Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 120

Thread: intel vs AMD - Benchmark 2019

  1. #31
    Super Member Kryslin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Prescott, IA
    Posts
    1,534
    As an experiment, I took the scene, and added a 12th Pod, with Skin material / FiberFX on it, in the center of the scene (Which is the worst possible place for it, IMHO...)
    Render time was about what I expected - 1h 6m 34.8s.
    --------
    My Scripts for Lightwave
    Intel Core i7 960 @3.20 Ghz, 24 GB ram, EVGA 6GB GTX980Ti "Classified" driving 2 x HP LA2405.

  2. #32

    Yeah, FiberFX rendertime can make a person cry. Mostly because of turtle speed AntiAliasing.

    LW vidz   DPont donate   LightWiki   RHiggit   IKBooster   My vidz

  3. #33
    Still...Absolute Amateur scallahan1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Salem, NH
    Posts
    176
    Just tried it on my main AvaDirect tower

    Intel Core i7-6950X (10c/20t)
    Evga GTX 1080 FTW
    32gb G.Skill 3300 ram
    Asus Strix X99 Gaming board
    Cooler Master AIO liquid cooler
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	renderTest_3m27s.png 
Views:	43 
Size:	402.7 KB 
ID:	146046

    Steve

    3min,27sec LW 2019.1.2
    Last edited by scallahan1; 09-23-2019 at 08:35 PM. Reason: Added time and lw version...

  4. #34
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    98
    4m21s (261.4seconds) with 32 threads

    System: Dell Precision T5610
    Graphics card: Quadro 4000
    CPU: Dual Xeon E5-2670 @ 2.6GHz
    Mem: 64Gb (1333MHz)

    Lightwave 2018.7

  5. #35
    www.Digitawn.co.uk rustythe1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    england
    Posts
    1,322
    Quote Originally Posted by scallahan1 View Post
    Just tried it on my main AvaDirect tower

    Intel Core i7-6950X (10c/20t)
    Evga GTX 1080 FTW
    32gb G.Skill 3300 ram
    Asus Strix X99 Gaming board
    Cooler Master AIO liquid cooler
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	renderTest_3m27s.png 
Views:	43 
Size:	402.7 KB 
ID:	146046

    Steve

    3min,27sec LW 2019.1.2
    not bad at all for an old i7
    Intel i9 7980xe, Asus Rampage Vi extreme, 2x NVIDIA GTX1070ti, 64GB DDR4 3200 corsair vengeance,
    http://digitawn.co.uk https://www.shapeways.com/shops/digi...ction=Cars&s=0

  6. #36
    Registered User Rayek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,484
    13m58s *sigh*

    System:
    LW 2019.0.1, Windows 10
    i7 920 overclocked to 3.6ghz
    GTX 1080 8GB
    48GB RAM
    Asus P6T Deluxe v1

    Nigh on 11 years old rig. And it shows in CPU render times.

    I added an HDR environment to improve the overall look, and just that HDR resulted in a 15m38s wait.

    To compare GPU rendering on my machine, I rebuilt the same scene for rendering in Cycles: around 1m30s on my GTX 1080 with a similar quality and HDR lighting. Which made me feel a bit better about my rig :-)
    I also rendered combo GPU&CPU, but because the CPU just can't keep up it actually slows down the overall result to 2m18s in Cycles!

    Just for kicks I rendered the scene in Eevee, which renders in 00M019s (1.9 second). Not comparable since anisotropic materials remain unsupported for now, and the glass renders differently. Still, the quality is very nice.

    Anyway, I think it is time to consider investing in a new CPU sometime next year. And research E-Cycles, which I hear renders 2-15 times faster than regular Cycles, and on par with or faster than Octane.

    It is a shame Lightwave's new renderer is CPU only, because I have a feeling it would be quite fast if it would support GPU. It also shows that an old rig like mine is able to keep up somewhat as long as it's GPU rendering. It's been running solid for almost 11 years now - my longest time on any one computer since I started out on a C64 in the 80s!
    Win10 64 - i7 [email protected], p6t Deluxe v1, 48gb, Nvidia GTX 1080 8GB, Revodrive X2 240gb, e-mu 1820. Screens: 2 x Samsung s27a850ds 2560x1440, HP 1920x1200 in portrait mode

  7. #37
    www.Digitawn.co.uk rustythe1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    england
    Posts
    1,322
    Quote Originally Posted by Rayek View Post
    13m58s *sigh*

    System:
    LW 2019.0.1, Windows 10
    i7 920 overclocked to 3.6ghz
    GTX 1080 8GB
    48GB RAM
    Asus P6T Deluxe v1

    Nigh on 11 years old rig. And it shows in CPU render times.

    I added an HDR environment to improve the overall look, and just that HDR resulted in a 15m38s wait.

    To compare GPU rendering on my machine, I rebuilt the same scene for rendering in Cycles: around 1m30s on my GTX 1080 with a similar quality and HDR lighting. Which made me feel a bit better about my rig :-)
    I also rendered combo GPU&CPU, but because the CPU just can't keep up it actually slows down the overall result to 2m18s in Cycles!

    Just for kicks I rendered the scene in Eevee, which renders in 00M019s (1.9 second). Not comparable since anisotropic materials remain unsupported for now, and the glass renders differently. Still, the quality is very nice.

    Anyway, I think it is time to consider investing in a new CPU sometime next year. And research E-Cycles, which I hear renders 2-15 times faster than regular Cycles, and on par with or faster than Octane.

    It is a shame Lightwave's new renderer is CPU only, because I have a feeling it would be quite fast if it would support GPU. It also shows that an old rig like mine is able to keep up somewhat as long as it's GPU rendering. It's been running solid for almost 11 years now - my longest time on any one computer since I started out on a C64 in the 80s!
    I wouldn't say too bad, just look through the first two pages (your still about equal to some much newer tech), my old 980 still turns on and runs some stuff (I think it even has win8 on it), they were great at the time, I heard a rumor e-cycles will eventually be included for free in blender any way, so if you did mean research as in to buy it, you might be able to hold off for free?
    Intel i9 7980xe, Asus Rampage Vi extreme, 2x NVIDIA GTX1070ti, 64GB DDR4 3200 corsair vengeance,
    http://digitawn.co.uk https://www.shapeways.com/shops/digi...ction=Cars&s=0

  8. #38
    Registered User Rayek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,484
    Quote Originally Posted by rustythe1 View Post
    I wouldn't say too bad, just look through the first two pages (your still about equal to some much newer tech), my old 980 still turns on and runs some stuff (I think it even has win8 on it), they were great at the time, I heard a rumor e-cycles will eventually be included for free in blender any way, so if you did mean research as in to buy it, you might be able to hold off for free?
    E-Cycles is to be included in Blender? I'll check that. Thanks!

    My machine works fine for all the work I do, and I tend to sit out new generations of CPUs until I'd get a 3-4 times faster CPU render time. But this time I decided to invest in a good GPU instead, since for my work I don't need large amounts of render memory (so far).

    That said, I notice the old 920 is starting to get bogged down on tasks like video encoding, which I happen to have to do a lot lately.
    Win10 64 - i7 [email protected], p6t Deluxe v1, 48gb, Nvidia GTX 1080 8GB, Revodrive X2 240gb, e-mu 1820. Screens: 2 x Samsung s27a850ds 2560x1440, HP 1920x1200 in portrait mode

  9. #39
    Pär Mostad Meshbuilder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Gavle Sweden
    Posts
    284
    5m 8s on an old Mac Pro 12-core "trashcan".

    (5m 1s with higher render tile size)

  10. #40
    CPU : AMD 2990WX - 64 Go RAM
    Rendering time : 88s (1m28s)

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Capture.JPG 
Views:	31 
Size:	81.7 KB 
ID:	146047
    Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX 32 Cores - 64 Threads / 2 x GTX 1080 + 1 GTX 1070 / Windows 10 x64 / 64 Go Ram / LW2019 & Softimage user

  11. #41
    www.Digitawn.co.uk rustythe1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    england
    Posts
    1,322
    Quote Originally Posted by Meshbuilder View Post
    5m 8s on an old Mac Pro 12-core "trashcan".

    (5m 1s with higher render tile size)
    Yea, tile size is the only factor that is an issue with any benchmark scene as its more hardware dependant than scene, and it can be 2-20 seconds, if I set to 256 it renders in less than 1min for me, so that's over 15 seconds saving on a small render
    Intel i9 7980xe, Asus Rampage Vi extreme, 2x NVIDIA GTX1070ti, 64GB DDR4 3200 corsair vengeance,
    http://digitawn.co.uk https://www.shapeways.com/shops/digi...ction=Cars&s=0

  12. #42
    Super Member Kryslin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Prescott, IA
    Posts
    1,534
    I changed 3 settings - I turned on Brute Force GI (with 4 samples), turned off Interpolated, and changed the Adaptive AA threshold to 0.05, and the filter radius to 0.51.

    Cut 4 minutes off my render time.

    Then I went and added the FiberFX test object... and made the render 9 times longer.
    --------
    My Scripts for Lightwave
    Intel Core i7 960 @3.20 Ghz, 24 GB ram, EVGA 6GB GTX980Ti "Classified" driving 2 x HP LA2405.

  13. #43
    My I9 9820X standardclock needed 2min57 to complete the render.

  14. #44
    Super Member vncnt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    1,619
    Quote Originally Posted by vncnt View Post
    10m 49s
    Attachment 146039

    Intel Core i7-3770K @3.50 GHz, cache: L1=256kB L2=1.0 MB L3=8.0MB, 32 GB RAM
    NVIDIA GTX690, driver 431.60, dual monitor 60Hz: Acer 1920x1080 + NEC PA27LW 2560x1440
    Asus P8Z77-V premium, Readyboost enabled
    Wifi disabled, Ethernet disabled, Thunderbolt disabled
    Windows 10 Pro 1903 x64
    LW2019.1.3
    Now I realized that this PC should almost retire (at least for rendering activities in 2D and/or 3D) I finally dared to overclock with the Auto Tuning function in Asus TurboV EVO.
    When set to "Extreme" it claims a "28%" higher CPU frequency.

    Instead of 3.50 GHz, its peak velocity is now 4.48 Ghz.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	perf.jpg 
Views:	32 
Size:	148.3 KB 
ID:	146052

    Render duration dropped to 9m 10s.
    That's 18% faster rendering speed.

    I could observe a small amount of disk I/O during rendering while memory usage didn't change significantly.
    I'm still using a mechanical harddisk (+ a 30GB SSD Readyboost buffer) instead of a proper full SSD systemdisk but I suspect it won't speed up the render process enough to make me spending EUR 329,- on a Samsung 860 EVO 2TB SSD.

    I was thinking about a RTX2080 Ti for EUR 1439,- to be used with Vegas Pro 17 but I still doubt whether I should do that for what I do at home (@ work it's a different story), mostly animation activities, not too much rendering. I can even wait a little longer with video rendering, at least for the short clips that I usually do.

    Even if the render speed of others make me jealous, I save EUR 1768, a lot of time and bypass environmental issues by not upgrading.
    So don't feel bad if you're in the same situation.

  15. #45
    Registered User Rayek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,484
    Quote Originally Posted by vncnt View Post
    Even if the render speed of others make me jealous, I save EUR 1768, a lot of time and bypass environmental issues by not upgrading.
    So don't feel bad if you're in the same situation.
    True! By not upgrading my main rig (which before I did every two or so years) and focusing on swapping out bottle-neck components for new ones (such as the old HDD for a PCI-based SSD raid card and the GTX 1080), I saved many thousands of $$$. And I also considered against a full upgrade due to becoming more sustainability-oriented these last 15 years.

    Which is why I now primarily use GPU rendering, since it bypasses the main bottleneck for rendering in my current rig.

    Instead of focusing on hardware, I've been looking more and more at improvements in rendering software. A render engine such as Eevee is more than enough for many type of jobs, and it renders blisteringly fast. Same could be said for Lightwave with Unreal.

    I did a bit more research regarding e-cycles. It will become part of regular Cycles, but it may take a while (a year or so). In the meantime it costs $99. Investing this will give me a minimum of 2x-4x faster rendering on my current rig, and thus no need to invest in new hardware. And less energy is used (shorter render times), which is better for my ecological footprint.

    In one of the other threads it is suggested that Cycles may be coming to Lightwave. With these patches it will give Octane a run for its money.
    Win10 64 - i7 [email protected], p6t Deluxe v1, 48gb, Nvidia GTX 1080 8GB, Revodrive X2 240gb, e-mu 1820. Screens: 2 x Samsung s27a850ds 2560x1440, HP 1920x1200 in portrait mode

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •