i7 chip versus Xeon for Maya

[CHRiTTeR]

xeons are designed to be more 'stable' if you need a cpu that can render 24/7 then a xeon is recomended.

If you just want a workstation cpu, an I7 will be recomended.

[narenn]

xeon is a must have for lots of rendering. Very powerful cpu...

[HappyMachine]

I was thinking of doing double duty with this machine- some render power, and some workstation agility.

Thanks for your opinion.

[earwax69]

Xeon only make sens if you buy a pair of them and stack them on a dual socket motherboard. If you use a single socket mobo, get a i7. It will do the same job for half the price.

When you are working in your softwares, most process are single threaded or very badly multi-threaded. No need of 12 cores to finish a job. For render, the more cores the best of course. I survive on my i7 and start the very long renders by night. I've never missed a deadline.

You can build cheap i5 or phenom x6 render nodes for a peanut these days if your soft come with free render licences. Im talking under 400$ here.

If you got cash, one good options is the i7 970. 6 cores on 1 socket. best of both world but its a somewhat expensive cpu.

[SL]

As, um, ...earwax69 said, Xeon processors aren't really sensible for a workstation unless you plan on slapping two of them into a dual socket motherboard, which is extremely expensive of course (Render nodes are probably a faster and more economical option). If you're going to be rendering 24 hours a day for weeks at a time, by all means go with a Xeon series, but if not, go with an i7 and you'll get much more bang for your buck.

Also, you may want to look at some benchmarks (http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html) to help yourself make a decision.

[earwax69]

mmm... something fishy about that benchmark list. The i7 980x should have a higher edge over the 2600k. 6 cores vs 4 cores and sandybridge is not that faster. Is it a single threaded benchmark? Also the i5 2500k does not fare well inthat list which is strange because most benchmarks show that it is only 2-3% slower than the 2600k due to the mhz difference. Maybe that benchmark is super hyperthreading friendly.

Here you can see the 980x in a better light. But still, for the price, the 2600K is the way to go!

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph4083/35031.png

[Srek]

Thats the old Cinebench 10 (2006). The current 11.5 CB (2009) gives much more meaningfull results for modern multicore CPUs. Check here for more usefull information
http://www.cbscores.com/

[thethule]

Well, all i know is that when i got my i7 i was absolutely blown away. I LOVE this chip. As much as a person can love a chip. Its exceedingly fast and i woudnt buy anything else, personaly.

[earwax69]

Except maybe a 6 cores i7!! ;)

Thanks for the link Srek, its way better.

Wish Anandtech would change their benchmak apps.

[rebolt]

Is i7-970 is better than i7-2600K ? Alot of people saying that one should buy i7-2600K because when you overclock it, it's equivalent to i7-970. I am too considering to buy an i7 but got stuck between these two processors.

[thethule]

Except maybe a 6 cores i7!! ;)

Thanks for the link Srek, its way better.

Wish Anandtech would change their benchmak apps.

Yes, i am running a six core i7 at work and it is phenomenal. Best chip since the Pentium Pro.

[dmeyer]

Hello All,

I am buying a new PC workstation for use with Maya and other 3D programs, and I am wondering which processor is going to work best for general Maya use. As I understand it, the i7 chip is a lot cheaper than Xeon chips, but they both have the similar mHz. Are the Xeons better suited to render big projects?

Thanks,

Tony

The only difference between i7 series and their Xeon equivalents is the Xeons have dual QPI.

This enables them to work in dual-cpu mode on dual socket motherboards.

From a performance/reliability standpoint, there is no difference.

[Kev3D]

Yes, i am running a six core i7 at work and it is phenomenal. Best chip since the Pentium Pro.

You taklin' about the older i7s because I didn't think the Sandy Bridge had a 6 core version yet.

Also, yes, the 2600k is blitzing, for most applications it feels faster than my dual six core machine at work (obviously this doesn't apply to rendering). I've read a review where they overclocked it and compared it to the 970x (I think) and the rendering benchmarks were very close.

Having said that, I've heard people say that getting a solid state drive made a bigger difference to the responsiveness of day to day applications than a processor upgrade ever did. I haven't taken the plunge myself yet, I'm going to wait for them to mature a bit and come down in price... they are tempting though.

[thethule]

You taklin' about the older i7s because I didn't think the Sandy Bridge had a 6 core version yet.

Also, yes, the 2600k is blitzing, for most applications it feels faster than my dual six core machine at work (obviously this doesn't apply to rendering). I've read a review where they overclocked it and compared it to the 970x (I think) and the rendering benchmarks were very close.

Having said that, I've heard people say that getting a solid state drive made a bigger difference to the responsiveness of day to day applications than a processor upgrade ever did. I haven't taken the plunge myself yet, I'm going to wait for them to mature a bit and come down in price... they are tempting though.

Ah..maybe.

Regarding solid state, i have one, its nice, but not really worth the money. To be honest, if you have your OS on one drive, all your program installs on another, fast drive and your data on other drives, then things load up very very fast and its a lot cheaper than a solid state.

[toluabisola]

You taklin' about the older i7s because I didn't think the Sandy Bridge had a 6 core version yet.

Also, yes, the 2600k is blitzing, for most applications it feels faster than my dual six core machine at work (obviously this doesn't apply to rendering). I've read a review where they overclocked it and compared it to the 970x (I think) and the rendering benchmarks were very close.

Having said that, I've heard people say that getting a solid state drive made a bigger difference to the responsiveness of day to day applications than a processor upgrade ever did. I haven't taken the plunge myself yet, I'm going to wait for them to mature a bit and come down in price... they are tempting though.

Makes sense as your machine is only really as fast as it's slowest component and that would be the HD, improving that should see substantial performance gains.

[Srek]

Makes sense as your machine is only really as fast as it's slowest component and that would be the HD, improving that should see substantial performance gains.
Only for those parts that are heavily HD speed related. In 3D thats usualy only save, load and application start. Not worth any extra money imo.

[HappyMachine]

I am leaning towards the i7 now, because I don't have renders going 24-7. Maybe for a few days out of the month, we are rendering during the day, but I try to get the machines going over night usually.

I was just concerned that the i7 couldn't handle overnight renders like the zeons. I had read that they use more power than the zeons, and couldn't handle long renders. Any truth to that?

:)

[Srek]

I was just concerned that the i7 couldn't handle overnight renders like the zeons. I had read that they use more power than the zeons, and couldn't handle long renders. Any truth to that?

:)
Nope, none at all. Any well build Core i7 machine will work 24/7 without a problem. Maybe take care to select harddisks that are meant to be run 24/7 instead of el Cheapos, also don't choose a cheap CPU cooler. Actualy the original Intel coolers that come with the boxed Core i7 have proven 100% reliable for me even in 24/7 use.
Cheers
Björn

[sentry66]

I am leaning towards the i7 now, because I don't have renders going 24-7. Maybe for a few days out of the month, we are rendering during the day, but I try to get the machines going over night usually.

I was just concerned that the i7 couldn't handle overnight renders like the zeons. I had read that they use more power than the zeons, and couldn't handle long renders. Any truth to that?

:)

i7's handle overnight renders with no problem.

The early model i7's from about 2 years ago did run hotter and hog more power, thus being more likely to crash, but modern ones are tanks.

[neurignacio]

i got some offer from lenovo for a w3565 xeon with a quadro 2000 and 8gb ECC. the problem is that it's around 400€ more expensive than equivalent 2600k configurations... considering same ram and gpu, should i expect to see some better performance with w3565 for rendering? :-?

[Srek]

i got some offer from lenovo for a w3565 xeon with a quadro 2000 and 8gb ECC. the problem is that it's around 400€ more expensive than equivalent 2600k configurations... considering same ram and gpu, should i expect to see some better performance with w3565 for rendering? :-?

The w3565 with 3.2 GHz has a CB of 5.63, an i7 2600 @3.5 GHz has a CB of 7.69. Even at the same clockrate the i7 would easily outperform the Xeon.

[mirkoj]

talking about i7 and rendering...
recently got an i7 2600 Sandy bridge and it is working like a charm!
with standard cooler that comes with it (without overclocking ofc, it keeps rendering at around 70 degrees and it is really hot here right now, not from comp but summer temperature :)
As that part goes it is looking great.
Now I'm planing to get 1st render node built on i7.
i7 2600, 16gb ram, small hard drive and some smaller slim case, comes around 650euro.
The thing is that MB supports graphic from board and CPU as this i7 should support it so no need to get graphic card.
I was just wondering if anyone tried that so far and does it not having GPU but using graphic from CPU slows down much or at all.

Also one more thing would be great, to be able to install Win7 on an USB drive. Large enough drives are cheap these days and need only system and Softimage. Even if it dies soon it is easy to replace it. But can;t install Win7 on USB at least as I found out so far :)

Anyway any ideas about this graphic from CPU thing?

[Srek]

Only if you use a renderer that makes use of the GPU you will need a GPU in the render client, currently not many renderengine smake use of this. If you need it a PCIe16 slot is required in the system and enough space, power and cooling capacity to support a powerfull graphics card. I doubt that slimline case can handle this.
Cheers
Björn

[mirkoj]

just pure CPU rendering.
but I need some vga display to setup software and everything so need some graphic for that. so plan was to not put graphic card at all but go with that GPU on board and voala.
that should work I guess

[Srek]

It works just fine. As long as the display options you have are supported by the OS you use you should have no problem.

[mirkoj]

Good to know. I should have that first node built and deliver at the beginning of Sept.
But just for fun I configured an boxxtech renderpro with lets say similar specs.

Dual Xeon E5640 2.66Ghz ( so 2x 4cores(8threads) = 16threads total) CPU
12 GB ram
160gb hard drive
-------------------
$6000 on boxxtech config page
http://www.boxxtech.com/products/cf_step2.asp?ModelInstanceID=1049&PrevQuoteID=&Enabled=1&cfg19040=21698&cfg19019=19340&cfg19021=16944&cfg19022=2446&cfg19020=2446&cfg19453=2446&cfg19023=24916&cmdUpdateTotal.x=45&cmdUpdateTotal.y=12

vs

Single i7 2600 3.5Ghz (4core 8 threads)
16Gb ram
500gb hdd (overkill but that is smallest one I found :))
Not so nice looking case but still small slim case
--------------------
650 euro = ~935 USD


Comes that you can get 6 i7 render nodes, totaling 24 cores/48threads, each node 16gb ram for the price of 1 boxxtech render node.
Watt consumption is higher but compare total price/speed, and anyway rendering electricity consumption can be easily calculated into project estimates and use only as much nodes as needed per project.
And even talking about long run and durability.. for the price of i7 nodes is is way easier to replace parts or even whole node than with brand name render node. Nothing against boxxtech just got them as example. I would personally love to have projects that would cover expenses of top line products but if you compare everything.

This is a bit out of topic and probably could go to separate render farm building post but while o n subject was wondering to hear what do you think.
Ofc this is great option for small studios, even freelancers. But as need for nodes and CPU count goes up, nice packed solutions like those nicely packed renderboxx nodes is probably best way to go :) But for freelance/smll studio I personaly think that this would be a better way to go. Ofc interested in other opinions if I miscalculated something.

[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.