Render Speed

I'm buying a new computer.....and was wondering what CPU, RAM, and graphics card configuration will give me the fastest rendering speeds.....for both 2D and 3D rendeing of very large (to the limits) files.....using primarily 3ds Max, Vray, PhotoShop, and of course Filter Forge???

Can anyone confirm, deny, or add to this..... From what I've gathered so far, it seems that a quad core with high Ghz speed and 8 gigs of RAM would be good.....due to each core getting 2 gigs of RAM....thus preventing "bottlenecking" if one or more of the cores doesn't have an equally large proportion of RAM to use.....

Also, how do the graphics card(s) play/tie into this.....and what would work best with quad CPUs and 8 gigs of RAM???

Any input/opinions/facts would be greatly appreciated!!!

Thanx Genie....

Another question(s) is what 32 or 64 bit operating system would be best for rendering speeds???

Quote
StevieJ wrote: Another question(s) is what 32 or 64 bit operating system would be best for rendering speeds

Depends on whether your rendering app has a 64-bit version. As Filter Forge is 32-bit only, you won't get advantage in a 64-bit OS over a 32-bit one. Note that Filter Forge doesn't work as a plugin with 64-bit host apps.

dont worry about being confused on the graphics cards. lol. it's an ever expanding arena there. we've gone from pci to agp to pci-e to sli to quad sli... lol. and that's not even counting the old dos days of ega, vga and all those. you have onboards now and multiple slots and shader technology and the new (not yet released) physics cards.

the bottom line is, you dont want onboard. these are generally pretty crappy and often hard to upgrade. for anything photoshop and that ilk, you dont actually need a lot of graphics power. system ram (not graphics card ram) is MUCH more important there. for high end gaming you DO need graphics card power. some of the newer games are doing their rendering in real time. this is really quite amazing and extremely powerful and extremely versatile. game devs can do a WHOLE lot more with real time rendering than the old pre-rendered way. it's like the difference in being able to blow up a single wall in a single location that is pre-determined, to being able to blow up any section of the wall, to any degree and with full particle rendering, lighting rendering and all that goes with all that, IN REAL TIME. it's really quite amazing!

so, the real bottom line is, what are you going to do with your machine? if you're into high end gaming, get the biggest, fastest, most powerful beast you can and the hell with the money! but, if you really dont need all that; you're only going to be doing photoshop, FF and some other lighter graphics, you dont need all that ultra-fast, real time rendering. a simple agp or pci-e card will do. get 256 or 512 on-the-card ram and you're good for several years, most likely. it's the gamers that have really pushed the graphics card needs for years now. nothing else, even 3d modeling and animation doesnt require the graphics power that a high end game does.

here's another way to shop for graphics cards... go to the computer store, one that sells game software and simply look at the requirements on the box. that, more than anything else, will tell you what you need at a minimum. last i looked, that meant a shader 2 card with at least 256 megs of ram on it. but, you dont buy for the present, ever! you always buy for the future. so, if the current game requirements say shader 2, 256 megs, then look for at least double that, if not quadruple, to stay within the ballpark for a several years. now, i dont think shader 3 is actually out yet, but there might be cards that are claiming to support it when it does come, so, look around.

and that's why i say, find a knowledgable store guy, one you can talk to for an hour at a time. i dont know half the crap they do and i'm always finding out new stuff when i go to my guy. i've bought several new toys based on what he said and i've not been disappointed yet

How is a graphics card supposed to help with a 2-D graphics app like FF ? I run a $39.99 graphics card (and tried the one built-in to the $99.99 motherboard with similar results, maybe 15%-20% slower at worst) and it's fine (in that this dualcore processor with the new DDR2 ram, makes everything render way faster, like 2X once it starts, and it starts way faster on *bigger* filters).

jffe

Quote
jffe wrote: How is a graphics card supposed to help with a 2-D graphics app like FF ?

Hey jffe.....I know that FF doesn't need one.....software rendered.....and other programs like Maxwell are like that as well.....but 3ds Max and CS4 Extended requires cards.....

Quote
jffe wrote: DDR2 ram

Isn't that for video???

Quote
jffe wrote: faster on *bigger* filters

That's a big part of what I'm looking for.....fastest rendering of large images using super-slow/complex FF filters.....

yup, that w90 looks like a serious beast. btw, it says 6 gigs in that page, not 8.

Quote
The W90 is the world’s first notebook equipped with a 3 x SO-DIMM mainboard design and a maximum RAM capacity of 6GB of DDR2-800 memory.

power is always a measure of speed, basically. ram is your workspace. the cpu is the dynamo pushing stuff in and out of ram. ram has a resistance factor, as do all electrical components. therefore, ram tends to want to slow things down. it's still the fastest workspace available. ddr2 simply allows the cpu to push stuff into and out of ram faster. in the early days of ibm compatibles, the cpu did damn near all the work in the computer. apple and commodore, using different chips than intel, demonstrated how stupid that was. in those computers, the cpu was simply the traffic cop along with a math co-processor and the work of graphics and sound were doled out to dedicated graphics and sound processors. this was much faster and the cpu's needed were much slower and generated a lot less heat as a result. ibm/intel/microsoft were slow to change and still havent completely, as i understand it, though they are a lot closer to that now, with dedicated sound processors and graphics cards.

so, your cpu is important to graphics processing and so is the graphics card and so is the system ram and so is the onboard ram of the graphics card. i cant tell you exactly what device is doing what these days, but faster ram, more ram, faster cpu's, more cores, faster gpu's (graphics processing unit = graphics card = graphics adapter), and more gpu ram all help.

and, there is one more factor you shld look at, buss speed. busses in the old days were one of the biggest limiting factors of a computer's speed. A buss is a method of transferring information between various devices. the cpu might be able to churn out X nanobits per second, but if it couldnt send that info out to the other devices via the various busses, it didnt really matter how fast the cpu was. the whole agp to pci-e thing had a lot to do with reworking some of the busses and flows from cpu to gpu and so on. it was simply made more efficient. i forget what the main buss is called now, but that's usually one of the ratings you'll see for motherboards.

apparently, intel and company, are moving the graphics processing to the graphics card... and more of it. they are also heading towards larger workspaces on the gpu's. in the last few years there has been a major increase in onboard gpu ram, going from around 256 megs to 1 gig. and, they arent done yet. i mentioned the new physics boards being developed. these puppies are going to elevate gaming and such to new levels. basically, whatever universe you are playing in in a game, the gpu is actually going to provide the physics of that universe, built into the gpu. that's going to take some serious power and some serious ram, but it's coming. the cpu will eventually become the true traffic manager of the computer and little else. jobs will be farmed out to other processors and down the road, even those sub-processors will farm out to even other sub-sub-processors. lol.

there are also experimental computer cores being worked on. there is supposedly a light speed/no heat core being developed, fiber optic, i think, but that's got some large barriers to overcome yet. there was also the 'bubble' core, but i havent heard a thing on that one for years now, so it might have been dropped.

what i was trying to say above about ram vs cpu for speed is, you can increase either and get a speed boost, but actions done in photoshop and the like, dont need the quad core stuff as much as they need more ram. i see this one personally. 2 gigs of ram on an xp machine is woefully short of what i need for FF and paint shop pro work. increasing the cpu or gpu wouldnt benefit me as much as increasing the ram. i'll be sitting working on an image in psp and watch, in a very short time, the harddrive light start blinking madly as the swap file comes into play. and if i push it too hard, psp simply goes, 'you've got to be kidding!' and crashes. FF is a little different. i rarely see the harddrive light come on unless i'm working huge files, which i mostly dont. so, with FF, an increase in ram wouldnt help as much as an increase in cpu/gpu. with 3d stuff, it's both, but somewhat depending on the file sizes. the bigger the file size, the more ram you want. the faster the rendering, the better cpu/gpu you want. it takes both, really.

so, now you know as much as i do on all this, and since i often forget half of what i know, some of that may be wrong. it's been a while so, see, there's another reason to find a good salesguy

Quote
jffe wrote: That's processor related then, dualcore or quadcore, and 2gigs of ram, is 90% of what yer gonna get from what I know

Well, that's a hell of alot better than what I currently have......two single-core machines.....I have to wait a long time for large files to render.....so now you know why all my filters were never more than 5 components..... ..... LOL....

Good info, Craig......BUS speed......and have to research the "Physics" technology about to be released.....going to try and not get outdated for at least a month.... .....

Quote
Kraellin wrote: w90 looks like a serious beast. btw, it says 6 gigs in that page, not 8

They have just released it with 8 gig RAM......not reflected in those site pages yet.....I'm on it like a fly on a cow patty..... LOL....

Quote
Kraellin wrote: i often forget half of what i know

....still ends up being 200% of what I know..... LOL....

Quote
KGtheway2B wrote: My biggest recommendations are to ditch the idea of a notebook and don't spend that much money on anything single computer related component. Notebooks only last so long before something irreplaceable breaks and I'd regret spending anything beyond $300 on a new cpu as it'll be extraordinarily cheaper in 6 months.

Yeah, I know.....I would get much more with a desktop for that kind of money....but I have to have mobility for traveling. Believe me.....I would much rather have a 30" HD display .....so I'm trying to get the largest display notebook/laptop that I can find. The Asus and MTeck workstations are being billed as very rugged machines that can take a beating....but I haven't read any proof of that from someone who owns one yet.....

Thanx for the links.....I'm on my way to check them out......

rofl. that's some serious sh*t! tri-sli. lol. $1600 for just the graphics cards. you've got to be one serious freakin gamer to buy that thing. all liquid cooled. solid state boot drive... sweet i'll take a dozen!

Quote
Kraellin wrote: rofl. that's some serious sh*t! tri-sli. lol. $1600 for just the graphics cards. you've got to be one serious freakin gamer to buy that thing. all liquid cooled. solid state boot drive... sweet i'll take a dozen!

LOL.....

It's like popping the hood on a Bugatti 16-4 Veyron.....man, that's one hell of a machine!!!

Maybe without the $600 paint job.....then I could possibly get the price down to.....well.....still no where close to being able to afford it right now without robbing a bank..... LOL.....

Quote
meyendlesss wrote: I just put together an i7 920 build for under $2000CAD... OC'd it to 3.8GHZ (for daily use) and am lovin it!

What did you get???

Quote
meyendlesss wrote: Performance gains @ 8gb over 6gb would likely be small, but that may also depend on what kind of system you have.

Really??? I want it purely geared for rendering large 2D and 3D graphics files in the shortest amount of time possible. I read in the 3ds Max forum that having a quad core with 8 gigs of RAM is optimal for speed because each core will equally utilize 2 gigs RAM without bottlenecking. Do you know anything about that???

Quote
StevieJ wrote: I was considering hocking everything I own for it...

Now that´s a freaking machine!!!!!!!! But for that price, it better come with a holosuite!

Quote
StevieJ wrote: What did you get???

i7 920, T.R.U.E to cool it...
Gigabyte ex58-ud3r motherboard
Corsair 3x2gb DDR3 1333
Corsair 650w PSU
Western Digital 640GB HDD
Acer 21" LCD monitor
LG DVD RW
Logitech Keyboard/Mouse (cheap ones)
Wacom Bamboo Tablet

I just ordered an EVGA GTX275 video card to replace the 9500GT I settled for when I put together my build.

This machine is awesome. I run it at 3.8GHZ daily, and can go higher for fun...
Renders filters that made my other computer cry... I regularly work on large files and they are no problem either.

Quote
StevieJ wrote: Really??? I want it purely geared for rendering large 2D and 3D graphics files in the shortest amount of time possible. I read in the 3ds Max forum that having a quad core with 8 gigs of RAM is optimal for speed because each core will equally utilize 2 gigs RAM without bottlenecking. Do you know anything about that???

That has apparently changed with the i7 and triple-channel DDR3. Really I don't know a whole lot about it... I'm still learning. I have heard that's true for other quad-cores though.

Okay guys and gals.....I'm seriously thinking about scrapping mobility, using my current laptop for it, and taking the "ultimate plunge" for this bad boy.....

http://reviews.cnet.com/desktops/main...ontentMain

I just got off the phone with MainGear.....for $5197, I can get the Ephex with the following features.....

-i7 940 @ 293 GHZ CPU (with excellent overclocking ability for games)
-Dual 80GB Solid-state drives in Raid for 160GB
-12GB Triple Channel DDR3 Memory (RAM)
-Nvidia CX 1.5GB graphics card
-BlueRay all-in-one W/RW DVD drive
-Liquid cooled, etc....

The price "includes" a Samsung 30" LCD HD monitor, keyboard, mouse, etc....

I think it's a pretty reasonable price to get all of that.....and this machine is so upgradable that it will be a long long time before it is ever outdated.....

Now, time to crack open my piggy bank and start counting pennies..... LOL....

Let me know if you want any suggestions...
I'd be glad to help you put together a list.
Most online shops will build with your selected parts for a small fee,
or you could build it yourself (it's pretty easy).
You'd save quite a bit doing it this way (at least $1000... probably more), so it may be something to consider.

Whatever you choose to do I hope you enjoy it.
Maybe we can compare rendering speeds...

Do you want a list of parts?
I have some suggestions...

What country are you in?
There are some good sites I can recommend.

Building your own is not hard, though it's a little intimidating.
I just built my first a couple months ago... before that I had only messed around, changing cards and fans and whatever. I'll link you to some good tutorials/help sites too...

Give me a bit and I'll be back...

Here's a start...

i7 940
Gigabyte ex58-Extreme
Corsair Dominator 3x2gb 1600Mhz DDR3 (get 2 sets if you really need to)
Silverstone TJ09 Case
Silverstone ST1200W Power Supply
Intel X25-M 80GB SSD (why do you need 2?)
Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB 7200RPM HDD
LG Black Super Multi Blu-Ray Burner
LG 22x DVDRW

I'd suggest you try to get a monitor locally unless you get a shipping deal with the other parts.

Also, the video card (Nvidia CX 1.5GB) looks awesome, but costs like $2000. You may want to think about getting 3 GTX275 cards and run them in SLI. Heck... even one or two of them would be good. The Quadro cards are cool, but really really pricey. Unless you make some decent money with your art I'd say don't bother. If you can afford it though, and want it then go for it!

A couple other things to consider will be CPU cooling, but that will really depend on whether or not you will overclock. Even then, good air cooling like a Thermalright Ultra Extreme 120 (1333 edition) will do fine unless you're going for 4GHz or more on a daily basis.

If you do plan on overclocking, you may want to consider an i7 920 instead. They are really easy to OC... I run mine at 3.8GHz 24/7 and it's just fine. That would save you another couple hundred $$$.

I have the above parts in my cart right now (GTX275 x 3 instead of Quadro card)...
$3174.90 USD

Good Cooling will cost you around $50 to $75.

Pick up a monitor, mouse, keyboard, and you're all set!
Oh yeah, and whatever Operating System you want.
Think about the RAM too... you could always try 1 3x2GB set for now, and if you want/need another then get another one...

Some sites will assemble for you... some won't. You may be able to find a computer shop locally that will do it, or even get a friend to help. There are lots of tutorials out there if you want to do it yourself. I'll help if I can too.

If you really want the pc from MainGear then go for it.
It looks like a sweet machine, for sure... it would probably make my rig cry
But you could match its performance without spending as much.
That Quadro card looks cool though... if I had that kind of money to spend I'd probably get one even if I didn't really "need" it, but that's waaaaay outta my price range.

What specs are you running currently?

If you already have a top end system and simply must-have the bleeding edge, then these 3-4K systems are your only choice. If you're running something pretty tame right now I think you'd be quite happy by the speed increase of a system that costs FAR less. I'd advise that you don't spend more than ~2000 for a desktop.

Really top of the line system shouldn't cost you more than this for the core parts:

300 CPU - Something Intel- it's not worth spending more than this
300 HDD - I'd suggest 2x 1TB drive in raid 1 (Mirrored for security) but you could also go with 2xRaptor drives in Raid 0 for blazing fast speed (almost SSD)
300 GPU - Don't waste anything more than this
250 Mobo - ASUS is a good brand (Just get a proven chipset)
250 RAM - Whatever is compatable, I'd go 4-6 GB
150 PSU - 800 W is plenty, get a reputable brand (not something flashy, Enermax is solid as is "PC power and cooling" brand, (and don't bother with modular- you'll still have a wire mess)

I'd also say go hog-wild on accessories such as keyboard/monitor/mouse/case since they won't really age as quickly as your core components. I've spent 200 on my case, 70 on a nice aluminum keyboard and 600 for a monitor and never regretted it.

My case: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product...t%20adamas
Kbd: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product...x%20aurora
Monitor: Dell 3007WFP-HC <- BEST ONE, I did my research.

Good luck.

I sort of agree (mostly) with KG... my system cost around $2000 and it's just amazing. I'll post a couple render times to give you an idea if you like. If you want to spend more it can be worth it if you really need the extra.

CPU is a tough choice right now. i7 is supposed to be getting a 6 core (12 thread) chip, and there's going to be a lower-end i5 chip too with a totally different socket. I'd say get an i7 920 and overclock a little, or 940 if you have to. By the way, I don't know where you heard overclocking is not stable enough for rendering. I always render with my CPU overclocked to at least 3.8GHz!!! I only run stock when I'm not working... even some games don't show much improvement when OC'd. My system is totally stable too. I ran Prime95 (a good program to test stability) for 24hrs straight... 24hrs at 100% CPU load means I'm pretty darn stable. Definately get a good HSF for this though... you won't need water unless you want to run 4GHz for long periods. I didn't find the performance gains at 4GHz to be worth the extra voltage needed, or the extra heat/cost of water cooling so I settled at 3.8GHz. Mind you, those days I'm in the mood for some fun I can go higher

As for a GPU... I really don't think the Quadro cards are worth the money. Then again, I've never used one so I don't really know. From what I hear though, 3 x GTX275 (which are almost as good as a GTX285 for way less cash) will about match one. There's a GTX275 with twice the memory of the regular one and then you may only need 2. I have one GTX275... factory overclocked... and it's awesome. I don't think I'd need another.

Oh, and don't be afraid of Vista. I really like it. Far better than xp in my opinion.

I'm not sure if the soft-mod works yet with the GTX200 series cards.
It's supposed to work well with the older cards though.

Stevie, one card would probably be fine, but I really can't say.
I don't have a Quadro, and only have 1 GTX275.
My main monitor is a 22" LCD, and I run a 19" CRT on the side sometimes.
For a big monitor I'd say get at least 1 275, then if you want another get another.
You may want to get the one with more memory...
I would have but didn't have the extra $$$.
I'm no expert, though, so maybe you shouldn't listen to me.
Certainly don't know enough about the Quadro cards to say much.

For GTX275 in SLI you'd likely be fine with a GOOD (Corsair, PC Power & Cooling) 750W PSU. Definately don't get a crappy brand or you'll regret it. If you want to run tri-SLI get at least 800W like KG suggested... even 850W to be safe.

I recommend Gigabyte motherboards. Mine was a "budget" board and it performs really well. Solid overclocking on this thing. I only have 4 RAM slots though, which is fine for now since I've yet to use up all 6GB that I have. ASUS and EVGA are also supposed to be good, but I've not used one.

Check between the couch cushions

ya know, i was thinking about those desktop supercomputers and i decided very quickly that harddrives would have to get a WHOLE LOT FASTER for that whole thing to really realize its true potential. you'd have to be able to pull data off the drive at incredible speeds to truly max out all that processing power. looks like solid state drives are coming around just in time

(pssst, stevie... *looks around furtively* buy a mac!)