Quad core versus dual 6 core render question

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by strausd, Jun 8, 2010.

  1. strausd macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #1
    So I was talking to my friend about the new MPs and that they should have two 6 core processors in it. I plan on getting one for rendering scenes with Maya and doing stuff on AE, FCP, and the CS5 master collection. We were talking about his computer, which is one quad core processor. He was saying that render times on Maya wouldn't be very different when comparing a quad core versus two hexa cores. I don't agree with him but would like someone elses opinion on this.
     
  2. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #2
    If the apps support 12 cores (which I think they do), it can be up to 3 times faster (depending on the clock speed though)
     
  3. strausd thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #3
    Thats what I thought. But he is extremely hard headed and still believe that there won't be a big difference. How many cores does Maya support?
     
  4. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #4
    It supports at least 8 cores (fast googling) but I'm pretty sure it does in fact support all 12 (maybe even 24 threads) as it, if something, is CPU intensive
     
  5. strausd thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #5
    Would you happen to know how many cores FCP and AE support? I have heard that Photoshop can only handle 2...
     
  6. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #6
    FCP and AE can handle n cores, which means as many are available (AE can even utilize Hyper Threading IIRC). :D
     
  7. austinpike macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Location:
    MN
    #7
    If there isn't a big difference with multi-cores, why did he spend the $ on a quad core vs dual core...? ;P

    I can't speak to Maya specifically, but in my experience the render speed of pretty much any 3D software will increase nearly linearly with the number of processors. 12 cores will quite simply kick ass.

    edit: apparently Maya may have once had an an 8-core limit. At any rate, that has been removed.
    http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=799784
     
  8. strausd thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #8
    24 virtual cores :)

    Do you know if Maya supports hyperthreading?
     
  9. GiantDolphin macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2010
    #9
    It really depends on what renderer you are using. Although I do not use Maya's native render engine, it should use every core available to it. I've used RenderMan and proprietary GI renderers through Maya and they use every processor or core available. You can also send jobs to a network of computers and use multiple computers to render one job just the same as using multiple cores on a single machine. This has been possible for as long as I have used Maya which goes back to version 1.0 (but maybe not with the native renderer that I know of). So yes. There is no finite number of cores or processors at which Maya is limited to using. More cores means faster renders (given same clockspeeds). Two cores are twice as fast as one core. You can do the math easily from there. Although, again, I have no direct experience using Maya's native render engine. You don't want to really use that anyway. I believe Mental Ray will use all cores, too, but I haven't done enough with MR to find it's limits.
     
  10. strausd thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #10
    And GPU doesn't help render time with Maya unless using hardware render, correct? If true, should I go for better CPU before GPU?
     
  11. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #11
    Really? I've heard FCP is single core and only the compressor multi-core. Do you have any link? I know you know your stuff but I wan't some proof so I can use it in future :p

    I'm not sure how well does Maya support GPU but upgrading GPU is a lot easier than upgrading CPUs (and a lot cheaper + you can have different ones). Most apps still more or less poorly support GPUs but CPU has always done the hard work
     
  12. Macinposh macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Location:
    Kreplakistan
    #12

    Seconded! Intrested as well,as based on my own experiences,the 100-200% seems to be the max?!
     
  13. J the Ninja macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2008
    #13
    FCP tends to not fully utilize every core. It may be it is not using all, and the workload is being bounced around. Who knows. Compressor can chop a job up and use multiple transcoder processes (only if you submit to a "cluster"), so it will scale pretty much infinitely.

    Also, with crazy numbers of threads, sometimes problems come up even when something should be embarrassingly parallel. Luxrender (open source unbiased renderer, for those who don't know) was found to have issues scaling past 8-10 threads on a single instance, since all the cores doing the raytracing are having to wait on the one handling the "film".
     
  14. beaker7 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2009
    #14
    Maya Software renderer tends to scale well up to ~5 cores before trailing off.

    Mental Ray will scale nearly linearly with physical cores, and you'll get about a 25% boost from HyperThreading on top of that.

    Other modern path-tracing renderers that plug into Maya such as Maxwell and Fry will render nearly linearly even with virtual cores. (thus, clock for clock, a machine with 12 physical/24 virtual cores will be roughly 6x faster than a 4physical/no HT machine)

    Most animation and simulation functions in Maya scale relatively poorly, where a 12 core machine will see little speed increase clock-for-clock over a 4 core.
     
  15. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #15
    I recall an article from some ~'07 on Barefeats that indicated it was. And I also recall seeing something here on MR too.

    At any rate, I got curious, and re-examined this a bit, and you may be right. It definitely needs further investigation, and I didn't find what I was looking for on Apple's site at all (though I didn't spend a lot of time at it, just searched the specs and discussion threads).

    Care to help look into this, as it's beneficial for others?
     
  16. VirtualRain macrumors 603

    VirtualRain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #16
  17. Mr. Anderson Moderator emeritus

    Mr. Anderson

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Location:
    VA
    #17
    FCP uses one core, but if you export the final render to Compressor, it uses as many as you want/have.

    D
     
  18. VirtualRain macrumors 603

    VirtualRain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #18
    Are you sure it's just 1 core... I thought it was using 2... but I may have been optimistic when observing my CPU usage. :)
     
  19. J the Ninja macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2008
    #19
    It always seems to use about 150% on my MBP (C2D)
     
  20. reel2reel macrumors 6502a

    reel2reel

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    #20
    This really speeds up encoding times. You need to export a self-contained movie, though, you can't just send straight from the timeline if you want to use the virtual cluster.
     
  21. Octobot macrumors regular

    Octobot

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2006
    Location:
    MPx12
    #21
    Yes, in my case.. Cinema 4D!
     
  22. PeterQVenkman macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2005
    #22
    Cinema 4d is wonderful for multithreading. Love it. If Apple falls through with the Mac Pro updates, I'm getting a 20% overclocked Core i7 980x. A nice compromised balance of budget, high clock speed and multi-core rendering power.

    I wish Apple would offer that.
     
  23. mism macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2010
    #23
    I'm getting a Mac Pro largely for Cinema 4D. Could someone confirm that Cinema sees 8 cores as 16, and in turn will see 12 cores as 24?

    Assuming Cinema does see 8 as 16 is it fair to multiply clock speed by 16 when comparing processors? Or is that wishful thinking?
     
  24. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #24
    Virtual core ≠ physical core

    HT can speed up up to ~30% but it's still nowhere near the performance of a real core thus it's not fair to multiply the clock speed. Forget HT and use real cores. Then add some % due HT
     
  25. mBox macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2002
    #25
    Renderman for Maya single license does 4-cores. Had to buy two to take advantage of one Windows workstation. Mental Ray uses em all.
    Maya's own (scanline, vector etc..) uses all cores on your system.
    Love seeing topics like Maya on Mac :)
    We havent fully moved our workflow over to the Mac (6 to 1 ratio in workstations) due to slight issues with Maya.
    Looking forward to the day that happens :)
     

Share This Page