PDA

View Full Version : Dual Xeon 64 cores support???


paco33
03-09-2012, 09:37 PM
Hi, I have a little problem with 2 renderfarm that I buy recently.
Its a AMD Dual Opteron of 16 cores (64 total)

At the first time I instaled Windows 7 and only show 32 cores (2 procesos of 4)

Then, I instaled Windows server and it show the 64 cores. I instaled 3dmax 2011 and vray 2.0 and when im going to render in netrender in the monitor show only 32 cores and in the task manager only use the 50% of the processors.

Anyone can help me with that, or any idea??

It was a lot of money and its sad that i cant use it at the best performance.

Thanks a lot to anyone can help me.

viro
03-09-2012, 10:13 PM
AMD doesn't make xeons Intel does, so lets make sure what processors you have. I'm wondering if it might be a hyper threading or hyper transport issue because those usually double your amount of cores.

paco33
03-09-2012, 10:18 PM
sorry, yes its Opteron

Diffus3d
03-09-2012, 11:07 PM
Dual 16's would be 32 cores...

Above poster is right, you might have 64 virtual cores but 32 logical cores in reality.

PsychoSilence
03-10-2012, 04:56 AM
I have the dual 12 core opterons running here on one workdstation and i must say the intel boxes perform better with most tasks. Max is not very well multithreadded. For simulation even more so then rendering it seams that clock speed will be king for a while over core count. Even FumeFX, that is multithreadded will outrun by far on 4x4Ghz(1quad at 4ghz=16ghz) versus 8x2.2Ghz (dual quad at 2.2x8=17.6) although it is technically less clock speed combined. Not to talk about particle systems that are widely not multithreadded at all for certain operations.

In fact my gaming rig for $1,100 dollars running a i7 2600k sandybridge intel outperforms that box that was once a lot more then one thousand dollars...should have read online a bit more before buying imo.

paco33
03-10-2012, 04:13 PM
Thanks PsychoSilence for you answer.

If I understand. I cant use the 64 cores in max?

In the simulations I was testing that and its clear that the ghz are more
Importants thanthe numer of cores, isnt?

For example. I test the amd with realflow and it use the all 64 cores but its no big diference between my workstation (dual xeon 12 cores) thats because the ghz?

Its clear that i should read or ask for adivices first.

Its a big help the answers here in the forum

Thanks a lot

paco33
03-10-2012, 08:47 PM
Thanks PsychoSilence for you answer.

If I understand. I cant use the 64 cores in max?

In the simulations I was testing that and its clear that the ghz are more
Importants thanthe numer of cores, isnt?

For example. I test the amd with realflow and it use the all 64 cores but its no big diference between my workstation (dual xeon 12 cores) thats because the ghz?

Its clear that i should read or ask for adivices first.

Its a big help the answers here in the forum

Thanks a lot

captain brainiac
03-10-2012, 10:19 PM
If you have the Opterons 6200 series installed, it has 16 ! Cores.

http://www.amd.com/us/products/server/processors/6000-series-platform/6200/Pages/6200-series-processors.aspx

If you have a dual system you have 2 * 16 cores, which means 32 cores.
To my knowledge, Opterons don't have a hyperthreading option. So no more cores there.
(i may be wrong here!)

Unless you are a member of AMD's development team, which might have access to newer
CPUS with more cores, you don't have 64 cores right now.
Or you may have a tyan board with 4 cpus, than you might have 64 cores, what i doubt too.

So 32 cores is the correct number of cores for a dual core opteron 6200 system.
Windows is showing them, and max can use them.

I wonder what you have seen with windows server :hmm:


So everything is ok!.... Otherwise please show me where i am wrong.
Best wishes
Tom

paco33
03-10-2012, 11:58 PM
Well, the specification of the AMD its:

4X AMD Opteron 6274 Interlagos 2.2 Ghz 16MB L3 Cache Sockets G34 115W 16-core (64 Cores Total)

When I go to the BIOS its say 64, also in the task manager say 64 cores, and in Real Flow say 64

But in 3dmax say 32 cores.

Im a little confused.

Here its the link

http://www.titanuscomputers.com/A450-AMD-Interlagos-Workstation-Quad-CPU-and-up-to-p/a450.htm

captain brainiac
03-11-2012, 06:24 PM
In your first posting you wrote "Dual Opteron".... in fact you have a "Quad Opteron"
that was your mistake.

The problem is, to my knowledge consumer windows versions, including "Ultimates" only support
2 physical (real) cpu's... so you are right using windows server!

Hm you should ask AD if 3dsmax allready supports as many cores.



Tom

paco33
03-11-2012, 11:05 PM
Yes, sorry, it was Quad Opteron.

Well, so is that the cores are 64 (real)?

And why in the monitor of the backburner shows 32 only.

Im rendering right now and im using the 64 cores and its more slow when i turn of the 50% of the cores.

Thats strange.

KellyM
03-12-2012, 10:11 PM
Can you provide a little more information such as what renderer you are using? Scanline is limited to 32 cores. Mentalray should utilize all cores, I know I have personally tested it on 48 physical cores.

paco33
03-12-2012, 11:19 PM
Im using Vray 2.00.01

Diffus3d
03-13-2012, 08:18 AM
Yes, sorry, it was Quad Opteron.

Well, so is that the cores are 64 (real)?

And why in the monitor of the backburner shows 32 only.

Im rendering right now and im using the 64 cores and its more slow when i turn of the 50% of the cores.

Thats strange.


Intel chips have hyperthreading which actually helps quite a bit with rendering. That's why you are showing 64 cores when you have 32 logical (actual) cores. Hyperthreaded cores count as 2 in windows, but 1 in reality. I have dual quads in my box, which is 8 processors. But in windows it shows 16. Feels nice, but 64 must be some euphoria. :)

http://s16.postimage.org/dzdp9sh4l/Cores.jpg

Here's a screen shot... notice I have Node 0 and Node 1 for my CPU 0 core? It's the same processor, just split because of hyperthreading. Each of of the 8 cores will show up like this. If I disable hyperthreading in the bios, then it only shows 8 processors.

When they work together though it really is a lot faster for rendering with vray and max. The pentium 4 sure wasn't though... what a stinker. That was the first generation of hyperthreading that I know of from Intel and it was terrible. But the new generation... I get like a 30% boost from it. I've tested it. Love the hyperthreading.

paco33
03-13-2012, 02:34 PM
mmm ok 24-Bit Voxel, thanks for that, its more clear the thing right now.

Its a shame the waste of the cores here.
In the area forum some guy show me this:

yea Vray is limited to 32 Cores. Sorry bud, looks like those extra 32 cores will go to waste. I still can not believe that AMD made a processor with 16 physical cores, so there maybe a way to tell max to view them as “unthreaded”. Not really sure if that would help performance wise? I know you can set affinity in the task manager to 3dsmax.exe by right clicking on it and you can choose which cores max will use. So instead of it using the first few cores that are normally used by windows, internet, etc the render wouldn’t bog down the system as much-ish…

“However, like most modern rendering engines, V-Ray is fully multi-threaded, and therefore likes lots of CPU cores. In fact, the program scales almost linearly with the addition of every CPU core up to its limit of 32. (A few comparative speed tests on a machine equipped with a single 3.33GHz Core i7-980X processor – the desktop equivalent of the X5650 – confirmed the near-linear scaling of performance from six to twelve CPU cores.)”

Source:
http://www.cgchannel.com/2011/06/review-v-ray-2-0-for-3ds-max/

Author: Andrew Delgado



For now, I have to use only the 32 cores, its sad that Vray only use the 32 cores, maybe im going to tryit with mantal ray (Thanks for the help KellyM)

On the other hand, Im going to take advantage of the cores for Real Flow, its supposed that Real Flow use all the processors, or it shows the 64 cores, and when i simulate say that it use 64 cores.

Thanks for the help to anyone how tell me a lot of interesting thins to learn more about it.

I will read a little bit before I buy a PC.

Diffus3d
03-13-2012, 09:02 PM
You could always email Vlado (maker of vray)

He's been known to make custom versions of vray for people with problems like this. (For nothing!) Maybe it's hard to break the 32 core barrier, but you never know unless you try.

KellyM
03-14-2012, 11:22 PM
I asked Vlado Koylazov and he says it has a limit of 256 threads, not 32.

thev
03-15-2012, 11:29 PM
You need Windows Server 2008 if you want support for more than 32 threads. The regular versions of Windows 7 support only up to 32 cores.

V-Ray itself works fine with 64 cores and we have tested this here. However for quad-processor machines based on NUMA architecture (like some AMD systems) it is better to run several separate render processes.

Best regards,
Vlado

captain brainiac
03-16-2012, 01:42 PM
Can this be automated?
And how much ram should a 64 core machine have?

PsychoSilence
03-16-2012, 03:45 PM
Well, you gotta divide the ram by teh cores. then you know how much ram each core has to perform it's task. with 64 cores 64 gig ram means every core gets only 1 gig to do it's thing! So you wanna have at last 128 or better 256 gig of ram.

Part of the reason why a fast quad machine with 32 gig ram will be way faster then a 64 core machine is that every thread gets 4 gig of ram! (4 cores > 8 threads, 32 gig/8=4gig)

paco33
03-16-2012, 04:10 PM
Hey Vlado, thanks for the reply.

So in this article are wrong?

“However, like most modern rendering engines, V-Ray is fully multi-threaded, and therefore likes lots of CPU cores. In fact, the program scales almost linearly with the addition of every CPU core up to its limit of 32. (A few comparative speed tests on a machine equipped with a single 3.33GHz Core i7-980X processor – the desktop equivalent of the X5650 – confirmed the near-linear scaling of performance from six to twelve CPU cores.)”

Source:
http://www.cgchannel.com/2011/06/re...-0-for-3ds-max/


So the best OS its Windows server for my renderfarm????
I dont know why in the monitor shows 32 CPUs, and when turn of the server, automatically in the task manager the CPU 3 and 4 turns off.
Thats correct or still have a problem here??

I think the configuration of the PC its maybe wrong, because I test my Dual Xeon 2.8Ghz (24 cores) 24 cores vs the Quad Opteron 2.2Ghz (64 cores) 32 ram with Real Flow and the Xeon its more faster that the Opteron.
Looking the 64 cores and 32 ram you think that the Opteron will run faster, but now.

Could be the windows server or what could it be???
Definitly its the RAM???

CHRiTTeR
03-16-2012, 06:45 PM
Wasnt there some command line you could type in maxscript to enable/disable the amount of cores used... Maybe that could help?

I dont remember the command, but im sure someone else following this topic wil know.

thev
03-18-2012, 12:11 PM
So in this article are wrong?They are indeed wrong.

So the best OS its Windows server for my renderfarm????Do all your machines have 64 cores?

I dont know why in the monitor shows 32 CPUs, and when turn of the server, automatically in the task manager the CPU 3 and 4 turns off. Thats correct or still have a problem here??Not sure I understood what you say here?

I think the configuration of the PC its maybe wrong, because I test my Dual Xeon 2.8Ghz (24 cores) 24 cores vs the Quad Opteron 2.2Ghz (64 cores) 32 ram with Real Flow and the Xeon its more faster that the Opteron.I mentioned this in my previous post. Quad-processor Opteron machines are built on a NUMA architecture meaning that the RAM is divided in pieces and each piece is connected to a particular processor. When one of the processors needs data from the memory attached to another processor things get very very slow. These machines are server machines, built to handle lots of processes (separate programs) like what you get in a web server, they are NOT meant to be used for workstations where one single program uses all the processors and RAM. Think of it has having four completely separate machines put into one box. When they work on separate tasks, things are fine and smooth. When they need to wait for data exchange to work on the same thing, things are extremely slow.

Looking the 64 cores and 32 ram you think that the Opteron will run faster, but now. Could be the windows server or what could it be??? Definitly its the RAM???See the above :) From our own tests, the quad Opteron machine is usually (much) slower when you run the same program on all processors. It's much more efficient to run serveral simultanous renders, each running on only one processor.

Best regards,
Vlado

paco33
03-20-2012, 05:04 PM
Hey Vlado, thanks for your help, mean a lot!.

Well, only 2 machines have 64 cores.

The workstations are 24 cores, 16, 8 cores.
I know that i need to buy more ram.

Now I understand a lot more why are so slow render.

What do you recomend me??? still using the machines live renderfarm but turn in on and off the processos depending the job???

Or its there a way to configure the processors to have 4 independent CPUs? that can be done???

Thanks Again

I have another problem besides that.
At the first time, the machines whas working on window 7 and the rendertimes whas (1.40) vs my dual xeon (1:20).

Then I installed windows server 2008 and the render times whas (3:40-4:20)

So i go back to windows 7 and the render times are 6(:30-7:00).

I dont know what its happening!!!

Holzi
03-21-2012, 02:42 PM
However for quad-processor machines based on NUMA architecture (like some AMD systems) it is better to run several separate render processes.

Is there a way to determine whether and in what way ones CPU uses the numa architecture? The google search didn't really give me a water proof answer. Though I found one very very interesting article about the differences in NUMA architectures (http://blog.agoragames.com/blog/2011/06/24/of-penguins-rabbits-and-buses/).

That said, how would one controll that in the best possible ways? Here at work we sometimes encounter such perfomance problems too. Though it seems very scene dependant. Some of our scenes render on our 'workstations' (8core i7 with 16GB ram) quicker than our proper slaves (dual xeon x5650 with 24 threads and 12/24 gb ram)?
And do I get you right? those big rendermachines with 24 threads should have way more than the 12 and 24 gig of ram they have at the moment?

ZephyrStar
03-22-2012, 04:54 PM
Hmmm...this thread has been very useful for my own research, thanks guys.

I've been debating on building a render farm as well, and I was trying to figure out what would be the most cost effective thing to do. At this point I've pretty much decided that instead of building server boxes with 4 processors or 2 processors, I'm going to build a bunch of i7 2600 boxes, and focus on more separate boxes with one processor.

Now I guess the question would be, do I actually NEED hyperthreading, or can I save $100 a processor and use say, the i5 3.3ghz part?

CHRiTTeR
03-22-2012, 06:45 PM
Hyperthreading does help considerably when rendering

hrhajiali
06-25-2012, 02:23 AM
Dear Friends,
i searched a lot in the forums and hope finally one you can solve my issue,
i have 40Core machine ( 4xXeon E7-8870 (10-core 20 Treat) ) totally 40-cores and 80 Treats .
256 GB of Ecc Reg 1333MHz ( Operat at 1066MHz).

When am rendering (Mental Ray and V-ray Both) with Hyper-thread ON, it will render just with 32 Core with CPU usage of 20-30% .
When am rendering (Mental Ray and V-ray Both) with Hyper-thread Off, it will render just with 32 Core with CPU usage of 40-55% .

i even Lunched 2 and 3 time 3dsmax and rendered in all 3 at same time to over load the machine and allow them use the rest silent CPU but still same its just using 32 Core but with more CPU usage.

i can see all my 80 Treat in task manager all 80 Core has been detected under the predecessor tab in device manager.

Can you tell me what is wrong in my calculation ? is really mental ray and Vray are limited to 32 core ?

Thanks.

hrhajiali
06-25-2012, 02:27 AM
Dear Friends,
i searched a lot in the forums and hope finally one of you can solve my issue,
i have 40Core machine ( 4xXeon E7-8870 (10-core 20 Treat) ) totally 40-cores and 80 Treats .
256 GB of Ecc Reg 1333MHz ( Operat at 1066MHz).

When am rendering (Mental Ray and V-ray Both) with Hyper-thread ON, it will render just with 32 Core with CPU usage of 20-30% .
When am rendering (Mental Ray and V-ray Both) with Hyper-thread Off, it will render just with 32 Core with CPU usage of 40-55% .

i even Lunched 2 and 3 time 3dsmax and rendered in all 3 at same time to over load the machine and allow them use the rest silent CPU but still same its just using 32 Core but with more CPU usage.

i can see all my 80 Treat in task manager all 80 Core has been detected under the predecessor tab in device manager.

Can you tell me what is wrong in my calculation ? is really mental ray and Vray are limited to 32 core ?

Thanks.

CHRiTTeR
06-26-2012, 01:54 PM
You need Windows Server 2008 if you want support for more than 32 threads. The regular versions of Windows 7 support only up to 32 cores.

V-Ray itself works fine with 64 cores and we have tested this here. However for quad-processor machines based on NUMA architecture (like some AMD systems) it is better to run several separate render processes.

Best regards,
Vlado

i think you might have this problem

Markuss
09-19-2012, 10:20 AM
I'm also looking into investement in some serious render hardware for network rendering, and I found that the limit is 2 physical CPU's with windows 7, but up to 256 logical processors. I don't think there are CPU's with 128 cores out yet, so I guess that's why it is limited to 32 (2x16 cores).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7

"
Processor limits

The maximum total number of logical processors in a PC that Windows 7 supports is: 32 for 32-bit, 256 for 64-bit.

The maximum number of physical processors in a PC that Windows 7 supports is: 2 for Professional, Enterprise, and Ultimate, and 1 for Starter, Home Basic, and Home Premium.
"


That leaves you with the option of running a server OS that supports 4 CPU's or more. For example "Windows Server 2008 R2", but It's not officially supported by Autodesk, and I don't feel like gambling on investing in expensive hardware if there is a possibility I can't use it.
http://usa.autodesk.com/3ds-max/system-requirements/

Does anyone here have actual experience from running 3dsmax under "Windows Server 2008 R2"? Does it work, or are there problems?

Rocky5
04-05-2013, 03:13 PM
Yep... we run Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1 and 3dsMax works fine... and with backburner too.
Currently got some xeons and AMD in the same farm, and I would highly recommend the xeon's over the AMD's.

So far the AMD's crash (probably because we have 64 cores, and only 64GB of RAM, but then we didn't spec them ourselves... the so-called clever IT bods did them for us, never again.) I have had to limit the AMD's to 32 cores in order to stop them crashing. I'm not sure if this is a mental ray issue, or a lack of RAM thing?

But, to answer your question... W2k8R2 and 3dsMax works fine!

CGTalk Moderation
04-05-2013, 03:13 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.