AccuRender nXt

advanced rendering for AutoCAD

Can somebody give me a hint-

what is better / faster in rendering speed:

2 physical processors or, lets say one xeon with 8 cores?

Thanks in advance,

Thorsten

Views: 166

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Physical cores and physical processors are basically equivalent.  

Intel chips, in particular, make a distinction between logical cores and physical cores.  Logical cores help a little, physical cores help a lot.  So-- for example-- your Xeon might have 4 physical cores with 8 logical cores.  This is a pretty common specification.  Don't pay much attention to the # of logical cores.   As a rule of thumb, use:

(# of physical cores ) x (clock speed) as a rendering speed index.

2 physical CPUs (let's say two AMD Opterons) with 4 cores each = 8 cores X 17600MHz (2X120=240euros)

1 physical Xeon with 8 cores = 8 cores X say 2400MHZ = 19200MHz (but 1400euros!!!)

The question is also the data throughput between CPU and memory and other significant aspects. Try to investigate some sites with benchmarks (Like Tom's Hardware showing results of rendering benchmarks like Cinebench and others), they are adequate for comparison purposes as regards the nXt.

Your information helps a lot, thanks!

But as always, Randy Newman is right - it's (always) money that matters... .

Intels pricing is a class of its own.

RSS

Search

Translate

Latest Activity

Peter Milner replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"Yes, the glass material translated as Refractive automatically."
Dec 23, 2020
Roy Hirshkowitz replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"Yeah-- like I mentioned the caustics are accurate but could be annoying.  Things that might alter it include changing the sun angle so it's not striking the chair's metal surfaces so directly, changing the roughness of the chair…"
Dec 23, 2020
Peter Milner replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"Here's the latest render using metallic materials. The chrome now looks a lot better. I do feel though that the reflected light on the back wall is too bright."
Dec 23, 2020
Roy Hirshkowitz replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"Ah-- so that's a function of the material type.  The standard material won't give you a mirror anymore.  You need to change the material to metallic and you should get something more familiar.  Use the Type popdown on the…"
Dec 18, 2020
Peter Milner replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"Pacing a mirror on the back wall (reflections = 1.0, noise = 0.0), you can see the difference more clearly (top image is nXt)."
Dec 18, 2020
Peter Milner replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"You can see from these two images that there is definitely something wrong with reflective surfaces. It appears the light is being reflected, but not objects or textures. In the nXt version (top image), the carpet texture is being reflected in the…"
Dec 18, 2020
Roy Hirshkowitz replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"It's interesting-- overall the quality of this interior is very high for that short amount of processing, and may be acceptable for certain scenes.  In this one, however, there are some reflective caustics that are taking longer to…"
Dec 17, 2020
Peter Milner replied to Roy Hirshkowitz's discussion AccuRender Studio
"ARDECAL now works. Here's the image after 10 minutes of rendering. I do have a slight concern that reflective surfaces seem rather dull. This is particularly evident on the end frame of the desk and the base of the chair."
Dec 17, 2020

© 2021   Header image courtesy Peter Milner   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service