looking at a new puter later in the summer....12core it just maybe!:devil:

monovich
03-15-2010, 05:38 PM
well that was simple. thanks!
can you just make it a user input so we could make 11 threads? I think 11 threads would be insanely fast.

monovich
03-15-2010, 05:39 PM
Now that is sexy.

Something to think about. WE had two i7 machines here at work, one had hyperthreading disabled and one had it enabled, now you would expect the render times to still be the same right? Wrong. The machine with hyperthreading disabled (disabled from the bios) was about 30% slower at rendering in 3D Max. That shocked me actually, and just to be sure I went into the bios and enabled hyperthreading support. Boom, immediately the rendering sped up by about 30% and matched our other i7.

I've heard of instances where hyperthreading is slower. Do you have any idea what those might be?

Lightwolf
03-15-2010, 06:01 PM
Something to think about. WE had two i7 machines here at work, one had hyperthreading disabled and one had it enabled, now you would expect the render times to still be the same right?
No, the point of HT is to allow a core to use parts of the internal pipelines that would be idle if only a single "thread" runs on it.
HT thus allows for the better usage of existing assets, and usually get you 15%-25% on an application that is will multi-threaded.

Cheers,
Mike

Lightwolf
03-15-2010, 06:02 PM
I've heard of instances where hyperthreading is slower. Do you have any idea what those might be?
Not with i7s, with P4s it could happen though. I haven't seen anything that shows a slow down behaviour if HT is enabled lately though.

Cheers,
Mike

Hieron
03-15-2010, 06:59 PM
well that was simple. thanks!
can you just make it a user input so we could make 11 threads? I think 11 threads would be insanely fast.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeOXsA8sp_E&feature=fvw

"these go to eleven!"

:)

biliousfrog
03-16-2010, 02:27 AM
Doubt they'll be any different in cost to previous generation of Macs Pros from what I've read,

At $999 per CPU it's going to be a lot of extra money for very little gain in 99% of applications. If rendering is your thing, using 3x 8-core machines will still be faster and probably cheaper.

cresshead
03-16-2010, 07:38 AM
At $999 per CPU it's going to be a lot of extra money for very little gain in 99% of applications. If rendering is your thing, using 3x 8-core machines will still be faster and probably cheaper.

yeh but apple usually get them cheaper than anyone else [cpu's] remember apple mac pro's were cheaper than dells or hp

littlewaves
03-16-2010, 12:34 PM
yeh but apple usually get them cheaper than anyone else [cpu's] remember apple mac pro's were cheaper than dells or hp

I'm not sure if apple and intel still have that "special relationship" though.

Intel were apparently miffed when Apple didn't pick them for their executive toys range.

I expect we'll find out soon enough. Rumour was that we'd see the new MP today but that doesn't look like it's happening after all.

do they still only release new stuff on Tuesdays?

Andyjaggy
03-16-2010, 01:07 PM
Maybe you could answer this Lightwolf. The reason we had disabled hyperthreading on one of our boxes was we thought that it would be faster for single threaded tasks, because when you do something single threaded the task manager shows you are only using like 13% of your cpu power, which means you are only using 1/2 of 1 physical core. So we though disabling hyperthreading would then speed up single threaded processes.

We never did enough testing to confirm or debunk or thought process but I still wonder if it wouldn't be a better approach for single threaded apps. Any thoughts?

ToMar
03-16-2010, 02:33 PM
According to Lewis (at the Core Forums) , LW 9.6.0 will use at least 32 cores if you leav threads at "auto" .

OOZZEE
03-16-2010, 03:32 PM
Now that is sexy.

Something to think about. WE had two i7 machines here at work, one had hyperthreading disabled and one had it enabled, now you would expect the render times to still be the same right? Wrong. The machine with hyperthreading disabled (disabled from the bios) was about 30% slower at rendering in 3D Max. That shocked me actually, and just to be sure I went into the bios and enabled hyperthreading support. Boom, immediately the rendering sped up by about 30% and matched our other i7.

logically, HT wouldnt be there if it didnt offer any kind of benefit .

cresshead
03-16-2010, 03:52 PM
According to Lewis (at the Core Forums) , LW 9.6.0 will use at least 32 cores if you leav threads at "auto" .

okay cool good to know.:thumbsup:

Lightwolf
03-16-2010, 04:22 PM
Any thoughts?
Was that total usage, or usage per core? CPU History set to One Graph Per Core.

In the end, the only way to know is to time it.

Cheers,
Mike

zapper1998
03-16-2010, 06:12 PM
just to prove it..at GDC 24 threads....

http://www.luxology.com/community/blog/images/GDC_2010_resize008.jpg

W O W

nice

Horse Power ya

biliousfrog
03-17-2010, 03:20 AM
BTW BOXX have already updated their workstations and RenderBOXX systems with the new 6-core CPU's

http://www.boxxtech.com/products/RenderBOXX/10300_overview.asp

littlewaves
03-17-2010, 08:30 AM
how do boxx usually compare price wise against mac pro for similar spec these days? anyone know? (couldn't find info on site)

I remember researching it a year or two ago and the Mac Pro came out pretty favourably but then that may well have been at the beginning of an MP release cycle

cresshead
03-17-2010, 08:53 AM
http://www.cgarchitect.com/news/newsfeed.asp?nid=4809

boxx 24core review

biliousfrog
03-17-2010, 09:10 AM
how do boxx usually compare price wise against mac pro for similar spec these days? anyone know? (couldn't find info on site)

I remember researching it a year or two ago and the Mac Pro came out pretty favourably but then that may well have been at the beginning of an MP release cycle

The previous generation Mac Pro's (pre i7's etc.) were slightly cheaper and I know many people that bought MP's solely as Windows workstations (although you're not covered by any Windows software support). With the latest generation Mac's they rocketted in price again.

I don't know how the 24core BOXX compares price-wise, as neither have released any prices, but they're usually pretty competitive. Obviously you can build something yourself cheaper but they're built like a tank, use top grade components, are pretty much guaranteed to work with your applications straight out of the box, have excellent support (even out of warranty) and look cool :D

If you're looking for a PC CG-workstation I can highly recommend them.

manholoz
03-17-2010, 09:27 AM
Meh, Who would pay for 24 cores when you can have 48 cores for free?

http://blogs.amd.com/work/2010/03/03/48-cores-contest/

This is one of the times I wish I was residing in the US of A... sigh

JonW
03-17-2010, 01:52 PM
If you build your own or get a small computer shop to put it together for you. You will save a lot of money. Last year when my W5580 was built it worked out to $360 per Ghz, the Mac X5570 worked out to $512 per Ghz.

I suspected with the X5680 it will be a similar price structure.

MentalFish
03-18-2010, 06:03 PM
Good to hear about the thread increase supported in LW. That said, I still only have a 2008 Mac Pro with 8 cores, considering buying two quad core iMacs to use as monitors and render slaves. Would be nice with a more-than-16 core machine setup for LW to abuse.

Hieron
03-18-2010, 07:44 PM
I don't know how the 24core BOXX compares price-wise, as neither have released any prices, but they're usually pretty competitive.


The renderboxx 10300 with 6 cores you can get a price on on their website, not sure about the workstation ones...

As per price/performance I tried comparing a 10300 renderboxx (4 cpu's) 6 core Xeons to 4 seperate 6 core i7 setups self built (decent parts). I believe the 10300 was about 1.7x more expensive.

That said, the 10300 is a very very small package and won't be in the way for a long time. But I don't mind overclocking rendernodes, so I'll stick to i7's. But boy would I like to have one just for the sheer ghz/cm^3 :P

Andyjaggy
03-19-2010, 11:39 AM
We rented a couple of those for a few weeks when we were in a render crunch. Wicked fast, but beware they are LOUD! Be prepared for a constant wind tunnel noise running through the entire office.