xserve cinebench R10 score

[Srek]

I can't give you the numbers, but the XServe will not perform better or worse than any other system using identical processors.
Cheers
Björn

[Zmurowski]

Thanks for the reply Srek. Xserve it is then :)

[Simon Wicker]

the xserves are very expensive compared to the standard mac pro so unless you really need the rack mount form factor you will get a better machine by buying a 'normal' mac.

cheers, simon w.

[Zmurowski]

I know it's alightly more expensive, but then again imagine a renderfarm built with MacPros... that would be a sight...

[Simon Wicker]

i'm sure all the mac users remember this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlWnv4-H0W0

cheers, simon w.

[Zmurowski]

that is indeed impressive.

[LucentDreams]

i'm sure all the mac users remember this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlWnv4-H0W0

cheers, simon w.

Haha and now a single standard server rack can store 800 CPU's using Boxx's RenderBoxx, so you can easily fit 2.5 Teraflops in one ServerRack.

good one you apple, good on you.

Heck for a super computer a PS farm would be much smaller and cheaper, sadly cinema will never be compiled for the Core CPU.

[Srek]

Heck for a super computer a PS farm would be much smaller and cheaper, sadly cinema will never be compiled for the Core CPU.
The Cell CPU used in the PS is related to the Power processors. Provided a working development environment is available a port of CINEMA 4D to PS3 is technicaly possible though economicaly absurd.
Who in his right mind would like to use a 256 MByte sytem for 3D rendering is a different question ;)

Cheers
Björn

[Zmurowski]

Boxx solutions are cool, but the price is pretty high (higher than xserve).

[LucentDreams]

well the price of a single renderboxx is for 16 cores, basically one module has 2 nodes with 8 cores each, way more than any xserve

In a 4U space you can fit 4 xserves for a total of 32 cores, or 5 Rendrboxx for a total of 80 in the same amount of space.

If you were to build identical specs too, you'd have to buy 2 xserve with 16gb of ram or a single renderbox with 32 gigs of ram

total for xserves 7,749x2 =15,498
total for Renderboxx =12,415

More compact, cheaper overall and already fully 64bit cinema compatible, because that mac isn't going to be able to use all that ram with cinema

[Zmurowski]

I can see your point. Is it possible to run MacOSX on Boxx? It's crucial as the rest of our render farm are Macs

[Srek]

Not legaly. OS X is only meant to be used on Apple systems.
There are some attempts to hack it to run on arbitrary x86 systems, but i would not recommend this for a production environment.
Running OS X x86 and Windows x86 system in a combined renderfarm is not recommended, but should work fine in 99% of all cases, especialy if you bake as much as possible, which is a good idea for net rendering anyway.
Cheers
Björn

[LucentDreams]

Bah if you listen to legal shemantics its been illegal to run safari on your PS too since their release too the EULA specifically says

Id just run windows on all your macs that are in your render farm since you can install windows on your mac.

[CGTalk Moderation]

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.