PDA

View Full Version : New Intel Core i7 (Nehalem) reviews with Lightwave benchmarks



Jason Hawkins
11-04-2008, 01:54 AM
FYI - Intel Core i7 (Nehalem) reviews were released today, and I found a couple of the reviews have benchmark data with Lightwave 9.3. Linked here for your enjoyment:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2333773,00.asp
http://www.planetx64.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1435&Itemid=1&limit=1&limitstart=7

The quick summary is that the slowest Core i7 920 (2.66 Ghz) outperforms the current top Core 2 QX9770 (3.2 Ghz) by 11-18% in these particular Lightwave benchmarks. Not bad for a ~$300 cpu...

The top of the line Core i7 965 (3.2 Ghz) destorys every other contender, beating the similar clock speed Core 2 QX9770 (3.2 Ghz) by 25-31% in the same benchmarks. It even beats the dual socket Skulltrail V8 (2 x QX9775 at 3.2 Ghz) system listed on one of the benchmarks.

BigHache
11-12-2008, 10:44 PM
Thanks for the post. Interesting to see what's coming out soon.

virtualcomposer
11-13-2008, 08:50 AM
will this be integrated on mac processors as well?

COBRASoft
11-13-2008, 10:35 AM
I'm wondering if this I7 965 CPU is more interesting to buy 'now' than buying Dual QUAD XEON. The price is obvious, but what would be the speed difference for rendering in LW? Any1?

calilifestyle
11-13-2008, 11:27 AM
so is this Core i7 a duel core or single core... and when will it be out.

calilifestyle
11-13-2008, 11:34 AM
so i just read that there will be 3 types and all 3 are quad core. so why is it cheaper.

calilifestyle
11-13-2008, 11:43 AM
http://www.core-i7.com/features-overview-table.html

not bad. to bad i just placed an order for new pc.

BigHache
11-13-2008, 03:05 PM
will this be integrated on mac processors as well?

Probably. Whether it's something that makes MacWorld we probably won't know until MacWorld. Haven't been keeping up with the rumors myself as of late.

praa
11-13-2008, 07:30 PM
http://newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=91652

Jason Hawkins
11-23-2008, 12:48 AM
Core i7 systems are out now and available from the usual suspects - Dell, Gateway, etc. You can also go the build your own route as individual cpus and motherboards are for sale at places like newegg.

As for rendering speed, a single Core i7 965 will be about the same as current dual Core2 quad xeon machines (the dual socket Skulltrail V8 in one of the benchmarks above is basically a rebranded dual quad xeon setup). Of course the dual server version of Core i7 itself will be out early next year and will obliterate pretty much any other setup...

cresshead
11-23-2008, 05:20 AM
so to clarify,one of the new intel i7 chips that's quad core and hyperthreaded is about the same as 2 xeon quadcore chips you'd see in a mac pro?

coremi
11-23-2008, 06:11 AM
thats corect

cresshead
11-23-2008, 06:18 AM
cool!

so if [when] apple update their mac pro's to this chip/memory/mother board we'll see 16 threads at work on lightwave renders and get a 2x performance gain over the current mac pro's at same clock speeds?

coremi
11-23-2008, 10:50 AM
probably yes, but it needed to be based on Nehalem platform, Core i7.

dmack
11-23-2008, 12:58 PM
How do they compare speed wise to the quad core xeons (54xx)?

Jason Hawkins
11-25-2008, 08:16 PM
The processor used in the dual socket Skulltrail V8 (2 x QX9775 at 3.2 Ghz) system is basically a rebranded Xeon 5482. The QX9770 is also basically the same CPU, but is only validated for use in single socket systems. You can find this info by looking at the Intel processor number data sheets here:
http://www.intel.com/products/processor_number/chart/index.htm

QX9775: 12MB L2 cache, 3.2 GHz, 1600 MHz bus, Dual socket support
X5482 : 12MB L2 cache, 3.2 GHz, 1600 MHz bus, Dual socket support
QX9770: 12MB L2 cache, 3.2 GHz, 1600 MHz bus, Single socket support
i7-965 : 8MB L2 cache, 3.2 GHz 6.4 GT/s QPI bus, Single socket support

In the planetx64 benchmark link at the start of the thread, there is a dual socket Skulltrail V8 (2 x QX9775 at 3.2 Ghz) system. The single socket core-i7 965 beats that dual socket system in the listed lightwave benchmark. In the extremetech link, the single socket core-i7 965 handily defeats the QX9770 in the lightwave benchmark.

To answer to your question about how core-i7 compares to quad core xeons (54xx):
a single i7-965 blows away any single 54xx series cpu by itself, and a single i7-965 will beat all but the highest clocked 54xx (5492,5470) in a dual config. The lower clocked i7-940 and i7-920 will also blow away any single 54xx series cpu by itself, and will beat the majority of 54xx in a dual config.

When the Xeon version of core i7 with dual socket support is released early next year, it should dominate everything.

Hope this helps. :-)

thomascheng
11-26-2008, 11:35 PM
This is awesome, but it also makes me sad since I got my Mac Pro 6 months ago. Now a single quad core with hyperthread is making feel I paid too much. Oh well, it made me feel good for 6 - 9 months. I wonder if I can swap my mac CPUs with these new ones.

coremi
11-27-2008, 01:01 AM
u can't, it is a different platform, the new one are much bigger in size, different socket, LGA 1366 instead of LGA 775.

dmack
11-27-2008, 07:00 AM
Hi Jason, sorry for the late reply - thanks for the info. Do you have any info on how early next year the xeon versions will be out?

dmack
11-27-2008, 07:20 AM
Wow, just did a bit of googling. It seems the Xeon equivalent will be almost twice as fast!! That's the chip to hold out for I think!

JonW
11-28-2008, 12:23 AM
I have just ordered from the local “Chinese” shop to custom build 2 new computers. I would have ordered the 965 but AU$ has turned into Monopoly money recently & computer components have gone up about 50%. Down from almost 1:1 with the US$ a few months ago, Australia imports everything!

I am getting 1 of each 920 & 940 each with 12gb ram each.

In a week I will let you know how slow my E5335 & E5450 gas guzzling V8s are.

dmack
11-28-2008, 04:13 AM
March next year will see the Xeon i7's ship in systems.......

zapper1998
11-28-2008, 09:14 AM
OH wow
I just drool every time I read all this stuff ...
I hate it, ya buy a new system and 6 months, u are outdated passed up ... arrgggg

Those new " i7 " chips look and sound sweet, I just hate the new naming " i7 " .....

JamesCurtis
11-28-2008, 05:36 PM
Considering buying one of the systems that have a Core i7 Processor 920 from my local Microcenter store [model: PowerSpec G401]. Processor speed is 2.6GHz. I assume it should work okay with Lightwave3D, right?

It comes with Windows Vista Business 64bit, 6GB of DDR3-1333 RAM expandable to 8GB, 2 500GB SATA drives, 8 in 1 Media Card Reader, DVD writer [which I plan on puting a Bluray burner in its place], and an ATI Radeon 4850 [would rather have an Nvidia card, BTW], and plenty of other stuff [see link].

Price is around $1600 [not including monitors].

Other specification info is in the link below.

http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0300893

Up till now I've had a 32bit system, and it would be my first new machine in about 6 years. I would appreciate any advice, buy - yes/no if this machine would fit the bill for LW and Video Editing, etc. and if there might be any issues or gotchas other than the ones I noted I'd change.

At this time building my own system is not an option.

Thanks in advance for any help.

cresshead
11-28-2008, 06:04 PM
my advice >> stay away from ATi cards

i have a 64bit system [quadcore win vista ultimate] you can run 32bit apps just fine as well as 64bit apps

JamesCurtis
11-28-2008, 06:12 PM
As I said, I am planning on replacing the ATI with an Nvidia one, and sell or give the ATI to someone.

cresshead
11-28-2008, 06:24 PM
when you install lightwave..best to install BOTH 32bit and 64bit as some plugins were not recompiled to work in lw64bit plus lightwave 64 cannot render to quicktime as there's no 64bit version of quicktime as yet.

other than that 64bit is pretty transparent...doesn't feel any different than 32bit...except larger scenes/videos/files with 64bit

mikala
11-28-2008, 08:07 PM
Funny my Firegl V7600 card works just fine with XP64 and LW.

TripD
11-28-2008, 08:19 PM
OH wow
I just drool every time I read all this stuff ...
I hate it, ya buy a new system and 6 months, u are outdated passed up ... arrgggg



Now I just wanna see how long I can make my thoroughly obsolete system last! I'm thinking of picking up a Radeon 3850 AGP version just so I feel like my old system isn't too old.

Quiet1onTheSet
11-28-2008, 11:43 PM
Considering buying one of the systems that have a Core i7 Processor 920 from my local Microcenter store [model: PowerSpec G401].
I've never seen a negative issue with my ATI video cards at all, James, FWIW.

Interesting, your mention of Microcenter. Went to their Fairfax, VA store on 11/29/2008, and snatched up two 32GB USB flash drives at $59.99 each, and also, at that very same price, snatched up an Antec model "Nine Hundred" Gaming PC case. Utterly fantabulous deals to be had in that store "Black Friday" 2008.

www.microcenter.com (www.microcenter.com)

mav3rick
11-29-2008, 07:21 AM
talking on overclocking this beast?

http://uneit.com/2008/11/02/intel-core-i7-at-5ghz/

this is top one....
slowest one 2.66 i7 can OC at 3 ghz without single problem or special setup....

zapper1998
11-29-2008, 07:43 AM
talking on overclocking this beast?

http://uneit.com/2008/11/02/intel-core-i7-at-5ghz/

this is top one....
slowest one 2.66 i7 can OC at 3 ghz without single problem or special setup....

Holy Cow ... batman ...

wow

The Dommo
11-29-2008, 09:00 AM
There's talk of there being 6 core and 8 core Nehalams coming out around the March 09 time too. So with hyperthreading that would be 16 threads from one CPU.

Ace :D

BigHache
11-29-2008, 09:17 AM
I'm interested, but I looked at cost and it would take me around $1k to upgrade my system to Core i7. That's what I spent on my initial system all together. This was only looking at mobo, CPU, and RAM.

JamesCurtis
11-29-2008, 12:00 PM
"when you install lightwave..best to install BOTH 32bit and 64bit as some plugins were not recompiled to work in lw64bit plus lightwave 64 cannot render to quicktime as there's no 64bit version of quicktime as yet." - cresshead

So, you're saying to install both LW 32 and 64bit on the 64bit Vista Business OS as this machine is only 64bit as far as I know. Vista 64 Business pre-installed.

Am I correct?

Auger
11-29-2008, 06:59 PM
"when you install lightwave..best to install BOTH 32bit and 64bit as some plugins were not recompiled to work in lw64bit plus lightwave 64 cannot render to quicktime as there's no 64bit version of quicktime as yet." - cresshead

So, you're saying to install both LW 32 and 64bit on the 64bit Vista Business OS as this machine is only 64bit as far as I know. Vista 64 Business pre-installed.

Am I correct?

You got it!

zapper1998
11-30-2008, 09:39 AM
There's talk of there being 6 core and 8 core Nehalams,
coming out around the March 09 time too.
So with hyperthreading that would be 16 threads from one CPU.
Ace :D

OMG... 12 cores or 16 cores ..
this is so cool......
I guess i can wait, saving the pennies as they say....

JonW
12-04-2008, 12:19 AM
Bench marks using: http://3dspeedmachine.com/?page=3&scene=31

This is just a quick test as I am flat out at the moment.
I have tried this on my old dual 533 Mac & it just crashes LW.

My supplier was playing around with the 920 chip, & has over clocked the chip, he forgot to reset it..... I said I am happy with it just the way it is! The 940 has not been over clocked.

5335 gi 54.9, et 3:26
i7 940 gi 33.3, et 3:05
i7 920 gi 32.2, et 3:02 (over clocked by supplier)
5450 gi 35.3, et 2:09

Every box is running XP64, 12gb ram each except the 5450 (16gb & a Velociraptor 300gb main HD). All boxes have the page file set Min & Max the same, at twice the physical ram before any programs were installed.

using Lightwave 9.5
http://3dspeedmachine.com/?page=3&scene=31

JonW
12-04-2008, 12:44 AM
I should have mentioned

5335 ram FB dimm ecc 667
5450 ram FB dimm ecc 800
920 & 940 DDR II 1600

Fausto
12-04-2008, 12:55 AM
when you install lightwave..best to install BOTH 32bit and 64bit as some plugins were not recompiled to work in lw64bit plus lightwave 64 cannot render to quicktime as there's no 64bit version of quicktime as yet.

other than that 64bit is pretty transparent...doesn't feel any different than 32bit...except larger scenes/videos/files with 64bit

Is this exclusively related to Lightwave rendering to Quicktime? I use AE CS4 and writing to Quicktime is no issue on Vista 64 business. And Quicktime works fine as do nearly all 32 bit apps on Vista 64.. I did notice that Lightwave running under Vista64 doesn't have an render option for .mov.

Weepul
12-04-2008, 03:18 AM
5335 gi 54.9, et 3:26
i7 940 gi 33.3, et 3:05
i7 920 gi 32.2, et 3:02 (over clocked by supplier)
5450 gi 35.3, et 2:09

So...what? Was the i7 940 system 1 CPU (4 cores, 8 with HT) or 2 CPU? The E5450 system? This seems to show that the i7s are a step backward in performance unless it was one quad-core vs. two quad-cores, in which case it will depend on how well dual core systems scale.

romrom74
12-04-2008, 03:28 AM
So...what? Was the i7 940 system 1 CPU (4 cores, 8 with HT) or 2 CPU? The E5450 system? This seems to show that the i7s are a step backward in performance unless it was one quad-core vs. two quad-cores, in which case it will depend on how well dual core systems scale.

well indeed! that's not what I expected coming from the I7.
I've just benched my Q9550 oc at 3ghz and got 2m37s rendering this scene! (36sec for gi and the rest for...the rest)...Anybody fancies benchmarking an I965 ???

Lightwolf
12-04-2008, 04:00 AM
So...what? Was the i7 940 system 1 CPU (4 cores, 8 with HT) or 2 CPU? The E5450 system? This seems to show that the i7s are a step backward in performance unless it was one quad-core vs. two quad-cores, in which case it will depend on how well dual core systems scale.
The i7 can only be a single socket system, otherwise it'd be a Xeon.
On the other hand I assume the E5450 to be a dual socket system unless they forgot to mount one of the CPUs ;)

Cheers,
Mike

Weepul
12-04-2008, 04:25 AM
The i7 can only be a single socket system, otherwise it'd be a Xeon.

*smacks forehead* Right...

Well, romrom74's mark and the way I've seen multi-CPU systems mostly scaling at about 1.5x for double the chips, and it's not looking like a huge advance from that...?

JonW
12-04-2008, 04:32 AM
5335 & 5450 are V8s, I am just finishing a test, I'll post in about half an hour, the 5450 has already finished!

JBT27
12-04-2008, 04:33 AM
There's talk of there being 6 core and 8 core Nehalams coming out around the March 09 time too. So with hyperthreading that would be 16 threads from one CPU.

Ace :D

Rumour like that on top of genuine announcements of new cpus, coupled with around about the time anyone wants to buy new kit, is a good signal to sit back and wait if you can.....if you can :D

We've completely missed buying quadcore so far, so next year we'll either buy into this new stuff, or hang on a bit to get quadcore even cheaper.....that's the plan anyway.....

Julian.

JonW
12-04-2008, 05:48 AM
i7 real world benchmark

I have done 2 tests. 1 of my own architectural models & “3d speed”.
I can’t show you the whole image, only a crop still to be finished, it’s a new house, 5+ floors high, lift, deep water frontage. boat (very big, or rather very very big!) & sea (based on “Ice cube tutorial”). Including a “nursery of trees” for the garden - Onyx, Dosch Cars, area lights. lots of glass (blurred reflections “RS 16” & transparency), water fountains (particle emitters), swimming pool. Also a lot of interior including fire place (volumetric lighting).
Everything is animated including fire & water.


LW 9.5, 13m polys, 2444 mb (lots of large bit maps)
AA 8,
Radiosity 500%, 196, 16, 46%, 4, 100, 100%, Final Gather
RRL 5, RP 5
SML set at 2000mb
3200 x 1800 pixels (scales nicely to an A3 to take the sharpness off the edges)


The i7 920 was over clocked by the supplier & he forgot to change it back. I’m not complaining! Everything running on XP64. These are all very clean computers as I do every thing else on my old Mac including Photoshop.


E5335, 8gb 667 ecc, gi 1h30m et 5h40m

E5335, 12gb 667ecc, gi 39m49s et 4h02m28s wtm 9.64gb
E5450, 16gb 800 ecc, gi 26m19s et 2h24m25s wtm 9.34gb
i7 920, 12gb 1600 ddr2, gi 31m18s et 3h23m01s wtm 8.31gb (over clocked)
i7 940, 12gb 1600 ddr2, gi 31m42s et 3h27m20s wtm 8.31gb

The E5xxx are V8s (I don’t know why anyone would buy a single CPU server) & the i7 are 4 bangers.
The 4 banger boxes are a lot hotter the the server boxes.... they need another fan or 3!

http://3dspeedmachine.com/?page=3&scene=31

E5335, 12gb, gi 54.9 et 3:26
E5450, 16 gb, gi 34.3 et 2:09 (WD Velociraptor 300gb HD)
i7 920, 12gb, gi 32.2 et3:02
i7 940, 12gb, gi 33.3 et 3:05

And while all this was running my UPS “MGE Evolution S3000” was chewing up 1500 watts of “100% Green” electricity.

Lightwolf
12-04-2008, 05:56 AM
Wow, that basically means that a single i7 940 (2.8 GHz if I remember correctly) is roughly as fast as two E5450s quads which run at 3GHz.

Not too shabby, especially considering that a basic i7 920 rig costs less than a single E5450 CPU.

Cheers
Mike

P.S.: Because I'm picky: A V8 isn't a server box. It was designed for gamers with too much spare change.

JamesCurtis
12-04-2008, 12:48 PM
Finally got my new Comp with the 920 i7 Processor [the one listed in my earlier post]. Before I can get LW installed and working on this machine I need to get my Old Dongle swapped for a USB one as the machine has no Parallel port. I may talk with NT about getting a 2nd seat of LW though if I can get it for an upgrade cost. Will need to talk to Customer Service on this.

Will keep everyone posted.

Ivan D. Young
12-04-2008, 12:55 PM
I believe that 6 core Xeons are out already. you don't hear much because they are like $2,000 dollars, a little too expensive. But for the folks with a MB capable they are a direct replacement for the previous Quadcore that they replace. That could be 12 cores now!

JonW
12-04-2008, 08:20 PM
The 6 core Xeons have been out for a long time in the 7xxx series, & they are quick.... & expensive! Anandtech reviewed a 24 core beast some time back.
So the 5xxx should not be too far away.

robk
12-04-2008, 09:27 PM
E5335, 12gb 667ecc, gi 39m49s et 4h02m28s wtm 9.64gb
E5450, 16gb 800 ecc, gi 26m19s et 2h24m25s wtm 9.34gb
i7 920, 12gb 1600 ddr2, gi 31m18s et 3h23m01s wtm 8.31gb (over clocked)
i7 940, 12gb 1600 ddr2, gi 31m42s et 3h27m20s wtm 8.31gb

I thought the i7's only worked with ddr3 ram. Why are you using ddr2 ram?

JonW
12-04-2008, 10:14 PM
A correction, the ram on the two new computers (920 & 940) is “ddr3”. There was a typing error on the invoice & I made the mistake of just copying it. The MB is a Gigabyte GA-EX58-DS4

JonW
12-08-2008, 09:28 AM
I over clocked the 940 to 3.5ghz based off notes from Anandtech, I was not game to go higher as I was stabbing around in the dark for the first time not having the opportunity to try this in the past due to the nature of the server mother boards I have been using, also the 12 gb of ram was running extremely hot to say the very least (like FB-DIMMs would if they didn’t have ducted air which the S5000XVN MB has) before quickly pointing another fan at the ram.

One would obviously need to put a few more fans in the case & also duct some air through the ram similar to a server box or somehow mount a fan on top of the ram.

Anyway the interesting bit......

My architectural scene mentioned earlier.

E5450, 16gb 800 ecc, gi 26m19s et 2h24m25s @ 3.0 ghz
i7 940, 12gb 1600 ddr3, gi 31m42s et 3h27m20s @ 2.93 ghz
i7 940, 12gb 1600 ddr3, gi 26m21s et 2h55m23s @ 3.5 ghz

3dspeedmachine

E5450 gi 34.3 et 2:09
i7 940 gi 33.3 et 3:05 @ 2.93 ghz
i7 940 gi 28.7 et 2:39 @ 3.5 ghz

JonW
12-09-2008, 06:35 PM
Update

Now after getting a hint of what is happening with OC, with my limited experience..... None! Both mother boards are running cooler than pre OC with an extra couple of fans, and 1 above the ram as it was getting a bit hot around that area with 12gb.

E5450 gi 26:19 et 2:24:25 @ 3.0 ghz
i7 940 gi 25:41 et 2:49:05 @ 3.68 ghz OC
i7 940 gi 31:42 et 3:27:20 @ 2.93 ghz
i7 920 gi 30:37 et 3:15:32 @ 3.15 ghz OC
E5335 gi 39:49 et 4:02:28 @ 2.0 ghz

3dspeedmachine

E5450 gi 34.3 et 2:09 @ 3.0 ghz
i7 940 gi 26.8 et 2:29 @ 3.68 ghz OC
i7 940 gi 33.3 et 3:05 @ 2.93 ghz
i7 920 gi 30.5 et 2:51 @ 3.15 ghz OC
E5335 gi 54.9 et 3:26 @ 2.0 ghz

I am sure many of you could do a lot better than this.

clagman
12-10-2008, 11:44 AM
Wow! I am advising my group to wait a bit though. For the workstations we are going to adopt the 6 or 8 core version of the i7 (nehalem xeon yes?) then the old hardware gets folded into the render farm.

JonW
12-11-2008, 07:16 AM
Up date - Refinement

Architectural scene.
E5450 gi 26:19 et 2:24:25 @ 3.0 ghz
i7 940 gi 24:59 et 2:42:39 @ 3.772 ghz*
i7 940 gi @ 3.703 ?

3dspeedmachine
E5450 gi 34.3 et 2:09 @ 3.0 ghz
i7 940 gi 25.8 et 2:24 @ 3.818 ghz ?
i7 940 gi 26.1 et 2:25 @ 3.795 ghz #
i7 940 gi 26.2 et 2:29 @ 3.772 ghz*


* rendered this scene 3 times without any problems & wtm was showing 8.3 gb ram been used, but it crashed half way through when I scaled the scene from 3200x1800 up to 12800x7200 now using 11.8gb of ram.
? When rendering @ 3.818 ghz the architectural scene crashed near the end of “gi” 8.3gb ram.
#Crashed just before the end, approx. 2 hours into the render, doing the architectural scene using 8.3 gb ram.
? Didn’t do an 8.3gb scene, just did it as 11.8gb (reduced AA & Bounces etc) gi 1:37:44 et 7:54:30 & all ok.

As mention earlier I am new to all of this. All the above times were achieved with very conservative voltage increases, taking heed of a few comments from Anandtech about clock speeds & ratios. With the 920 using the same conservative figures it has been perfectly ok at 3.15 ghz.

http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3471&p=12
http://www.anandtech.com/weblog/showpost.aspx?i=521

From what I have read my understanding is that it is a bit harder to get as high clock speed with 12gb than with a smaller quantity of ram.

If I can get a little bit of extra speed at minimal risk & 24/7 running when required & not having high voltage heaters in the room, I believe its worthwhile doing some simple tweaks using the stock parts with the only addition a few extra fans.

JonW
12-17-2008, 11:30 PM
Over clocking still going well.

If your renders have a large percentage or GI it is worth considering an i7 chip. Its giving my E5450 V8 a lot of bites on the bum.

I am looking forward to a V8 i7. If you have the work get any i7 now if you are running an old computer.

dgrigo
12-27-2008, 09:39 PM
Hi Guys,
I got my new I7 940 stock , with 6gb ram, and vista xp64.
Lightwave 9.6 x64 rc3, did the radiocity from
http://3dspeedmachine.com/?page=3&scene=31
and got 2.17 sec render time.
You can check how it goes against Xeon's on the link.

/wave
:D

Jason Hawkins
12-27-2008, 09:47 PM
Thanks for benchmarks. They continue to show that a single mid-range i7 cpu is about as fast or faster than the 5450 setup (2 cpus). Talk about a monster speedup for a fraction of the cost of the 5450 setup.

The Intel Xeon 55xx series parts (i7/Nehalem derived) will be out in March. These are Quad-core parts and will work in a dual socket motherboard to give you the equivalent of a V8 i7 (2 cpus - 8cores - 16 threads). The scaling of these parts should be excellent due to the Quickpath Interconnect technology that Intel is using to communicate between the cpus - (much, much better than the ~1.5x scaling of the old FSB based products).

JamesCurtis
12-30-2008, 08:19 AM
"I got my new I7 940 stock , with 6gb ram, and vista xp64.
Lightwave 9.6 x64 rc3, did the radiocity from
http://3dspeedmachine.com/?page=3&scene=31
and got 2.17 sec render time." - drigo

Don't you mean 2.17 min?

I tried the benchmark scene on my i7 920 Vista 64 and got 3 min 24 sec.

Unless something is terribly wrong...

JonW
12-30-2008, 05:29 PM
I was a bit intrigued how 2.17 was achieved, I thought there was a few typos here & though what dodgy components have I got to only get 2:24 @ 3.818 ghz. I didn’t do the test with 9.31 as in general I am not going to use it any more.

The best I could do with a 940 was 2:24 @ 3.818 ghz, but being able to use 12 gb of ram, 2:29 @ 3.68 ghz was the best. So for me 2:29 is my bench mark figure on a 940 when I compare with E5450, but it does have 16 gb ram & a 300gb Velociraptor HD, but in this small test its not that much of an issue, as I think it was using less than 1gb of ram, but they are variables.

Earlier post (48) my architectural render, I was a bit short on ram for my E5335, with 8gb, 1h30m/5h40m, chucked in another 4 gb 39m49s/4h02m. It shows you need enough ram for the scene.

Any test needs to compare apples with apples, I did this test on my E5450 for both 9.31 & 9.5, & 9.31 was substantially quicker that 9.5 for this particular test. So if a test is done any variables need to be clarified, eg different LW version, over clocking etc so the information is of any use, otherwise one is wondering what is wrong with their own computer.

The 2 new processors 940 & 920 have been running for over 200 hours now, & have about a week to finish the job, using 9gb of ram @ 3.68 & 3.15 ghz.

If you have work that needs to be done now these new CPUs will same a lot of time.

dgrigo
12-30-2008, 07:33 PM
Oh my .. 2.17 sec , meant 2min .17 sec and yes that was from the 9.6 64 beta sorry if i mislead you guys..

Dunno how i get 2.19 , hitting render always comes with some second's difference tho.. i never got more that 2.21 min.

dgrigo
12-31-2008, 01:57 AM
Oh my .. 2.17 sec , meant 2min .17 sec and yes that was from the 9.6 64 beta sorry if i mislead you guys..

Dunno how i get 2.19 , hitting render always comes with some second's difference tho.. i never got more that 2.21 min.

@neverko According to that thread http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93350
i don't see a problem discussing outside in OB forum.. imo!
Oh and btw all this benchmarks was for 9.5 and my link was going direct to 9.5 64 bit Benchmarks.
If you want to check go here:
http://3dspeedmachine.com/?page=3
and you can select benchmark for different Version of the software.:thumbsup:

dgrigo
12-31-2008, 02:09 AM
Oh my .. 2.17 sec , meant 2min .17 sec and yes that was from the 9.6 64 beta sorry if i mislead you guys..

Dunno how i get 2.19 , hitting render always comes with some second's difference tho.. i never got more that 2.21 min.

@neverko According to that thread http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93350
i don't see a problem discussing outside in OB forum.. imo!
Oh and btw all this benchmarks was for 9.5 and my link was going direct to 9.5 64 bit Benchmarks.

If you want to check go here:
http://3dspeedmachine.com/?page=3
and you can select benchmark for different Version of the software.:thumbsup:

And another thing.. dunno if its real as i have not tested or did those test myself.

You can check it here http://3dspeedmachine.com/?page=3&scene=29
and here http://3dspeedmachine.com/?page=3&scene=31

Lightwave 9.3 64 bit : 1m 53s Jon Intel Xeon 5000 Sequence - E5450 (4 cores) 3 2 16 Windows XP 64 SP 2

Lightwave 9.5 64 bit : 2m 10s Jon Intel Xeon 5000 Sequence - E5450 (4 cores) 3 2 16 Windows XP 64 SP 2

At least on this scene according to what was posted 9.5 is slower than 9.3. Ok i cheated and used 9.6 :D

/cheers
I am happy with the i7 940 and sorry for the double post

JonW
12-31-2008, 06:32 AM
On my E5450 V8, 3dspeed test was a lot quicker on 9.31 than it was on 9.5. But for my typical architectural renders 9.5 is a lot quicker than 9.31, & for me this is all that matters.

The best thing about the new processor is the GI times, they are just simply fast! And we are all doing a lot more GI in our renders now. There are some threads somewhere about finding the balance between GI & ET, if you can get a bit more done in GI all the better.

My architectural scene & 3dspeed posted earlier (56), the 940 @ 3.68 ghz the GI is faster than the E5450 V8. If one didn’t want to OC even a “lousy” 920 you will have a processor right on the tail of the high end 54xx V8. These can be built for a lot less money.

Some nearly identical frames in the sequence I am currently doing, around 31m on the 940 & 27m on the E5450 with about 1m of GI. The 4 boxes are all now using about 10.2gb of ram.

PS. Our fire works were not bad. I hope you all have lots of work for 2009.

romrom74
12-31-2008, 09:26 AM
Well if I carrefully follow all render times posted here I don't see any noticeble performance boost between my Q9550 actually overcloked at 3.41 ghz (fsb1600 etc), renderering 3dspeedmachine scene in 2mn37s (and btw very cheap) and an I940 oc at about same speed.

JonW
12-31-2008, 02:45 PM
These 2 new boxes I got are in principle my first single processor boxes, even my extremely prehistoric Mac is a dual processor, & other boxes I have had were Athlon MPs etc. I would have waited for a dual i7 but I needed some more horsepower now, hence the single processor boxes & thus was able to provide a limited V8/ 4 banger comparison based on my typical 3d architectural rendering, which is probably pretty run of the mill.

Information on normal & or over clocked CPUs & if anyone has a range of CPUs they have run their own benchmarks across would be very useful to allow everyone to make the right decision on getting a new computer or keeping their old one. Hopefully there is some more helpful input here.

jpizzini
02-03-2009, 08:26 AM
Just thought I'd follow up here. I'm in the process of doing some major overhauls to www.3dspeedmachine.com in order to make the site more user friendly. As suggested, you will be able to specify whether or not your machine is overclocked. Also, the database will be tracking more hardware components so we can have a better understanding of the results.
Later on down the line users will have the ability to compare benchmarks side by side for even more clarity.
I also have alot of other cool ideas in mind for the site in the coming months. I should have most of the changes listed above by mid February so stay tuned. Thanks for participating!
-Joe Pizzini
www.3dspeedmachine.com

hrgiger
02-03-2009, 01:50 PM
Anyone know where I can find the best information (hopefully recent) on overclocking the new i7's? I'm still deciding which i7 to go with and I've heard that even the 920 can reach 4GHZ if done correctly. That would be a great chip for the price. Is that wise and will it shorten the life of the processor?

Ztreem
02-03-2009, 02:16 PM
I have two computers that is overclocked and they are still working fine, one 10 years old and another 4 years old. I don't think you have to worry about shorten the life of the CPU. Just make sure you have a good enough cooling.

hrgiger
02-03-2009, 03:20 PM
I went with the coolermaster HAF case. Which is better, liquid or air cooling? Both? And is there a way to monitor the temp at which your processor is running?

richcz3
02-03-2009, 03:34 PM
I have two computers that is overclocked and they are still working fine, one 10 years old and another 4 years old. I don't think you have to worry about shorten the life of the CPU. Just make sure you have a good enough cooling.True. I have systems over 5 years old I've handed to family members still going strong.
But concerning older MBs, the capacitors could go first. Still, not OC related. :)

warrenwc
02-03-2009, 04:55 PM
I went with the coolermaster HAF case. Which is better, liquid or air cooling? Both? And is there a way to monitor the temp at which your processor is running?

If you're overclocking, liquid will probably cool better- Luckily that HAF case is designed to make either easy; Room for the radiators & pumps & even a plug on the top so you can fill the system without getting inside the case.
Most new MBs come with temp monitors (not REALLY precise but the only better option is to install a sensor that actually touches the proc(Major pain in the rear & risky).

hrgiger
02-03-2009, 06:01 PM
If you're overclocking, liquid will probably cool better- Luckily that HAF case is designed to make either easy; Room for the radiators & pumps & even a plug on the top so you can fill the system without getting inside the case.
Most new MBs come with temp monitors (not REALLY precise but the only better option is to install a sensor that actually touches the proc(Major pain in the rear & risky).

Yeah, the HAF case showed up tonight. I noticed the plug on the top first thing. Do you often have to replace the fluid? Sorry, I'm not up on this new stuff.

Animapper
02-03-2009, 07:14 PM
Anyone know where I can find the best information (hopefully recent) on overclocking the new i7's? I'm still deciding which i7 to go with and I've heard that even the 920 can reach 4GHZ if done correctly. That would be a great chip for the price. Is that wise and will it shorten the life of the processor?

Check back to my post from two weeks ago. The specs I gave will get you in for a 920 that can overclock like a madman. If you use these parts you can comfortably get 3.8 gHz on air. HTH

JonW
02-03-2009, 09:18 PM
My 920 & 940 over clocked are using the standard heat sink, I just put a couple of extra fans in the cases & an 80mm fan on the ram with a few cable ties here & there, not elegant but it works.

They have been running 24/7 for 6 weeks rendering, & got through a few hot days, one being over 40C outside & hotter inside around the computers.

My 5335 V8 I feel was more likely to pack it in.

If you are running these things in normal room temperatures, a few cheap extra fans is all you need. If you have 12gb ram, cable tie an 80mm fan on top of the ram.

Ztreem
02-04-2009, 11:53 AM
Yeah, the HAF case showed up tonight. I noticed the plug on the top first thing. Do you often have to replace the fluid? Sorry, I'm not up on this new stuff.

The liquid system I have (Zalman reserator) should be refilled with new liquid once a year, but I waited two and it worked flawless and I didn't get any algae growing in the system. My system is almost fan less and very silent, love water cooling.

Andyjaggy
02-04-2009, 12:35 PM
My i7 comes tomorrow. Woot.

hrgiger
02-04-2009, 12:39 PM
As soon as I get my tax refund and paycheck, both this friday, I'll be ordering the processor and motherboard.

phillydee
02-05-2009, 09:37 AM
wow, just found this thread.

For OC'ing (dunno if anyone's covered this here yet) I've gone over to the Xtreme systems forum (http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/index.php ) and followed a few guides.

I have to say using the Asus P6T Deluxe has been the easiest OC so far. I know my OC's are modest by comparison, but I'm on air cooling with a thermalright 120 Ultra HSF and I don't really want to see my new i7 get torched. But I have to say it's so F*ing fast compared to my last Core2Duo E6700 OC.

Hrgiger I'm happy for you. It's like Christmas all over again man.

Andyjaggy
02-13-2009, 02:32 PM
Holy crap. Those i7 chips are blaaaaaaaazing fast. I was expecting it to beat my Q6600 by a pretty fair margin but what I wasn't expecting was it to be nearly twice as fast.

I ran the Cinemark benchmark and my Q6660 gets roughly 1100.

I then ran it on my new i7 machine. 2050. Freak. Wow. I'm sold on this beast.

hrgiger
02-13-2009, 07:40 PM
Hey, which video cards are you guys using? I just put together my new system with a P6T Asus, i7 920, DDR3 tri channel 1600 and the GeForce 285 OC. But I'm having a problem with playing video full screen and wondered if it's really the video card or if maybe I set something up wrong? I posted a thread on it in community.

phillydee
02-13-2009, 08:00 PM
What are you getting--artifacts? Or staggered video?

hrgiger
02-13-2009, 08:13 PM
No, the video is lagging. The audio stays constant but the video lags.

phillydee
02-13-2009, 09:38 PM
What type of video--uncompressed, Mpeg2, Xvid, h264 etc.... also what player? Windows Media player etc. did you try multiple players?

FWIW, I've experienced some issues with Vista and certain video render methods cause the player and OS headaches.

For video codec playback in vista, I generally use the Vista Codec pack found at www.free-codecs.com--this will generally work well with any player. VLC is a good player that plays anything straight out of the box, I use BSPlayer currently.

I currently use a Gforce 9800GX2 OC but probably will upgrade soon. I'm guessing you're running Vista 64, correct?

phillydee
02-13-2009, 09:41 PM
Forgot to mention, watch out for heat with your video card. I've had to crank my card fan's RPMs up to about 80% for everyday use just because the card was so hot. I am pretty sure your card runs slightly cooler than mine, but it's worth a look. I'm sure you have good ventilation on the case--or if you're watercooling you still have adaquate airflow for your RAM and video card.

hrgiger
02-13-2009, 09:48 PM
Thanks phillydee, I'll try the codecs. I tried QT player and it seemed to play fine in full screen. Media player has been playing the files too, but as soon as you go to full screen, it starts lagging. The few files I was trying to play were DivX files. And yeah, I'm running Vista Ultimate 64.

phillydee
02-13-2009, 09:57 PM
Most likely because WMP11 has full-screen render issues. I don't know why, I dumped using it back when it was version 7 because of it's redraw and software-rendering limitations, especially at full-screen.

VLC is a good player if you want to test issues such as this--download the zip, not the install, unpack it to a folder and fire it up. If you really want to get your hands dirty you can call up different rendering methods and see which one makes the system/video choke, and that may narrow it down (if you still want to use WMP 11 that is..)

another idea you can try is go into preferences of the QT player, and just toggle some of the rendering options on or off--if you get similar results in fullscreen it may help you narrow down what options you need to 'look for' in WMP11.

Those are just some things off the top of me head. Hopefully you'll be able to sort this out and it won't dampen the i7 excitement....

phillydee
02-13-2009, 09:59 PM
Ha--just thought of this, but you can install the codec pack, and then assign the Quicktime player to playback AVi files.... if it doesn't lag playing MOV files, AVI files should render the same way as long as the QTplayer can access the codec info (which it should be able to, I think).

I know folks who have done this, it supposedly works...

mojotribe
02-22-2009, 04:37 PM
IMO actually the best buy is a Q9550 with lower power consumption than I7 and almost as fast as i7 940. Of course, i mean overclocked.
My result on 3DSpeedmachine test: 2m 27s @ 3.59Ghz (stepping E0).

nlightuk
02-22-2009, 05:00 PM
VLC is a good player if you want to test issues such as this--download the zip, not the install, unpack it to a folder and fire it up. If you really want to get your hands dirty you can call up different rendering methods and see which one makes the system/video choke, and that may narrow it down (if you still want to use WMP 11 that is..)

another idea you can try is go into preferences of the QT player, and just toggle some of the rendering options on or off--if you get similar results in fullscreen it may help you narrow down what options you need to 'look for' in WMP11.

As an alternative to the other media-playing utils you have tried, you may also wanna check out the KMPlayer. I recently switched to using this for video and MP3 playback over Media player/QT/Winamp. It's a pretty full-featured little app....oh, and it's free, which always helps! :)

You can get the latest build here:
http://cdn.pandora.tv/KMP/Download/beta/The_KMPlayer_1434.exe

HTH...

Pavlov
04-25-2009, 12:48 PM
So i got a pair of I7 940, Asus P6, 6gb ram (corsair 1600), xp64. Cooling is prett ok, 4 big fans into these.
It runs nicely, but i have some issue in overclocking with Asus software. As soo as i raise anything, machine freezes.
I tried on bios but it refuses to overclock (it says OC had no success and it suggests to load bios default before starting)
Are there some caveats to take in account ?

Paolo

IMI
04-25-2009, 12:55 PM
So i got a pair of I7 940, Asus P6, 6gb ram (corsair 1600), xp64. Cooling is prett ok, 4 big fans into these.
It runs nicely, but i have some issue in overclocking with Asus software. As soo as i raise anything, machine freezes.
I tried on bios but it refuses to overclock (it says OC had no success and it suggests to load bios default before starting)
Are there some caveats to take in account ?

Paolo

The newer Asus boards have a jumper which in one position allows OC and in another position blocks it and you won't see the advanced features in the BIOS. Check your Asus manual to see where it's at and what position.

Aside from that, the Asus overclocking software tools just suck, don't even bother.

COBRASoft
04-25-2009, 03:35 PM
I have a Gigabyte x58-Extreme and I OC'ed my 920 to 3.57GHz @1.38v for the moment with a Mugen II cooler (air). I should be able to go higher, but my system freezes by every try so far. My RAM is doing 1.7 GHz @ 1.65v (is ok, they are tested by Kingston 1.6 GHz @1.65v.

sammael
04-25-2009, 06:51 PM
There's talk of there being 6 core and 8 core Nehalams coming out around the March 09 time too. So with hyperthreading that would be 16 threads from one CPU.

Ace :D

ooohhh! me me

Pavlov
04-26-2009, 01:57 PM
Imi, thanks. i didnt know about the jumper thing, i'll give it a look.
I managed to bring these at 3.2 ghz, and now they are just a 10% slower than a dual Xeon 3ghz on Kray. Dual xeon finishes a render in 100 sec, these in 110 sec. Pretty good !

Paolo

JonW
04-27-2009, 01:51 AM
Pavlov,
At some stage I am looking at getting a replacement for my E5450 V8. Are you saying that a pair of i7s (920 or 940 etc) will work instead of a pair of expensive Xeons, in a Xeon motherboard. One can save a few thousand dollars or build 2 V8s for the price of one V8 Xeon box!

If this is possible I will get a new V8 sooner rather than later, as one i7 is almost as quick, & quicker if overclocked than a E5450 V8 at pre processing (radiosity). Radiosity is where all the processing is these days.

My scene
E5450 gi 26:19 et 2:24:25 @ 3.0 ghz
i7 940 gi 25:41 et 2:49:05 @ 3.68 ghz OC
i7 940 gi 31:42 et 3:27:20 @ 2.93 ghz
i7 920 gi 30:37 et 3:15:32 @ 3.15 ghz OC
E5335 gi 39:49 et 4:02:28 @ 2.0 ghz

3dspeedmachine LW9.5
E5450 gi 34.3 et 2:09 @ 3.0 ghz
i7 940 gi 26.8 et 2:29 @ 3.68 ghz OC
i7 940 gi 33.3 et 3:05 @ 2.93 ghz
i7 920 gi 30.5 et 2:51 @ 3.15 ghz OC
E5335 gi 54.9 et 3:26 @ 2.0 ghz

Pavlov
04-27-2009, 04:38 AM
Well, yes.
With a very small overclocking it's easy to reduce the gap to 10%. I saw some getting much higher overclocking here, so i think you can even get *better* rendertimes on a I7 than a E5450 V8.
I've just tested a Kray interior scene with I7 overclocked at 3.2, and it took 118 sec, while 8 core took 106 sec.
Before, i was rendering a movie on BNR (i previously saved GI cache so there was no GI computing): 8 cores took 190 sec sec, i7 *NOT* overclocked took 240 sec.

Paolo