PDA

View Full Version : Can Lightwave use what Apple's Quads offer?



The Hardcard
08-26-2006, 08:29 PM
So, I am taking the plunge. In the the next few weeks, I am going to buy a used Quad G5. Sometime after, I will be getting Lightwave, with which I have some experience. I have followed this discussion forum someone but there are some details I want to be clearer on.

Both of Apple's quad-core Macs can take relatively large amounts of RAM. My question various how much the light weight to benefit from this. I realize that those doing very large polygon counts would be the main, I hope to be doing this soon.

So does Lightwave benefit from 4, 8, or even 16 gigabytes of RAM? I actually know that as a 32-bit app, it wouldn't see it all now, but I anticipate that future 64-bit Mac versions will run on the Quad G5. Can Lightwave max out available RAM?

Also, are there any benefits from trying to get one with a day Quadro 4500?

Thanks in advance for any and all info

Captain Obvious
08-26-2006, 09:37 PM
Once Leopard is out and Lightwave goes 64-bit for Mac, it will be able to use all 16 gigs of RAM.

At the moment, both Layout and Modeler can use 4 gigabytes each.

The Quadro 4500 is a waste of perfectly good money.

gatz
08-26-2006, 11:27 PM
The Quadro 4500 is a waste of perfectly good money.


Unless you need to drive two 30" displays. But if you've got that kind of green you wouldn't be wringing your hands over a measly Quad purchase.;)

rg

Captain Obvious
08-27-2006, 04:40 AM
Honestly, I don't think I'd even want to work on two 30" displays. IMAX is cool and everything, but it wouldn't make for a very ergonomic workstation.

amigo
08-27-2006, 08:08 AM
Maybe if you sit in front of one (30" screen) and use it for a bit, you might change your mind :D

I have been using my 30" display for about two weeks now, and each time I go to work to a dual 20" I kinda feel "inadequate". The desktop space at work just feels so crammed and constrained, but that's just me I guess...

Chilton
08-27-2006, 09:39 AM
As LightWave on the Mac progresses, we will increasingly be taking advantage of platform specific technologies. Your investment in multi-core/multi-processor, 64-bit hardware will pay off.

-Chilton

The Hardcard
08-27-2006, 02:10 PM
I thought about this as I considered the Quad G5 versus Quad Xeon, especially since a new Xeon is not much more than a used G5.

At Apple's current sales pace, it will likely be 5 or 6 years before Intel Macs are in the hands of more users than PowerPC Macs, if not longer. It will probably be another 2 to 3 years in addition to that before PowerPC ceases to be a large portion of the Mac installed base, and therefore significant part of the revenue of Mac developers.

On top of that, unless there is a technological leap in microprocessor design, all software for the next several years will run on both the G5 and G4. There will be the isssue of raw speed for the G4 in two or three years. I have been using a single 1.25 GHz G4 for 3D design. Not at all desirable in speed, but still tolerable.

Point being, I think it will be many years before we see Intel-only software, at least ones because of technological limitations of G4s and G5s. Naturally except for special cases like Boot Camp and Parallels.

Captain Obvious
08-27-2006, 03:13 PM
Apple will keep supporting the G5 for several years. I wouldn't be surprised if even Mac OS 11 supported PowerPC. Leopard will even support the G3 processor, despite the fact that no Macs with G3s have been made in several years.

frank1024
08-28-2006, 02:53 PM
I have two Quad Core Macs, and aversion of LW8 on one and LW9 on the other. I also have two Dual Core Macs. I transfered my copy of LW8 from my Dual Core to my Quad Core. The speed difference is dramatic. Twice as fast with renders on the Quad Core.

I have LW9 on my other Quad Core and in Discoverey mode (the dongle does'nt work for LW9 on my Quad Core. According to this forum others are experiencing this problem too.) LW9 runs renders the scene file about 10 to 15% slower. Go to this link to see the specs.

http://www.clubphotogallery.com/images/LW_Render.html

Yeah Quads are faster with LW8. Slower with LW9. I would wait a few months and get a Pro Mac and the UB version of LW9. By then Newtek hopefully will fix the bugs in LW9 and it should scream on a Quad Intel Mac.

Captain Obvious
08-28-2006, 03:30 PM
Yeah Quads are faster with LW8. Slower with LW9.
Stuff that renders in a few seconds per frame are not good indications of performance.