Hi Matt. If you compare Blenders core scaling to Terragen's i wanted to ask if there is anything new you can say.
With so much new and relatively affordable AMD CPU's it is more important then it was i think.
Can we expect better core scaling in the near future?
https://opendata.blender.org/
Is Cycles now NUMA aware? It wasn't last year in 2019. A EPYC only saw half cores being used, while it was still tiering the top of the list.
I do think our benchmarks are interesting and I wonder if there is bias in how TG handles the CPUs compared to Blender, or if people's systems benchmarking TG aren't well optimized, like lower end MBs etc.
I don't know Jordan.
With both SMT ON i will do a basic test with Lightwave one with 16 and 32 cores.
It is an older (v.11.63) version but it had multi core support since many years.
Just curious.
I tried with Lightwave with 4,8,16 and 32 cores restricted within Lightwave and with task manager affinity setting:
4_cores_367_seconds
8_cores_187_seconds
16_cores_97_seconds
32_cores_53_seconds
I tried the same with a basic scene in terragen with the same method:
4_cores_263_seconds
8_cores_142_seconds
16_cores_80_seconds
32_cores_48_seconds
I expected worse actually with Terragen. It isn't so bad as i thought it would be. Not sure what to say. A longer benchmark (with the benchmark scene) might be better maybe. After 16 cores it looks like it is getting a little worse but i can live with that.
There is some added time with both situations but it seems TG is a little worse.
Yes. Curious how much worse it is with more cores.