If so please tell us what you got and how well it handles Terragen.
I'm thinking about upgrading my c2d to one of these.
I've noticed they do two versions, one with hyperthreading and one without. Is it worth paying extra money for hyperthreading do you think? What difference would it make to terragen?
right now they don't see to be available in the US yet. :\
i looked on newegg.com and some other sites & they dont have any S.B. cpu's or socket 1155 boards out yet.
wont be long though ;)
Socket 1155 boards are available already. Just search for P69 or H69.
SB CPU's are available from next monday, at least, here in The Netherlands. Hardly can imagine they wouldn't be available in the US then.
Prices here are around 330 euros. But for now only 2 shops are offering them.
I'd definitely go for the 2600K model. It's just a few bucks more than a regular 2600, but it has un unlocked multiplier so you can overclock easily.
It is said that you can overclock to 4.5GHz on stock air-cooling.
Later this year 6 and 8 core SB's will be released, both with hyperthreading. According to Intel they are supposed for "enthusiasts" so it's likely they will cost >$600 each.
Hyperthreading works pretty well for TG. I know Frank has an i7 920 and I believe he told me once it is at least 1.5x faster than without hyper-threading.
On a $1000 machine (for example) I think an extra $100 investment for a hyperthreaded CPU is worth it.
I'm a bit undecided what to do. I have a Q6600 now which still does the job, but with an SB hyperthreaded CPU I could have a 2.5-3x faster machine, or wait for the six-core and have an even faster machine, but also an even more empty bank-account.
I think general availability is from Monday but you can order now from some sites. In the uk for instance overcockers have over a 1000 in stock (or did have when they first started selling them).
i5
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/productlist.php?groupid=701&catid=6&subid=1275
Prices start from £139.99
i7
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/productlist.php?groupid=701&catid=6&subid=1859
Prices start from £241.99
A little off topic... Matt's rework on the render engine has sped up my old system enough for me to save for a very nice machine. I am thinking of getting two. An AMD x6 for entertainment, and setting up renders. Then an i7 for stills and animation.
Found this on CNET http://cnettv.cnet.com/2nd-gen-intel-core-chip/9742-1_53-50098484.html?tag=api
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on January 08, 2011, 05:37:38 AM
Later this year 6 and 8 core SB's will be released, both with hyperthreading.
Wow can you imagine running 8 cores \ 16 threads with hyperthreading with Terragen.
Thinking about it though terragen isn't very efficient with core\thread usage is it? I thought once you get above 4 (or was it 8) you started to see very little benefit. Has the engine been optimised to handle these new cpus that are on the horizon? Is running with 16 threads going to be feasible?
Martin i'm not seeing these "k" models on the overclockers site I posted earlier. Are these due to come out at the same time?
Quote from: reck on January 08, 2011, 11:33:23 AM
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on January 08, 2011, 05:37:38 AM
Later this year 6 and 8 core SB's will be released, both with hyperthreading.
Wow can you imagine running 8 cores \ 16 threads with hyperthreading with Terragen.
Thinking about it though terragen isn't very efficient with core\thread usage is it? I thought once you get above 4 (or was it 8) you started to see very little benefit. Has the engine been optimised to handle these new cpus that are on the horizon? Is running with 16 threads going to be feasible?
Martin i'm not seeing these "k" models on the overclockers site I posted earlier. Are these due to come out at the same time?
Yep, i7-2600 and i7-2600K will be released at the same time. At least, here in the Netherlands.
I know that the threads scale less well on the mac edition of TG2, but I don't know how well it scales in general.
I believe 8 threads work fine, but more than 8 threads started to become less efficient.
Oshyan or one of the others should verify this though.
I will have to find this out myself too some time, since it's important to me too.
Quote from: reck on January 08, 2011, 11:33:23 AM
Thinking about it though terragen isn't very efficient with core\thread usage is it? I thought once you get above 4 (or was it 8) you started to see very little benefit. Has the engine been optimised to handle these new cpus that are on the horizon? Is running with 16 threads going to be feasible?
I have successfully run multiple instances of TG2 working on the same sequence to maximize core usage. Assign one core per TG2 instance and assign each instance its own series of frames. For example, with 8 instances and cores, use a Step of 8 and stagger them on beginning frames 1,2,3..6,7,8. All cores stay busy all of the time but managing them is more work. Also, you should have a 64-bit OS with plenty of RAM.
That has nothing to do with scalability of threads in TG2 I'm afraid. All instances, no matter how many, are still running one thread.
But, if you experience scaling problems then it is indeed worth splitting the work over instances and cores to keep things fast.
Hi PabloMack,
Yes I realise you can run multiple copies of TG, but that doesn't really answer my question. How efficient is Terragen when using 8-16 threads?
Taking another look at the different Sandy Bridge chips it seems if you want to overclock and have hyperthreading you only have a choice of one, which is the top of the range Core i7-2600K 3.40GHz :( It's a shame AMD can't offer more competition to Intel towards the top of the range. It allows Intel to be able to turn off things like hyperthreading on cheaper models and make "k" versions at a premium.
TG2 does very well at 8 threads. Performance benefits from adding threads/cores after that start to diminish and, depending on whether you're on Mac or Windows, going above say 12 threads may get you worse performance than fewer threads. It also depends somewhat on the scene. We're always working on improving the renderer and as it becomes more common to have more CPU cores/threads, making the rendering process more scalable is certainly a priority. We've made incremental improvements in this over the past few releases, and I think that will at least continue. Dramatic future improvements towards a more linear thread-to-render-speed relationship with more than 12 cores is certainly a possibility.
- Oshyan
Quote from: reck on January 10, 2011, 05:28:43 AM
Yes I realise you can run multiple copies of TG, but that doesn't really answer my question. How efficient is Terragen when using 8-16 threads?
Do you mean "How efficient is a single instance of Terragen when using 8-16 threads"?
Quote from: PabloMack on January 12, 2011, 09:08:01 PM
Quote from: reck on January 10, 2011, 05:28:43 AM
Yes I realise you can run multiple copies of TG, but that doesn't really answer my question. How efficient is Terragen when using 8-16 threads?
Do you mean "How efficient is a single instance of Terragen when using 8-16 threads"?
Yes. You could run any software multiple times to improve the speed, it's how well the software can handle the multiple threads itself i'm on about.
I just bought a Sandy Bridge laptop, quad core running at 2.0Ghz. I'll report back once I receive it (hopefully Thursday). :D
- Oshyan
ohh ohh lucky you. Yes please let us know how you get on with it. Does it support hyper-threading as I'm interested to know how much of a difference it makes?
i'm kinda glad some got a sandy bridge before me, that way i can know how they preform with TG2 before i buy :)
Quote from: zaai999 on January 25, 2011, 09:04:39 AM
i'm kinda glad some got a sandy bridge before me, that way i can know how they preform with TG2 before i buy :)
Indeed, but be aware that Oshyan bought a laptop SB processor, which is considerably slower than a desktop SB processor (hence the difference between 2 vs 3.4 GHz). Still pretty damn fast though.
yeah, i kinda knew that, but i didn't know of any persons who have a desktop SB cpu.
@Oshyan - Please let us know your results. These new chips look impressive.
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=52214
While it will be slower than a desktop CPU in raw clock terms, I can still compare it to an i7 desktop CPU (Nehalem generation), maybe downclock that to 2.0Ghz for direct comparison. Then you can extrapolate how some of the desktop chips might do.
It does support hyperthreading by the way.
- Oshyan
On a Dutch site there has been published two reviews about the SB CPU's...the first for the desktop models, second for mobile.
Very short conclusions:
SB desktop CPU: The 2600K model (stock @ 3.4 GHz) is roughly 10% faster than a i7-920 OC'ed to 3.8 GHz, but in some cases the i7-920 was faster due to the triple-channel memory being effectively used by some software, like Photoshop.
Still, the SB is a lot of bang for buck.
Mobile SB: at the moment by far the fastest CPU for laptops. IIRC >50% faster than the nehalem i7's.
A clock-to-clock comparison would be the best though.
Found this - http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083
Still want to hear whatever you have to offer us in terms of your experience and understanding, Oshyan.
Alright, first results from the 3D Speed Machine benchmark (http://3dspeedmachine.com/?page=3&scene=47):
i7 920 @ 2.66Ghz (1st gen i7, Desktop): 12 minutes 18 seconds
i7-2630 @ 2.0Ghz (2nd gen i7, Laptop): 11 minutes 57 seconds
Yes, that's right, the 2nd gen laptop CPU with lower clock speed beats my 1st gen desktop with higher clock. It's a surprising and promising result, but it needs to be taken with a grain of salt, there are some caveats.
First off if you visit the link above you'll notice that my i7 920 score is much lower than the other 3 there. I'm pretty sure that at least 1 of those, if not 2, are for overclocked CPUs, but the 10m33s time is for a stock CPU I think and my i7 920 is still not doing anywhere near that, which may indicate some kind of system bottleneck here. I'll be looking into it.
Second, the 3D Speed Machine benchmark that I created has always had a part of it that does not respond well to multithreading. The lower-right corner of the scene is actually where a good portion of render time is spent as it has the furthest depth to draw, interreflection between the reflective sphere and the water, and the densest parts of the plant population. This was done intentionally because at the time multi-core CPUs weren't all you could get, not to mention that not all TG scenes can be as efficiently multithreaded as we would like. So the idea was to have the majority of the screen area be rendered multithreaded, and then have a portion of render time be largely single threaded to sort of balance it out. Whether it is effective at its intended goal is another question, but the important consideration is that both the i7s here would have been working with 1 or at most 2 threads in that area for several minutes. Here's where an improved feature of the 2nd gen i7 comes in. While the CPU core clock is 2.0Ghz, it has TurboBoost which can clock it up to 2.9Ghz. Now the i7 920 has this too and its max turbo frequency is the same but given the other architectural improvements that show clock-for-clock that the 2nd gen i7 beats the previous generation, it makes sense that the slower CPU could pull ahead here.
All this being said I still have more testing to do. I will be trying a more multithreading-friendly scene, which should remove some of the i7-2630's advantage from turboboost. I will also be trying to downclock my 920 to match the 2630. More to come...
- Oshyan
Thanks for all of the info, Oshyan.
Just read this - http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/218254/intels_chip_bug_shows_why_not_to_buy_firstgen_tech.html
i think i'm going to wait a little longer... for the upgrade or maybe even wait for the LGA 2011 cpu's
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/cougar-point-sandy-bridge-sata-error,12108.html
Looks like it would be better to wait on Sandy Bridge until maybe March or April. Otherwise, if you recently bought one (Oshyan), a new motherboard is in your future - the motherboards are likely carrying a 3-year warranty.
Yeah, I saw this yesterday. Bummer. I'm not clear on whether it affects laptop models, but I'll be looking into it.
- Oshyan
Oshyan, did you see this article on Anandtech? http://www.anandtech.com/show/4143/the-source-of-intels-cougar-point-sata-bug
Apparently, if the motherboard in your labtop only uses SATA ports 0 and 1, then you shouldn't have a worry. But, this might be old news.
Yeah, but I'm still a bit dubious. My laptop is within the reseller return period so I'll probably just send it back and wait to see how this all shakes out. I don't need it desperately right now. Although it's been nice to have. ;D
- Oshyan
So, with the B3 Revision being out now there's a reason less to not buy a Sandy Bridge.
Who's having one now?
There are still no SB benchmarks on the benchmark site, but I guess/hope it will finish the benchmark ~6 min.
I'm configuring a new PC for the coming 3 years (at least):
Fractal Design Define R3
Be quiet! Straight Power BQT-E7-550W
ASUS P8P67 Rev. 3.0
Intel Core i7 2600K / 3.4 GHz (perhaps with a better cooler to OC it)
16 GB Kingston ValueRAM
ASUS EAH6970/2DI2S/2GD5 GPU (not sure at all, as I would like to play games, but already haven't much time for TG2, let alone games!)
OCZ Vertex 3 Series 120GB SSD (on pre-order available)
Samsung SpinPoint F3 1TB
Sony Optiarc AD-7260S DVD-burner
Costs me a limb, but definitely worth it I think.
(nope, not yet) ;)
i had been trying decide if i should go ahead and get a socket 1155 sandybridge pc or wait for the socket 2011 sandybridges.
a six core sandybridge sounds sounds a bit temping, i know 1 at least one TG2 user uses a six core i7.
though i could more likely afford a 1155 sandy bridge system.
i just found out avadirect.com is offering 1155 barebones configurations. (its slightly cheaper than getting a regular configuration)
I've been thinking about a six-core machine as well, also the LGA2011 socket, but that won't be available before end of the year, if not 2012.
Besides that, TG2 doesn't scale that well beyond ~5 threads, so having 12 potential threads available isn't that much of an advantage anymore.
Unless you render with two instances at once of course.
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on March 24, 2011, 05:37:43 PM
Besides that, TG2 doesn't scale that well beyond ~5 threads, ..
I'm not sure how true that really is. I mean of course there's a point with multi-threading where the communication overhead between threads will eat up performance advantages. But I reckon that 2 threads per core does give a sizeable advantage even with a 6 core CPU. Now admittedly, I'm guessing here, but frankly I would be surprised if anyone with a six core CPU would voluntarily tune down #threads to below 12 (with HT present of course).
i'm thinking i might just get a 1155 socket sandybridge, dont know if i would be able to afford that or not.
i've been saying since last summer i wanted to upgrade... getting tired of holding things back.
need to catch up on current hardware for gaming too,
Quote from: FrankB on March 24, 2011, 05:55:52 PM
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on March 24, 2011, 05:37:43 PM
Besides that, TG2 doesn't scale that well beyond ~5 threads, ..
I'm not sure how true that really is. I mean of course there's a point with multi-threading where the communication overhead between threads will eat up performance advantages. But I reckon that 2 threads per core does give a sizeable advantage even with a 6 core CPU. Now admittedly, I'm guessing here, but frankly I would be surprised if anyone with a six core CPU would voluntarily tune down #threads to below 12 (with HT present of course).
Well I think you're guessing here indeed?
Just try this:
- Make a simple scene and make sure render-heavy elements aren't constricted to one or two buckets. Render it at decent resolution and quality (720x480 @ 0.7 for instance).
- Render it with 1 thread, record time
- Render it with 2 threads, record time
- etc. etc.
- Render with 4 cores 5 threads, 6 threads etc. etc.
I'm pretty sure linearity stops at around 4-5 threads ;)
In some cases the overhead is so big that having more threads is actually slower than having less.
I can't recall that threshold, it's on the other forums Frank.
Maybe in the near future I'll work on a 6-core HT CPU for a little while and test this myself, as it is important to know to optimize workflow (for production).
Cheers,
Martin
Quote from: zaai999 on March 25, 2011, 05:15:11 PM
i'm thinking i might just get a 1155 socket sandybridge, dont know if i would be able to afford that or not.
i've been saying since last summer i wanted to upgrade... getting tired of holding things back.
need to catch up on current hardware for gaming too,
Where do you live?
If you live in the US or can buy in the US then prizes are pretty good.
The system I mentioned above is ~1300 euros...that's roughly 1500 dollars.
I suppose in the US you can buy a similar system for 1100 dollars.
Well I've been using a hex core i7 970 running at 12 threads at work and it is indeed much faster than my home rig (quad core i7 920 running at 8 threads).
This is in no way a definitive test since there are other variables at play. The hex core is oc'd and has a shed load of ram, features my home rig lacks ;(
I did try the default benchmark scene and the difference was not that great however. I think this is highly scene dependant but when I get the time ::) I'll run some more definitive tests. I think the biggest difference is simply that the hex has so much more room to play.
:)
Richard
US (Florida) - the town i'm addressed to is called Havana, & i once told someone i was from Havana, and they thought i was from Havana, Cuba :D
for prices, it varies, depending on configurations/setup and where you buy from.
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on March 25, 2011, 06:02:43 PM
Quote from: zaai999 on March 25, 2011, 05:15:11 PM
i'm thinking i might just get a 1155 socket sandybridge, dont know if i would be able to afford that or not.
i've been saying since last summer i wanted to upgrade... getting tired of holding things back.
need to catch up on current hardware for gaming too,
Where do you live?
If you live in the US or can buy in the US then prizes are pretty good.
The system I mentioned above is ~1300 euros...that's roughly 1500 dollars.
I suppose in the US you can buy a similar system for 1100 dollars.
Hi,
I just thought I'd chip in on the scaling issue as I looked into this in some detail near the beginning of the year. The Windows version should show continuously improving performance up until the point where you go from real cores to hyperthreading cores. At that point performance will still improve but at a slower rate. If you take my dual quad core machine (8 real cores, 8 hyperthreading cores) using 16 threads is appreciably faster than 8 threads but it's not twice as fast.
It's not really true that scaling falls away after 5 threads as Martin says. It will depend on your processor. The point at where scaling falls away really does seem to be at the point where real cores turn into hyperthreaded cores, and this is understandable because hyperthreaded cores are not full cores and are a lot slower. As above, while the scaling does fall away you can still get worthwhile savings in render time. I've attached a graph showing ideal scaling vs the actual scaling on my machine. The scene used was a modified version of the 3D Speed Machine benchmark. I'll give a reminder again that hyperthreading is being used after 8 threads.
Looking at the graph you can see that there is still room for improvement with scaling but it's actually not too bad. Even with hyperthreading a 16 core render is about 18% faster than an 8 core render, which is far cry from being twice as fast but that's never going to happen with hyperthreading anyway.
The Mac version currently gets slower when you move from real cores to hyperthreaded cores. Right now I would recommend sticking with the number of real cores you have for rendering. The good news is that the next release is vastly improved in this regard and it has performance parity with the Windows version.
I will insert the usual caveat of this potentially being scene dependent :-). I should say that using Raytrace Objects and Atmosphere can be a help with scaling.
Regards,
Jo
18% is actually about average for hyperthreading performance improvement (when I say "average" I mean across applications, not average for TG2 necessarily).
- Oshyan
Hi Jo,
Thanks for proving me wrong ;D
It was a bit dense of me to forget the issue of HT performance comparison.
Thanks for the heads up on this and the clear graph. Very useful!
Actually makes me doubt a little bit again whether I should go for a Sandy Bridge 2700K or an i7-970??
What do you think?
Cheers,
Martin
Quote from: Oshyan on March 28, 2011, 11:52:34 PM
18% is actually about average for hyperthreading performance improvement (when I say "average" I mean across applications, not average for TG2 necessarily).
- Oshyan
Indeed, didn't took that into consideration in my last few posts :)
I wonder what the performance hit/bonus would be to run two instanced of TG in parallel would be?
:)
Richard
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on March 24, 2011, 05:37:43 PM
I've been thinking about a six-core machine as well, also the LGA2011 socket, but that won't be available before end of the year, if not 2012.
Besides that, TG2 doesn't scale that well beyond ~5 threads, so having 12 potential threads available isn't that much of an advantage anymore.
Unless you render with two instances at once of course.
But you could do this http://smattila.pp.fi/3D/Rendering.jpg except with 1 machine! :D I find out I'm constantly running out of CPU power even tho I have i7 and q9400 at my displosal, lol ;)
I'd still go for Sandy Bridge 2600k, unless the price difference really doesn't matter to you (several hundred dollars from what I can see). Not only does the 2600k have higher clock rate per core than the i7 970, but it also improves performance clock-for-clock over 1st gen i7. Granted having 2 whole more physical cores (along with 2 HT threads) on the 970 would help a lot. But if you really want 6/8 core and price is less a concern you might just want to wait for later this year when the 6/8 core versions of Sandy Bridge come around.
- Oshyan
second thoughts... once in a while i start thinking the same thing, going the 1366 route instead of 1155 and getting a 6core, its temping, but not just for TG2 of course. though its more likely i will just end up getting a 1155socket / 2500k i7.. prices.
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on March 29, 2011, 05:56:05 AM
Actually makes me doubt a little bit again whether I should go for a Sandy Bridge 2700K or an i7-970??
What do you think?
I should have my new pc in the next 3 days. A huge step up from p4 2.8ghz 1gb ddr ram:)
how does this sound it should work quite well with terragen right?
ASUS P8P67 LE , i5 2500K, (2x2GB) DDR3-1600 , WD Black 500GB 32MB, HD5770 win7 prem
Ordered my 2600K today ;D
Complete specs:
Fractal Design Define R3
Sea Sonic X-560 PSU
Asus Sabertooth P67 B3 Revision
Asus ENGTX570 DCII/2DIS/1280MD5
Intel Core i7 2600K + Scythe Mugen 2 rev.B
Intel SSD 510 Series 120 GB
Corsair XMS3 4 x 4 GB
Sony Optiarc AD-7260S
Samsung SpinPoint F3 1 TB
Can't wait :)
awesome Oo
cool!
personally i think the latest Asus Sabertooth with the thermal armor look awesome (and useful)
i hope more future mobo's will have them.
have fun rendering with the 2600k ;)
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on June 15, 2011, 12:17:13 PM
Ordered my 2600K today ;D
Complete specs:
Fractal Design Define R3
Sea Sonic X-560 PSU
Asus Sabertooth P67 B3 Revision
Asus ENGTX570 DCII/2DIS/1280MD5
Intel Core i7 2600K + Scythe Mugen 2 rev.B
Intel SSD 510 Series 120 GB
Corsair XMS3 4 x 4 GB
Sony Optiarc AD-7260S
Samsung SpinPoint F3 1 TB
Can't wait :)
Now *that* is going to be a sweet machine! :)
- Oshyan
Thanks Oshyan :)
My bankaccount is still crying out for its money ;D
i hear ya TU.
hopefully i'll be getting my 2600k system soon, im going to have my dad chip in on the cost.
(not because i'm begging, but he owes a present or two)
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on June 15, 2011, 03:31:00 PM
Thanks Oshyan :)
My bankaccount is still crying out for its money ;D
yesterday i got a i7 sandybridge 2600, but its for my work, that is, at my work.
though i should have a 2600k system at home in a few weeks... ;)
my Sandybridge (2600k) system arrived earlier today, no new TG2 renders yet though. ;) :)
other specs
-Antec Performance One 183 V3
-Antec True Power New TP-750watt
-Asus P8P67 Evo
-Antec KÜHLER Box cpu cooler
-G. Skill Ripjaws 16gb
-Evga GeForce GTX 460 700MHz, 2gb vram
-OCZ, 40GB Vertex 2 SSD
-OCZ, 240GB Agility 2 SSD
-Western Digital 1TB Caviar Black
-Sony, AD-7261S
-Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi