PDA

View Full Version : Dual Core G5's and Lightwave



Tony3d
03-15-2005, 07:11 AM
What's all this talk on rummor sites about a dual core G5 coming out? Would Lightwave be able to take advantage of this? :confused:

shaol
03-15-2005, 07:28 AM
What do you mean dual core? I'm not a computer geek

Tony3d
03-15-2005, 07:37 AM
The way I understand it each cpu would have two cores on one chip. It sounds like this would basically make it a quad cpu machine. If so, would Lightwave be able to use the other two cores or would Lightwave just see two processors?

shaol
03-15-2005, 07:52 AM
I would find a lightwave rep I would think if it can read 2 it would read 4 but i know nothing so good luck in your quest I would like to know too. :)

Lynx3d
03-15-2005, 07:58 AM
Lightwave doesn't "see" CPUs anyway, it launches as many threads as you tell it to (currently max. 8), the OS has to assign threads to CPUs. LW doesn't care if there is only one CPU, 4CPUs, 2 dual-core CPUs or a SMT CPU...

Besides that, why is everyone asking for support of non-available technology?

monovich
03-15-2005, 11:21 AM
because it's fun to talk about. do you really not get that, or are you just sounding "smart"?

Darth Mole
03-15-2005, 04:33 PM
Isn't that we all do? Talk about non-available technology? The existing stuff is so dull. Besides, the rumour sites are full of it - it looks like we won't have to wait too long... I think it's a perfectly relevant question.

Tony3d
03-15-2005, 07:17 PM
Thanks Darth! The Power Mac Line needs something really big really fast, amd I think this is just the thing. I'm ready to drop $4000 on a new machine and this dual core stuff sounds very interesting to me.

ingo
03-16-2005, 01:23 AM
Do you think Apple pushes out some dualcore G5's just before they release their cell processor G6, i think thats wasted money. :D

Darth Mole
03-16-2005, 01:31 AM
No idea about the Cell chip. I don't know if Apple is part of the Cell chip alliance, if it has any on order, if it has a version of OSX running on it, how much developers need to recompile, how much the chip will cost, how powerful it is, how much heat it generates, if it even exists yet...

Besides, the first 10 million (20 million?) will be needed by Sony for PlayStation 3. IBM has proven dual-core processors ready to roll, which Apple can use very soon (these will be the new G6 machines) that could be the equivalent of a 12GHz PowerMac if they use a twin, dual-core set-up.

I really don't think we'll see cell chips in anything this year beyond PlayStation 3 (if it even arrives this year, which I doubt). But it's interesting to speculate!

This a good resource on the Cell processor:
http://www.blachford.info/computer/Cells/Cell0.html

Check out this quote: "The first Cell based desktop computer will be the fastest desktop computer in the industry by a very large margin. Even high end multi-core x86s will not get close. Companies who produce microprocessors or DSPs are going to have a very hard time fighting the power a Cell will deliver. We have never seen a leap in performance like this before and I don't expect we'll ever see one again, It'll send shock-waves through the entire industry and we'll see big changes as a result."

And this story talks about Apple using Cell (or not):
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1768416,00.asp

Either way, Apple is set to have the fastest desktop computers by the end of this year, and LW on Mac can only benefit.

calico
03-17-2005, 04:43 AM
that was an interesting read Darth

Sande
03-24-2005, 02:14 PM
Hmmh, the cell-architecture, again... So, now that it has already killed the x86-platform (old and useless thread somewhere here) it will power the future macs? If it will, and especially if it's even half as capable of as all the hype surrounding it, I wish all the best...

BUT, last time Sony launched a new console (= PS2 - yes, the same over-promise/under-deliver-machine that has fell far behind XBOX and PC in performance) same kind of predictions were made. As I haven't seen any rendering platforms on emotion engine, I'll be cautios this time...

Captain Obvious
03-24-2005, 03:29 PM
BUT, last time Sony launched a new console (= PS2 - yes, the same over-promise/under-deliver-machine that has fell far behind XBOX and PC in performance) same kind of predictions were made. As I haven't seen any rendering platforms on emotion engine, I'll be cautios this time...
The problem with the PS2 hardware is not a lack of performance, it's the fact that it's so darned hard to code for. Go look at Grand Tourismo 4. Honestly, it looks better in-game than some of the car renderings I've seen Lightwave/mental ray/whatever produce. The idea that the PS2 can't produce graphics of the same quality as the Xbox is just bizarre. It's very much possible. It's just hard.

Kainlamond
03-24-2005, 04:21 PM
The problem with the PS2 hardware is not a lack of performance, it's the fact that it's so darned hard to code for. Go look at Grand Tourismo 4. Honestly, it looks better in-game than some of the car renderings I've seen Lightwave/mental ray/whatever produce. The idea that the PS2 can't produce graphics of the same quality as the Xbox is just bizarre. It's very much possible. It's just hard.your right about it hard to code and it does have good performance but it can not do some of the thing a Xbox can do...

the PS2 can do physic inside the GPU it like a GPU/PPU but it can't do thing like bump mapping and a few other thing that are just not coded in the GPU so it would slow down everything to go threw the CPU.

hardware wise the xbox is superior.
Xbox= 733Mhz and 64MB, 233Mhz GPU 64MB vRam (125 Mtriangles/s)
Ps2= 300Mhz and 32MB, 150Mhz GPU 4MB vRam (75 Mtriangles/s)
Gamecude= 485Mhz and 24MB, 162Mhz GPU 3MB vRam (6-12 Mtriangles/s)

one problem is the compiler, just now are we starting to see the power of the PS2 with MGS 3 and GT 4.

Captain Obvious
03-24-2005, 04:29 PM
hardware wise the xbox is superior.
Xbox= 733Mhz and 64MB, 233Mhz GPU 64MB vRam (125 Mtriangles/s)
Ps2= 300Mhz and 32MB, 150Mhz GPU 4MB vRam (75 Mtriangles/s)
Gamecude= 485Mhz and 24MB, 162Mhz GPU 3MB vRam (6-12 Mtriangles/s)
That does definitely not mean the Xbox is superior. A 1.6GHz Pentium 4 is clocked higher than a 1.2GHz Pentium M. Does that mean it's faster? Not by a long shot. The P-M is faster at just about everything you throw at it. The PS2 hardware is so unlike the other two that any comparison is utterly irrelevant.

If you don't think the Gamecube has good hardware, look at Waverace: Blue Storm or the new Zelda (the one not released yet). The latter is pretty much the best looking game I've ever seen. It's very hard to make a proper comparison between the three, since the hardware simply works differently.

Darth Mole
03-24-2005, 05:43 PM
You also have to bear in mind that PS2 is OLD technology, which - when released - also suffered from things like lack of RAM, because back then (some 5 years ago) RAM was still bloody expensive!

I don't much like PS2; it's got a certain 'feel' and it almost always looks pixellated. Xbox is better, but it also came out a long time after. A year or two is a lifetime in terms of computing technology.

Anyway - Xbox2 before Christmas. Bring it on!

Sande
03-25-2005, 01:59 AM
The problem with the PS2 hardware is not a lack of performance, it's the fact that it's so darned hard to code for.

Well, I think it's actually both - lack of performance and that it's hard to code...
Of course PS2 is nowadays starting to get old, but my point was that it was never as good as Sony promised...

I hope that Cell-processor will turn out to be something more solid. It doesn't matter how powerful the chip is in theory, if it doesn't show in practice.

I remain sceptical... :)

Johnny
03-29-2005, 05:15 AM
Lightwave doesn't "see" CPUs anyway, it launches as many threads as you tell it to (currently max. 8), the OS has to assign threads to CPUs. LW doesn't care if there is only one CPU, 4CPUs, 2 dual-core CPUs or a SMT CPU...

Besides that, why is everyone asking for support of non-available technology?


How so LW doesn't "see" multiple CPUs?...it sure is aware of the number of nodes avail. for screamer netting..

Captain Obvious
03-30-2005, 01:52 PM
How so LW doesn't "see" multiple CPUs?...it sure is aware of the number of nodes avail. for screamer netting..
I don't know about ScreamerNet, but when rendering on a single machine, Lightwave has no idea how many processors there are. It doesn't need to know. It just tells the system to run a certain number of threads, and the kernel then assigns the threads to different processors.

etyrihje
04-02-2005, 08:31 AM
My Dual G5 only renders at half speed (at least using fprime), using the cativity monitor its obvious only one processor is working on the render...

Captain Obvious
04-02-2005, 10:46 AM
My Dual G5 only renders at half speed (at least using fprime), using the cativity monitor its obvious only one processor is working on the render...
Fprime is only multithreaded insofar that different Fprime windows use different threads. A single Fprime view will only take advantage of one processor, unfortunately. Of course, with a dual-CPU computer, you can then have Fprime on one processor and everything else on the other, and just leave Fprime on with a very small performance decrease. That's always nice. ;)

Scazzino
04-04-2005, 10:07 AM
I don't know about ScreamerNet, but when rendering on a single machine, Lightwave has no idea how many processors there are. It doesn't need to know. It just tells the system to run a certain number of threads, and the kernel then assigns the threads to different processors.

Correct, LW just runs the designated number of threads, and Mac OS X handles assigning current tasks to the CPU's... Some scenes will actually render faster with more threads than the number of CPU's... Here's some info on setting the RenderThreads setting in LW... with a few tests running LightWave and LWSN at various settings on a test scene...

http://dreamlight.com/insights/10/config_files.html#Multithreading

-MikeS

Architook
04-04-2005, 10:14 PM
What's all this talk on rummor sites about a dual core G5 coming out? Would Lightwave be able to take advantage of this? :confused:

I think it's true. The new F prime 1.5 says it's designed to support multicore Macs.

"The Macintosh version of FPrime 1.5 has the same core render speed increase and same dual and multicore CPU support as the PC."

www.worley.com

Captain Obvious
04-05-2005, 04:56 AM
I think it's true. The new F prime 1.5 says it's designed to support multicore Macs.

"The Macintosh version of FPrime 1.5 has the same core render speed increase and same dual and multicore CPU support as the PC."

www.worley.com
Worley doesn't know more about whether or not there will be multi-core Macs than you or I.