PDA

View Full Version : more than 8 threads for lw9xxx?



cresshead
09-29-2006, 09:29 AM
hi with the nr imminent release of quadcore intel xeons and probably a simialar thing for amd lightwave 9's choice of upto 8 threads has now hit a wall....when we get quad cpu quadcore chips in 2007 with an avalaiable 16 cores how will lightwave 9 make use of them when it can only be selected with a maximum of 8 threads?...

juts looking to future proof lw9x

Lewis
09-29-2006, 09:51 AM
Good Question :).

But IIRC Core 2 Quadro (Kentsfield) is 4 cores and not 8 and I'm not sure will Hypethreading be enabled (to make it look like 8 CPUs) in those first CPUs (probably only at Extreme version) so it's still "safe" with 8 threads in LW ;).

cresshead
09-29-2006, 10:15 AM
intel's keynote speach this week saif that their quad core xeon chips shold start to ship in nov 2006..and a macpro or a dell precision should be able to hold them no problemo as they are the same pin config so 8 core pc's are just a few weeks away...and i'll hazzard a guess that a motherboard that can hold 4 of these cpu's [16cores] is nr ready...that'll make 8 core's non selectable doesn't it with the current lightwave 9.0?

cresshead
09-29-2006, 10:17 AM
also have a look here..intel's roadmap to 80 cores in 60months...

http://news.com.com/Intel+pledges+80+cores+in+five+years/2100-1006_3-6119618.html

cresshead
09-29-2006, 10:33 AM
okay so 80 core maybe a bit of a pipedream...but 8core is here now...and 16core either with 2x 8 core or 4 x 4core will be here in 2007...time for lightwave to keep up...just make that dropdown list add in 16 threads, 24threads and 32 threads to futue proof it for a couple of years...

cresshead
09-29-2006, 10:43 AM
http://i.n.com.com/i/ne/p/2006/084_550x367.jpg

ohh eer!:D

cresshead
09-29-2006, 11:00 AM
:agree:

16,32 threads would be cool to see in 9.xx

SP00
09-29-2006, 12:05 PM
Why a drop down box, why not just autodetect the thread count?

cresshead
09-29-2006, 12:12 PM
why a drop down list?...because that's what lightwave has right now...it just top's out at 8 threads...we'd like to see it top out higher to keep inline to where multicore pc's are heading in 2007

Scazzino
09-29-2006, 12:12 PM
Auto-detecting is fine as a default, but the user should still be able to override it and select the number of threads they want.

On my Dual Processor PowerMac G5 I sometimes set it to one thread if I want to render in the background while doing other things. I'll also set it to eight threads since it often renders faster with eight threads even though I only have two CPUs... even with the new Perspective Camera...

Intuition
09-29-2006, 12:50 PM
The main reason I would threads user specified is due to some plugs having crash issues with multiple threads. One would want to be able to change thread # for these instances.

Also, a good idea would be an option added in the # thread pulldown to detect threads. SO you get the best of both worlds.

Maxx
09-29-2006, 12:51 PM
And some plug-ins still are not multi-threaded, which means that an automated thread detector without user override would, in effect, kill these plugs.

Intuition beat me to it!

Scazzino
09-29-2006, 01:04 PM
Also, a good idea would be an option added in the # thread pulldown to detect threads. SO you get the best of both worlds.

LW9 already defaults the threads to the number of CPUs it detects when first launched, until the user changes it...

Lewis
09-29-2006, 02:31 PM
I'd rather FIRST see modeler recognize multiple CPUs/GPU than having 16/32 Threads in layout :). You always can start 2 layouts for rendering (workaround yes but it works) but you can't model in two modeleres at same time ;).

pixym
09-29-2006, 06:33 PM
Good Question :).

But IIRC Core 2 Quadro (Kentsfield) is 4 cores and not 8 and I'm not sure will Hypethreading be enabled (to make it look like 8 CPUs) in those first CPUs (probably only at Extreme version) so it's still "safe" with 8 threads in LW ;).

Right now Dual core Woodcrest has no Hyperthreading anable... So the next generation will surely do the same.

pixym
09-29-2006, 06:35 PM
Do not forget Reverse Threading that consists in making all the core being recognized as only one...

Dexter2999
09-29-2006, 06:49 PM
will the cores be addressable as render nodes for distributed rendering?

hrgiger
09-29-2006, 07:12 PM
Yeh, but it doesn't prove a thing. They might as well show a full warehouse of linked racks that make up a super computer. Only time will tell if they can shrink that to a few milimeters, instead of a foot.



Are you kidding me? If I could have an 80 core processor, I'd take up a whole garage if that's what it took. Who is complaining about a foot?

lots
09-29-2006, 07:26 PM
also have a look here..intel's roadmap to 80 cores in 60months...

http://news.com.com/Intel+pledges+80+cores+in+five+years/2100-1006_3-6119618.html
Keep in mind that Intel's 80 core CPU is never going to hit the mainstream market. They showed it off as a tech demo and inhouse research project. No doubt that in the future, we will see designs derrived from the lessons learned from this research CPU crop up in upcoming Intel chips. Just dont expect to see the 80 core CPU in its current form (80 very simple cores, even simpler than Cell's SPEs). However, we may begin to see a few fast general purpose cores tied to many smaller specialized cores (a la Cell). All of this is still a ways off.

EDIT: This 80 core CPU isn't even x86 compatible. The cores are very simple. Which is why 80 of them can fit on a single die slightly larger than your average CPU. Intel's intentions for the CPU are to develop techniques for manufacturing multiple cores on a single die. Packing this many simple cores into one die allows the researchers to find out the best way to organize and connect the cores. Techniques like laser transmitted by silicon (think the bandwidth of fiber built into a CPU die with the latency of cache memory, and light travels faster than electricity... http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2841) to feed the 80 hungry cores, TSV interconnects (a type of 3D interconnect to connect cores sandwiched together rather than side by side, http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060926-7840.html) to allow each core to talk to the other, etc. There are many things this research project can teach intel. But the CPU its self will not make an appearance on the market.

lots
09-29-2006, 07:29 PM
Do not forget Reverse Threading that consists in making all the core being recognized as only one...
This was dismissed a while ago as rumor and speculation. After all it did come from The Inquirer ;)

RedBull
09-29-2006, 08:50 PM
I'd rather FIRST see modeler recognize multiple CPUs/GPU than having 16/32 Threads in layout :). You always can start 2 layouts for rendering (workaround yes but it works) but you can't model in two modeleres at same time ;).

There are not a lot of instances in Modelling where dual processers can be harnessed. Parrallell algorithms are hard to translate to a lot of situations.
Hence the reason why pretty much only rendering benefits multicores.

Modeler does recognize and support multiple threading and LW9 has indeed increased it's support for SMP. I've looked into loading vertices and certain number crunching operations, and there's a reason why you don't see it done much, despite a lot of us seeing that with multiprocesser architecture it's inevitable that more things do become MP aware.

I was hoping Modo would of taken the inititive to be the first to boast
"Multthreaded modeling tools" but they missed the opportunity.
I'm sure you will see some of the little guys like Hex or Silo be first to do some multiprocessor modeling tools. LW Dynamics could with some effort be parrallellzed...

I notice forthcoming Macs have Mutliprocesser aware OGL. and Windows does not..... Dagnabbit..

As for the thread counts... More than 8 will possibly be necessary in the next 12 months possibly for the Classic Camera, however the perspective will
be fine for a few more years i think. But due to LW9's threading abilities,
i'm sure the ability to add more than 8 threads is quite possible, and trivial to implement if need be anyway.

lots
09-30-2006, 11:16 AM
I notice forthcoming Macs have Mutliprocesser aware OGL. and Windows does not..... Dagnabbit..
Nvidia's drivers have been multithreaded for quite some time. (6 months at least) This is why there were initially some problems with LW performance, recent Nvidia drivers, and dual core Athlon 64 X2s.

RedBull
10-01-2006, 03:04 AM
Nvidia's drivers have been multithreaded for quite some time. (6 months at least) This is why there were initially some problems with LW performance, recent Nvidia drivers, and dual core Athlon 64 X2s.

Very little performance was gained from the multithreading of the Nvidia drivers. And only the OGL portion was MT.

The new MacPro's have done some more optimizations to their implentation
through their LLVM. In some areas making large performance increases.

But basically Nvidia will push QuadroSLI for better OGL performance
in 3D applications. As they make more money that way.

lots
10-01-2006, 08:07 AM
Heh, I never said it was a useful performance improvment ;) It will be interesting to see what Apple does to multithread OGL...

pixym
10-01-2006, 05:59 PM
Just an old still I found on the web that will be very usual in the next days...

tjacobs
10-01-2006, 09:51 PM
16 virtual cpu cores and only one gig of ram. :)