PDA

View Full Version : LW9 - AMD x INTEL - Benchmark



silviotoledo
12-16-2006, 06:10 PM
If you have a Top Intel or AMD computer, please help me to create a Benchmark render LW 9

I am using the latest LW9.x Beta version

Scene - Lighting - Microwave.lws - from lightwave content directory

My computer: Intel Core 2 6600 2.4 Ghz 2GB ram

1 Thread -
2 Thread - 6m59s

ericsmith
12-16-2006, 06:15 PM
It would probably be wise to keep this within the realm of the release version of 9.

You may be treading on NDA issues with this.

Eric

Sensei
12-16-2006, 06:15 PM
Are you aware of http://www.blanos.com/benchmark/ ?

silviotoledo
12-16-2006, 06:33 PM
Thanks Erick. I think you can do the test on 9.0 or 9.x version and time will be the same. The comparisson I wanna have is the difference between AMD and Intel.
Sensei, I visited the site, but it has no tests with the latest processors like Intel Core 2 ( DUO new line with 2 cores ) Intel QX6700 ( Quad ) and AMD
FX-74

Scene - Lighting - Microwave.lws - from lightwave content directory

My computer: Intel Core 2 6600 2.4 Ghz 2GB ram Win XP

1 Thread - 9m16s
2 Thread - 6m59s
4 Thread - 6m54s
8 Thread - 6m8s

silviotoledo
12-16-2006, 06:45 PM
So, I am confused:

a) Two cores have not the velocity of 2 processors?

b) Once the my processor have only 2 cores, why does it get faster with 8 threads?

mgomes
12-16-2006, 06:47 PM
Hi Silvio,

My computer is HP nx9420, Core Duo (centrino) 1.87GHz, 1GB RAM

1 Thread 13m 18s
2 Thread 9m 50s

cagey5
12-16-2006, 07:18 PM
AMD 4600 X2 Classic 6m 42s
Perspective 1m 24s

2 threads on both.

silviotoledo
12-16-2006, 07:19 PM
Once with 8 Threads my computer was faster and had the better performance, I did this test:

I oppened 2 lightwaves at the same computer and rendered the same microwave.lws scene

1 Thread - 9m33s 9m24s
8 Thread - 9m23s 9m18s ( around the same velocity as 1 thread for each )

connerh
12-16-2006, 10:14 PM
If you're rendering with the classic camera, then that'll happen. With the classic cam, the render doesn't get split up over and over again as it's rendering, so it doesn't utilize all of your processing power. The perspective camera does, so you'll experience better speeds with the perspective camera if you leave the number of threads at the number of available cores.

Extent
12-17-2006, 12:58 AM
I would strongly reccomend that anyone who's doing benchmarks grab the LWautobench app from the Blanos site and use it to automatically submit to the database. Even if you want to post here it helps everyone out, and it's a nice way to keep all the benchmarks as absolutely consistant as possible

stib
12-20-2006, 05:19 AM
Hey, there are plenty of core2 6600s on that blanos.com site. They don't call them core2 duos for some reason, but they're E6600's so I can't imagine what else they'd be.

silviotoledo
12-24-2006, 05:23 AM
Just use LW9 version. I wnat to make comparisson between the processors speed only, so we can choose a better machine to work.

avkills
12-24-2006, 07:53 AM
Get a MacPro, then you can run OS X and Windows. ;) Although currently, LW9 renders a bit slower on OS X than XP, but that will soon be corrected when NT releases the Universal Binary version of LW.

-mark

Kuzey
12-25-2006, 04:20 AM
Get a MacPro, then you can run OS X and Windows. ;) Although currently, LW9 renders a bit slower on OS X than XP, but that will soon be corrected when NT releases the Universal Binary version of LW.

-mark

I dying to see how well the UB version does against the Windows version...I have my fingers crossed :thumbsup:

Kuzey

avkills
12-25-2006, 07:44 AM
I dying to see how well the UB version does against the Windows version...I have my fingers crossed :thumbsup:

Kuzey

It sounds as though Chilton is not going to let us down. :D

-mark

Stooch
12-25-2006, 07:56 AM
whats the point of this? it has been very well established that currently the core processors are the fastest. This is wasting space imo.

silviotoledo
12-26-2006, 05:05 PM
Ok, core duo processors are fastest, but maybe the difference is relative if you compare pricing, configuration, and so on.

TSpyrison
12-27-2006, 07:03 AM
I'd like to see the quad core results...

Stooch
12-28-2006, 09:27 PM
if you draw on the benchmarks ran by tomshardware.com with 3dsmax and use previous benchmarks to establish how that relates to LW then my guess is that the quad core will be fast as balls, there is essentially a linear increase in computing power with minimal impact on idle power consumption and thermal envelope. so you can extrapolate these gains to LW, AMD is far behind in both power and value for the money departments at this point. I am a huge fan of the quadcore and have already made the decision to obtain one for myself as my home solution. However be advised that the current quadcore power management features are far from optimal and there are more gains to be had in efficiency if not speed.

mav3rick
12-29-2006, 10:33 AM
My computer: Intel Core 2 6600 2.4 Ghz 4GB ram OC @ 3.1ghz

8 threads : 4m 44s
4 threads: 5m 21s

mav3rick
12-29-2006, 10:41 AM
16 threads: 4min 16sec

connerh
12-29-2006, 11:11 AM
What version of LW and what camera?

mav3rick
12-30-2006, 02:55 PM
9.2 Classic Camera

Sensei
12-30-2006, 07:35 PM
What version of LW and what camera?

But it's OC - over clocked.. from 2.4 GHz -> 3.1 GHz..

mav3rick
12-31-2006, 05:29 AM
yup