Is FF Slow ? Get a new Dual Socket 16 cores/32 Threads Intel CPU

Filter Forge is SLOW when you use it on higher resolutions of 2000 x 2000 and will take MANY minutes to get the result done, and much more slower from 5000x5000 and reach up to 40 or 50 minutes or more.

And not only the final result, the preview on many filters on reduced 600x600 view is ALSO SLOW

As from the news available until now, FF Inc. will not improve the render engine speed and will not add GPU support, so it seems that future version will have the same speed as FF 3.0.

So the only solution that is really possible is to upgrade the CPU and make it faster as FF is optimized to use the most of the CPU cores available and works well with this. RAM and GPU is not important.

Of course that this is not a cheap upgrade or solution, but really will be the ONLY way to speed up Filter Forge as FF Inc. will not do it for us.

ENTER THE NEW DUAL SOCKET MOTHERBOARDS WITH 16 CORES/32 THREADS INTEL CPUS -

I have seen some news that at the end of April 2012 Intel will release a whole new bunch of CPU chip processors that will change the market and lower the prices.

Also the trend until now has been to add multiple cores to the CPU to make it faster, BUT it seems that this is not enough for many users that want even faster computers, so it seems that since beginning of 2012 the Dual Socket Motherboard have begun to be more available to domestic customers and not only for high end business, and now in April/May 2012 will appear more.

I have a Intel i7 2600k Quad Core/8 threads and this is not enough at all for making Filtter Forge work fast or in a good usable way. And I have no hope from the news available for the future that FF Inc. will make something about it.

SO Imaging having QUADRUPLE Power of a i7 2600k CPU chip, it would make Filter Forge 4 times faster !!! (This is true to according some benchmarks I have seen)

SO 40 MINUTES WAITING FOR THE RESULT WILL BE REDUCED TO 10 MINUTES !!!

AND THE PREVIEWS AND CHANGE ON THE SETTINGS OF FILTERS COULD BE PROBABLY DONE IN REALTIME OR A VERY FEW SECONDS.

And this would be possible with FF 3.0 NOW

THE BAD NEWS

Now is time for reality check, as the bad news is that buying a new dual socket motherboard LGA 2011 with two Octocores CPU will cost about 2000$ / 2300$
Probably this price could be lower in May/June 2012.

Of course that this is not at all affordable for most of us, BUT if you are using Filter Forge for work and are earning money with it and so you are getting profit from this it would be perhaps a good idea to invest in this new motherboard and CPU combo to make FF really much faster NOW and do not keep dreaming and waiting that FF Inc. will sometime in the future could probably make a faster and optimized version.

DREAMING IS FREE

From the news that are until now from FF Inc. there is no point or hope to keep dreaming and wishing that FF inc. will possibly make something to make FF faster

So now I will stop my dream and wish that FF improves and optimizes FF and will change and continue dreaming on upgrading my computer to this BEAST computer above said

AND do not keep complaining and requesting FF Inc. uselessly for something that FF Inc. can´t do according to the way FF is built and that needs a whole overhaul and rebuilding and as said by FF Inc. this is TOO MUCH WORK.

Dreaming is free

AMD 8 CORES = INTEL QUAD CORE

If anyone think that AMD has already some 8 Cores chips available much cheaper, PLEASE, look at what PERFOMANCE AND SPEED they really give and NOT on the number of cores, because on lots of benchmarks the AMD 8100 Series that have 8 Cores is nearly equal (and even sometimes lower) than a Intel i7 Quad Core 2600K.

Meanwhile I find more information I leave this links here

Dual socket LGA 2011 motherboard (this is only one of the many available now or soon)

http://www.ocaholic.ch/xoops/html/mod...ng=english

Intel launches long-awaited 8-core Xeon processor E5-2600 product family

http://slideshow.techworld.com/334280...ct-family/

Preview of the Sandy Bridge E 6 core chip

Intel Core i7 3960X (Sandy Bridge E) Review

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5091/in...-end-alive

AND THE MOST IMPORTANT PART IS THE REAL PERFOMANCE AND BENCHMARKS

http://www.ocaholic.ch/xoops/html/mod...537&page=2

THE BENCHMARK IS FOR ONE CPU IN MULTICORE SUPPORT

Intel Xeon E5-2600 3.0 GHz_________________22 sec______8 cores + 8 virtual cores HT

Intel Core i7 3930K 3.20 GHz DDR3-1600_____25 sec______6 cores + 6 virtual cores HT

Intel Core i7 2600K 3.40 GHz DDR3-1333_____37 sec______4 cores + 4 virtual cores HT

AMD FX-8150 3.6 GHz DDR3-1600__________41 sec______8 Cores

Here you can see that the AMD 8 cores is even slower than the intel quad core and nearly half the speed of the Intel 8 core.

Also is interesting that the new 6 core is not much away and better than the 8 core (they have different technologies so really can´t be compared much) chip, and what is very important about this is that the i7 3930K 6 core is much cheaper.

I will put more information about this later.

Intel have released already the new Ivy Bridge Chips BUT for now they are ONLY QUAD CORES and the announced 6,8 and 10 cores will come later in summer or auttum this year, and is possible that the 10 cores will arrives for next year.

And also the news of reducing prices is only applied by now to quad cores chips and not to the 6 or 8 cores

The speed increase from the Sandy Bridge 2700K chips is between 2 and 8% depending on the application so there is no point at all to upgrade to this new chips, is not worth in any way.

Here is the FULL review with some benchmarks to show the speed difference if you are interested

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/i...,3181.html

This is the specific page for Professional graphic applications benchmarks

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/c...133-7.html

I have been looking to see HOW MUCH one of this new dual CPU computers can cost and regretably they are MORE EXPENSIVE than I thought or wished

Dual Socket LGA 2011 CPU are about 525€ (about 640$) !!

Hexacore LGA 2011 CPU Intel Core i7-3930K 3.2 Ghz - LGA 2011 - another 530€ (about 650$) each one

So it would be a minimum of 1940$ for ONLY the motherboard and the CPU chips to get a 24 cores computer (6 + 6HT x 2 = 24)

And there is the option of choosing the much the half price Quad Core CPU Intel Core i7-3820 3.6Ghz - Socket 2011 that cost about 260€ (about 320$)

So it would be 1280$ instead to have a 16 cores computer (4 + 4HT x 2 = 16)

But this would probably ONLY make Filter Forge only double faster than a single i7 2700k cpu chip and would not be worth to spend this great amount of money to get only the double speed.

So regretably this is a very expensive way to make FF 3.0 faster and I can´t afford to pay for this so I have to keep having spider webs around my arms waiting until FF renders the results of many of the filters at high resolution

LOL you have a cruel streak, I bet you pulled wings of flies as a kid

I do not think this is a cruel comment. I do not understand why you are saying this in this thread, but I do not think that it could be a bad thing, anyway I do not care about it.

I have wrote this thread as a POSSIBLE AND REAL alternative to making FF 3.0 faster NOW and without waiting for FF 4.0, although I done it without knowing how much really could cost buying this new computer, so now I know that this is only affordable and possible for someone that uses FF for business AND has enough money to spend on this and finds it really worthy to upgrade the computer to make FF faster and so be able to make works faster and could earn more money to justify upgrading the computer.

ALSO I think that this will be the ONLY real way to make FF 4.0 faster, because unless Vladimir confirms that FF 4.0 will have any kind of speed optimization I think it will have the same render engine and speed of FF 3.0

Sr you never realize when Ubervez is taking the piss out of you, so be it, I really have better ways to spend my time

lol this is why I like working with what I have.

Sometimes... can't expect people to return you stuff. You just have to hope the people on the other side to be thankful about the little suggestions and a comfortable sign that there are users out there who love the software they make. You just have to be like "Oh they must be busy working on the new version of FilterForge." and just sit and wait.

I mena I'm PRETTY BORED TOO YOU KNOW. I'm just messing around on this forum more often lately.

I forgot to say before that in the title I have put to buy the new 8 cores Intel chips that are put in the title to be able to get a 32 cores computer (8 + 8 x 2 = 32)

This costs about 1200$ EACH one !!!

and so this 32 cores computer costs 3040$!!!!

1200 + 1200 + 640 = 3040

And this is ONLY the motherboard and 2 CPU chips

Probably have some Higgs Bosons dancing on that computer right now. Probably makes it go faster. You know, just for FilterForge.

And in all honesty, you'd rather build a computer towards a situation and not towards a software unless you're convinced this would help you which is OK. This computer would be WAY too good for 3D and most things 3D (and a portion of 2D) go obsolete really quickly. There's almost no point in getting all of that since you'd be dealing with new hardware in 2 years to come. You wanna make a computer that's more adaptive to the situation rather than just buying everything fast you can at the time.

Quote
SpaceRay wrote: I do not understand

That was the point SR, but if your happy to be ridiculed, igorance is bliss as the saying goes

Quote
uberzev wrote: But at the same time I seem to be the one helping him out the most. So there's a balance.

Fair enough, he doesn't mind so go for it

I have been searching comparisons, benchmarks and tests to see if a simple one 6 core chip Intel i7 3930K 3.2Ghz overclocked to 4 GHz could be also good to be near the perfomance of the two Xeon E-2620 at 2GHz.

Although the i7 3930K cost around 500$ you have only to buy ONE, and also the motherboard cost is much cheaper at nearly half price of the one needed for the dual Xeon, and the case can be also anyone compared to the expensive EEB needed for the Dual CHIP motherboard for desktop use as a workstation.

As I have seen is NOT so much important HOW many cores it has, is important the final perfomance and efficiency result, and having more cores does not been it is much better.

Quote
Tysus I don't mean to be a downer, but I currently own a 12-core (hyper threaded) machine and can tell you that FF is defiantly not optimized for dual processors. In fact, I'd go so far to say that it doesn't support hyper-threading all that well either.

Please, What 12 cores do you have ?

If you say that you have a dual processor with 12 cores, does it mean that each processor has 6 cores and then two would have 12, and with hypertreading would have 24 cores?

Which processors are they?

Also it could be true that Filter Forge as you say is not optimized for dual processors, as I have seen in other information I have found that the software must be made specifically for dual and multicore processors and there are many that are only optimized for just one cpu and not two.

Quote
Tysus For example, my kids have a Core i5 2500 (overlocked to 4.5GHz), which does not support hyper-threading, but renders FF filters 2-3 times faster than my 12-core 3.2GHz machine. This leads me to believe that FF takes advantage of multiple cores, but not multiple processors or even hyper-threading.

So do you mean that a Core i5 2500 (overclocked to 4.5Ghz) is 2-3 times faster than a Core i7 2700 (overclocked at 4.5Ghz) ????

This could be true and solve the mistery of Totte that gets no benefit from his dual processor computer.

very good information, and thanks to this I think that now would be good to make some tests with just 1 cpu and no multicore and without any hyperthreading, and then with multicore, and then another test with full multicore and hyperthreading, and finally the same with dual processors with also these 3 options.

I can make the test of the first 3 but can´t make the dual processor test.

found this --> Does disabling Hyper-Threading increase performance?

And here is a video to show how to disable the Hyper-Threading, it is done inside the BIOS in the CPU properties.

Also have just quickly tested how FF uses the CPU and it uses all the 8 cores of a quad core + HT as shown here below AND when using FF there is nothing else at the same time.

Thanks very much for the additional information, good to know and was very helpful to have another opinion of a user of dual processor like the one Totte also own.

So you are having one of the very good MacPro dual processors, although is expensive to have, and if you want a similat thing in Windows PC is even more expensive.

Quote
Tysus Theoretically this system should run circles around my Core i5, but this isn't the case. The over-clocked Core i5 outperforms in every FF filter I tested - by a long shot. This isn't the case when I do renders with Cinema4D and/or After Effects; the Mac Pro destroys the Core i5 in terms of rendering speed.

YES, theoretically your great double processor computer should be surely much better than an overclocked Core i5 and should outperform it in everything as it happens with the other software you have tried it, but seems that there is some problem with Filter Forge with Dual processors and perhaps also multicore, as I have tested myself and you also the renders are NOT faster.

So the title of this thread is wrong

Thanks again

Well the next speed upgrade I would like to try (after a new computer as my desktop is 12 years old) would be a solid state drive or something like this http://ocz.com/consumer/synapse-sata-3-ssd