PDA

View Full Version : cheap render node? AMD/Intel



cresshead
12-14-2010, 01:29 PM
hi

i'm looking at making a cheap renderbox for 2011 as have been looking at the new Amd 12 core Cpu as well as their 8 core and 6 core option.
Now, i've been out of the cpu battle so don't know much...that's where you guys come in!
So question>> does the AMD 6, 8 and 12 core cpu's have hyperthreading to double up on the number of threads for rendering from 3d apps?
Are there any bottom line comparisons between the 2 chip types for rendering anywhere?

and any bare bone configs for a renderbox i can buy in the UK?

INTEL::
from what i gather on intel so far both the i3 and i5 do not have hyper threading only the i7 has

so far i see a macpro 12 core (2 x intel 6 core) that has hyperthreading making it 24 threads comes in at around £4000
Two 2.66GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon “Westmere” processors


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNrBavjByfw&feature=player_embedded

i suppose i'm looking at the balancing act of more cores in 1 CPU based box and cheaper 4 , 6 and 8 core cpu's with 2 or 4 boxes to setup with their own ram, hd, graphics card and o/s

cresshead
12-14-2010, 02:12 PM
so...found this>>
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/Phenom-II-X4-970-and-Phenom-II-X6-1075T-CPU-Review/1109


On the other hand, AMD still doesnít have anything similar to Intelís Hyper-Threading technology, which simulates an extra core on each CPU core. So the six-core CPU from Intel is seen by the operating system and programs as a 12-core CPU.

so amd chips have no hyper threading...:twak:
but they ARE really cheap!:thumbsup:

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=90889&d=1292361636

so from this a 6 core AMD is as fast as a 4core intel i7 running hyperthreading...HMmm interesting!

On Cinebench, the Phenom II X4 970 and Phenom II X4 965 achieved the same performance level, with the Phenom II X4 970 achieving a score 26% higher than Core i5-750ís (which is a dual-core CPU with Hyper-Threading technology). The Phenom II X6 1090T achieved a score 6% higher than Phenom II X6 1075T, with this new CPU achieving a score similar to Core i7-870ís (which is a quad-core CPU with Hyper-Threading technology) and 64% higher than Core i5-750ís.

Lightwolf
12-14-2010, 02:23 PM
I've recently specced out a new workstation (as I tend to do every now and then).
Basically, you get what you pay for. The speed ration of the fastest single socket Intel to the fastest single socket AMD is roughly 3:2, while the price ration is 3:1.
I.e. the AMD costs as third of the Intel and renders at two thirds the speed.
Once you add the components the AMD is still slightly ahead, but not as much. Probably a bit more so for a pure render node (since the motherboards are a lot cheaper and even have integrated graphics).
From that point of view the only downside are the 4 RAM sockets which limit you to 16GB of Ram.

Cheers,
Mike

cresshead
12-14-2010, 02:28 PM
thanks!...stlil looking into AMD trying to find out which of their cpu types support 2 cpu's on a m/board, i'm guessing Opteron and not PHennom

http://www.newtek.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=90890&d=1292362530

Lightwolf
12-14-2010, 02:32 PM
thanks!...stlil looking into AMD trying to find out which of their cpu types support 2 cpu's on a m/board, i'm guessing Opteron and not PHennom
Yeppers...
It's the same for Intel though... all of a sudden your choice is a lot more limited and CPUs are a lot more expensive.
Currently I'd say: If you don't run expensive software that is licensed per node or need the maximum CPU power on a single system (i.e. to use with clients at your side) then a dual socket system is hardly worth it. Certainly not as a render box.


If you really want to see AMD trounce Intel then have a look at 4-socket boards.
But there's so many problems involved with those (in general) that I can only recommend that as an academic exercise if you have nothing else to do ;)

Cheers,
Mike

borkus
12-14-2010, 02:50 PM
I would be very interested in hearing more about those problems, Lightwolf if you had the time to go further into that. It's something that I have been interested in lately but admittedly don't have much background in yet.

calilifestyle
12-14-2010, 02:52 PM
here's a six core from amd for 179
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103851

cresshead
12-14-2010, 02:55 PM
interesting to look into!

AMD Opteron 12-Core (6174) 2.2GHz Processor (L2 Cache 1)
is £989 just for the cpu

i can buy a 6 core amd system with o/s windows 7 for £739 inc vat
....
http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/pc/range/revolution.html
and the novatech is 3.2 ghz system compared to the 2.2ghz 12 core cpu.

Lightwolf
12-14-2010, 02:59 PM
I would be very interested in hearing more about those problems, Lightwolf if you had the time to go further into that. It's something that I have been interested in lately but admittedly don't have much background in yet.
For one: It's hard to find an OS that deals with 4x12 (48, AMD) or 4x(4+4) (32, Intel) cores efficiently, especially once NUMA (i.e. memory hooked up to the CPUs directly but shared by all of them) comes into play.
Handling that many threads is also a challenge for most applications, especially as many toolkits (such as compilers) are ill prepared at the moment.
So you might end up with 48 cores, but an app that can only use as many as 16 or 32.

Then there's diminishing returns. Any multi-threaded real world application has some points in the code where threads need to be synchronized. The more cores, the more of them will sit idle in such a case, waiting for one of them to catch up.
And that's beside that fast that not everything can be multi-threaded.

It's certainly not as bad as coding for GPUs, far from it. But since these systems are still rare you won't find a lot of software that runs well on them.

Cheers,
Mike

JonW
12-14-2010, 03:40 PM
On my W5580 box I did a few tests with hyper threading off. The computer is faster for single core work. But for a render the 8 physical core will take about 30% longer to finish a job. So it’s quicker to render using 16 cores with hyper threading on, but each individual core is slower.


With render nodes, one should use bare bones boxes, MB with onboard graphics, cheap & nasty case, the smallest HD you can find, borrow a CD drive from another box to set up the node. The cheaper CPUs will be more economical.

Add up the cost of all the component including operating system. Then divide the cost by the GHz so you can compare your different options.

If comparing different models of CPUs you will need to add an adjustment for that family of CPU rendering efficiency.

A top end dual CPU box with expensive graphics card, SSD etc, with bottom of the range CPUs is very expensive per GHz. This sort of box should have top of the range CPUs. It does make the box even more expensive, but dollars per GHz it will be a more economical set up.


Bare Bones Box,

Very cheap & nasty case.
MB with onboard graphics, probably still not possible with i7, so get the absolute cheapest card (if using remote desktop you can borrow & then remove the GC card, but have at least a spare card lying around that you can put in to fix things).

Tiny hard drive (unless you want to use this box as somewhere else to store stuff).

Enough ram to cover what you normally need. A 6 or 12 gig package is probably the way to go.

Because you won’t be using a stack of components, you will save money on a smaller power supply.

cresshead
12-14-2010, 03:46 PM
good information, thank you!

JonW
12-14-2010, 04:00 PM
The one area I did spend money was on the heatsinks. Using the Noctua towers & a stack of their fans as well. But this is because the computers & me are all in the same room.

Even in the middle of summer, air conditioning not reaching too well into this room. High 30 degree C room temperature the computers still run surprisingly quietly pumping out 2.5 Kw of heat.


Cinebench R11.5
16 threads W5580: 11.39
8 threads E5450: 7.17
8 threads [email protected]: 6.10
8 threads E5335: 4.47

Dexter2999
12-14-2010, 06:01 PM
I've mentioned this before in another thread, but for a laugh...
Go to YouTube and check out the tour of the BlenderInstitute on their channel.

For those who have no desire to look... they turned a four drawer file cabinet into a renderfarm. They hang four motherboards in each "drawer" which have been opened up for airflow.

cresshead
12-14-2010, 06:32 PM
I've mentioned this before in another thread, but for a laugh...
Go to YouTube and check out the tour of the BlenderInstitute on their channel.

For those who have no desire to look... they turned a four drawer file cabinet into a renderfarm. They hang four motherboards in each "drawer" which have been opened up for airflow.

quite interesting vid!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMJXiOF9MGM

JonW
12-14-2010, 07:34 PM
Great terminology when the computers are running too hot. They burn you!


The 16 i7 mother boards were running without graphic cards. Which would save a lot of money. Also not having a GC in the computer saves electricity.