PDA

View Full Version : Lightwave & Multithreading: Dual Core or Quad, how fast is it?



Nicolas Jordan
08-18-2006, 09:57 AM
I am thinking of getting a 2 Proc Dual Core Machine. I am wondering if anyone knows the speed of Multithreading and how much of a speed boost it really gives for rendering?

Ramon
08-18-2006, 10:11 AM
I'd really like to know this as well!! Love to see render tests on those bad boys.
Are you thinking of the MacPro 2 proc dual core Xeon (based on the new Core 2)? That's the only system I know of that has quad cores. Are there any on the PC?

hstewarth
08-18-2006, 10:56 AM
Check out the following discussion on Woodcrest

http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53916

I am planning on getting a dual 3Ghz Woodcrest and currently running a 3.2Ghz P4 and couple people already have the machine. It appears from testing that Lightwave 9.0 has about 7x improvement when rendering LightRoom scene - this assumes that I am guy that did it on the 3Ghz are rendering the same scene.

My 3.2Ghz did it about 1400s while dual 3Ghz Dell did it 195s.

Nicolas Jordan
08-18-2006, 12:40 PM
I'd really like to know this as well!! Love to see render tests on those bad boys.
Are you thinking of the MacPro 2 proc dual core Xeon (based on the new Core 2)? That's the only system I know of that has quad cores. Are there any on the PC?

Ya, I was thinking of completely converting over to Mac and get a Mac Pro or if I stick with Windows getting a Dell 2 Proc Dual Core XPS 700 System. I think we still have to wait until Newtek releases Universal Binary so it will work well on Mac Pro, hopefully it wont be long.

Nicolas Jordan
08-18-2006, 12:41 PM
Check out the following discussion on Woodcrest

http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53916

I am planning on getting a dual 3Ghz Woodcrest and currently running a 3.2Ghz P4 and couple people already have the machine. It appears from testing that Lightwave 9.0 has about 7x improvement when rendering LightRoom scene - this assumes that I am guy that did it on the 3Ghz are rendering the same scene.

My 3.2Ghz did it about 1400s while dual 3Ghz Dell did it 195s.

Thanks for the link. :)

Ramon
08-18-2006, 01:14 PM
Ya, I was thinking of completely converting over to Mac and get a Mac Pro or if I stick with Windows getting a Dell 2 Proc Dual Core XPS 700 System. I think we still have to wait until Newtek releases Universal Binary so it will work well on Mac Pro, hopefully it wont be long.

Cool, Yeah I know what you mean about waiting til Universal. I didn't know that Dell had a system that essentially mirrors the Mac Pro. That's awesome. Well, I have a Dell myself though it's a Precision workstation (Xeon dual 2.8) It's not a Core processor though. It's odd to me though that an XPS system would feature quad core. I thought that, that would only be found on Precision systems. I'll have to take a look.
The thing I like about getting the Mac Pro is that if you think about it, it's base price is not too expensive, it's $2,500 US for quad proc. Also, I love the Mac interface - always have - since OS 6.5 and since Apple has "Boot Camp" the way I understand it, you can run PC apps without emulation by installing Windows XP. So as far as the LW plugins that are PC only, well, that is essentially a null issue with this setup.
The only thing that bothers me about choosing to go with the Mac is that the video cards are still weak. Nvidia 7300 and not even the 7800?

Captain Obvious
08-18-2006, 02:55 PM
The only thing that bothers me about choosing to go with the Mac is that the video cards are still weak. Nvidia 7300 and not even the 7800?
What's wrong with the X1900 XT? It's pretty darned powerful.



At any rate, quad core machines are a LOT faster at LW rendering than dual core machines. Not quite twice as fast, but not far from it.

Ramon
08-20-2006, 01:47 PM
Not too familiar with ATI. I have heard that there are quite a few issues with them (redraw / glitches - several months ago) and that their weak on driver support.
Has all that changed to their favor? I'm a bit out of touch with ATI.

Captain Obvious
08-20-2006, 03:37 PM
As far as I've heard, ATI's OpenGL support has improved immensely the last few months.

Also, if you ever run Mac OS X, ATI cards are always preferable. When it comes to Mac OS X drivers, ATI's been better than Nvidia pretty much forever. Of course, Lightwave isn't universal yet, so running it on a Mac Pro might not be ideal...

Weepul
08-20-2006, 03:52 PM
Also, if you ever run Mac OS X, ATI cards are always preferable. When it comes to Mac OS X drivers, ATI's been better than Nvidia pretty much forever.
Really? What am I missing out on with my 7800? (Of course, I'm probably missing out on even what it offers, as I've never done anything but just, well, use apps that use it - no settings tweaking or any such things I've noticed people mentioning every now and again.)

Captain Obvious
08-20-2006, 06:01 PM
Really? What am I missing out on with my 7800?
Performance and stability, to a certain degree. But also things like custom settings. Lightwave doesn't have an anti-aliasing setting. With ATI's Mac drivers, you can turn on full-screen anti-aliasing for Lightwave's OpenGL viewports. This is impossible with Nvidia's drivers.

I haven't heard much about stability issues in Lightwave with Nvidia cards, but both Maya and modo have much more problems with Nvidia than with ATI.

Ramon
08-20-2006, 09:15 PM
Performance and stability, to a certain degree. But also things like custom settings. Lightwave doesn't have an anti-aliasing setting. With ATI's Mac drivers, you can turn on full-screen anti-aliasing for Lightwave's OpenGL viewports. This is impossible with Nvidia's drivers.

I haven't heard much about stability issues in Lightwave with Nvidia cards, but both Maya and modo have much more problems with Nvidia than with ATI.
Dang, that's news to me. Thanks for the insight. The anti-alias viewports sounds really cool.
I thought there was a big to do about how good the Quadro cards and their DCC drivers are for Maya, etc.

Captain Obvious
08-21-2006, 05:49 AM
To be honest, an X1900 XT is probably a better choice in a Mac Pro than a Quadro FX4500, even if we ignore the fact that it's a thousand dollars cheaper...

Elmar Moelzer
08-21-2006, 06:05 AM
Hello!
Well, I know first hand that the ATI cards make problems with OpenGL in some situations. E.g. non power of two 3d- textures are not supported correctly which causes issues for us with VoluMedic, if the user sets a non power of two texture in VoluMedics OpenGL display options. Nothing we can do about it. ATIs OpenGL- driver support still is not the best, if you ask me, even though it has seen some improvements lately. I am still hoping that they will do something to fix that. Their DirectX drivers are really good, but that does not really help with LW.

Back on topic: Multithreading support in LW is much better now with LW9.0.
Setting LW to two threads almost halfs rendertimes compared to a single thread on my Pentium D 820.
CU
Elmar