View Full Version : mismatched Os in the host and slaves Q

11-13-2007, 12:11 AM
Using 3ds max 9 32bit
Is there any problem in network render if the host machine has windows xp pro and the slave(s) have widows 2003 server ?

Are the host able to send job and the slaves able to render them w/o any problems?

Becuse iam going to buy some render blade servers from Hp and thy only offer win 2003
in the customize .

And please share any info you think that will help me.

thank you.

11-13-2007, 02:28 PM
In my experience, Server 2003 32bit is compatible with queue managers, programs and plugins designed for XP32 or Vista32.

The same with Server 2003 64 bit - If your stuff runs in XP64 or Vista64, it will almost certainly run fine on Server 2003 64 bit.

You would liklely want to ask the vendors of any software apps you use in your current pipeline if there are any known issues with this before you make the switch however, just to be on the safe side.

Happy Rendering!


11-14-2007, 02:23 AM
Thx alot Adam

i am thinking of buying your 10100 render farm Series insted of HP's
and 8400 Series workstation and i have some questions for you :

-Are thy noisy? need to be in other room? how about the 8400 workstation
are thy noisy too? i like HPs workstations thy are very quite can thy be the same?

-Can thy survive a normal-good air conditioning in a normal office?
or thy will need special cooling systems?

-Do thy need Enclosure like blade servers? how do i contoll them?
Admin software-hardware?

-In the customize selecting the ram 4GB means 2GB for each dual Processors?

thx again

11-14-2007, 03:49 AM
Hello Waleed,

Let's discuss it offline -

Please feel free to email me at aglick@boxxtech.com and I'll answer any questions you have.



11-14-2007, 10:49 AM
Hi Mxm,

If your looking at noise and temperature issues, its important to get your power consumption down.

This product (http://www.very-pc.co.uk/?section=designed-for&subsection=backburner&system=125) is much quieter than a normal server and runs hapily at room temperatures, only producing 112W per 8 Core node:

It can also be shipped with either 64bit or 32 bit XP pre-configured to autorun backburner (and vray is suitable) on startup

11-14-2007, 01:37 PM
Heat generation and power consumption are of course always a concern whenever you need many processing cores in the same space.

Low power variants of the Xeon chips, such as the L5320 however, typically produce produce only half the rendering productivity.

This means that it takes twice the number of low-power CPUs to render the same number of frames as the faster, hotter CPUs.

It's a tradeoff I suppose some would be happy with - others, perhaps not.



11-14-2007, 02:33 PM
Low power variants of the Xeon chips, such as the L5320 however, typically produce produce only half the rendering productivity.

Umm. Not True,

an L5320 is a 1.86GHz 4 core 8MB Cache 1066MHz FSB,
an E5320 is a 1.86GHz 4 core 8MB Cache 1066MHz FSB chip,

In fact they are both the same chip, with just a different type of material to reduce leakage currents.

The only truth in that comment was that intel don't do a l5355 or l5365 chip, so an l5365 running at 3GHz is going to be as much as 1.61 times faster that the L5320
I say as much as, because you'll start to get bottleknecks elsewhere, such as in your FSB and RAM.

11-14-2007, 06:16 PM
If you think of the same price bracket though, you get a much lower return on your investment with low power CPUs. That is of course not figuring in the overall power usage of your server room...

In a sense Adam is right. If you take two chips that cost the same, but one is low power and the other is not, you will get more performance out of the high power chip.

11-14-2007, 09:06 PM
Let me rephrase...

Low power variants of the Xeon chips, such as the L5320, typically produce only half the rendering productivity of the top-bin E5365 Xeon CPU's (@ 120 watts)

Here are some benchmarks:

Sandra 2007 CPU arithmetic (floating point) in XP64 w/ 8GB FB-DIMMS 667Mhz RAM

50 watts - L5320 Xeon @ 1.86Ghz - 44,800 MFLOPS (floating point operations per second)
120 watts - E5365 Xeon @ 3.00Ghz - 81,859 MFLOPS (floating point operations per second)

Rendering in many mental ray scenes and the Cinebench 10 Benchmark shows a 2X or more performance lead for the E5365 over the L5320...

I'm not arguing either way...I'm just saying it's a tradeoff that should be considered.

If there are any memory bandwidth or FSB bottlenecks, the larger L2 and L3 cache on the faster Xeons adequately make up for it. We see no performance degregation due to memory or bus saturation. The performance scaling is almost perfectly linear as the clock and FSB speeds increase.

11-15-2007, 03:39 AM
Thank you guys for all the help and usful info.

CGTalk Moderation
11-15-2007, 03:39 AM
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.