Render Server (Opteron vs Xeon)

[Phynaz]

How much does that quad socket motherboard cost?

Edit, nevermind I just looked it up.

$750

Add in the astronomical power and cooling costs of 32 Derpdozer cores, and the Xeon is cheaper, and faster.()🙂

Once you bring price into the picture the lower TCO of Xeon really starts to shine.

 

[BD231]

Pixar uses Dell Render Blades, which use core i7 CPU's exclusively. I'd go with Intel as well.

 

[AtenRa]

How much does that quad socket motherboard cost?

Edit, nevermind I just looked it up.

$750

Add in the astronomical power and cooling costs of 32 Derpdozer cores, and the Xeon is cheaper, and faster.()🙂

Once you bring price into the picture the lower TCO of Xeon really starts to shine.

A dual socket motherboard cost at least $450-550, adding $200-300 more for another two sockets is much cheaper than adding another dual socket motherboard. Not to mention the rest of the hardware you will not have to use.

Power consumption could be lower with dual Opterons (32 threads) vs single Xeon (12 Threads) if the Opterons will finish the job much faster (less time). Unless someone bench those two systems and record the power consumption the systems needs for the entire duration of the work (from start to finish) we cannot say which system consume more power.

He was only asking about the highest performance, so for the same price AMD Opterons are faster. 😉

 

[gmaster456]

A dual socket motherboard cost at least $450-550, adding $200-300 more for another two sockets is much cheaper than adding another dual socket motherboard. Not to mention the rest of the hardware you will not have to use.

Power consumption could be lower with dual Opterons (32 threads) vs single Xeon (12 Threads) if the Opterons will finish the job much faster (less time). Unless someone bench those two systems and record the power consumption the systems needs for the entire duration of the work (from start to finish) we cannot say which system consume more power.

He was only asking about the highest performance, so for the same price AMD Opterons are faster. 😉

BLASPHEMY I say. Are you out of your freaking mind! There is no possible way under the sun that a 16 core Opteron MIGHT be better suited for a task than a 6 core Xeon. Its just not possible.

 

[Phynaz]

BLASPHEMY I say. Are you out of your freaking mind! There is no possible way under the sun that a 16 core Opteron MIGHT be better suited for a task than a 6 core Xeon. Its just not possible.

He's talking about a quad Opteron. He needs to put 32 Derpdozer cores up against 6 Xeon cores.

 

[Abwx]

Coulda, woulda, shoulda.

The fact is 6 Xeon cores are faster than 16 Derpdozer cores. Period.

It s no better and it s an oudated CPU instructions wise.

In a few months Maxon will implement AVX and perhaps FMA as well ,
wich the current xeons are deprived of , so BD is way more future
proof...

 

[Phynaz]

It s no better

Are you clicking your heals together while you are saying that?

 

[Abwx]

Are you clicking your heals together while you are saying that?

You guess not as much as you surely did at the time when
promoting the Pentium 4 xeons as better than the opteron 64
to your customers...

Seems your motto did stay the same since theses old times,
albeit i will concede you that it has more relevancy currently....

 

[Phynaz]

Seems your motto did stay the same since theses old times,
albeit i will concede you that it has more relevancy currently....

Oh,so you admit the Xeon's are better than Derpdozer.

I knew we could talk some sense into you! :biggrin::biggrin:

 

[Wriptire]

Now, my primary question to the kind people on these forums. Which setup would you recommend for the greatest rendering performance with Cinema 4D? If you can not in good conscious recommend either of the above platforms, than what would you recommend that is comparatively priced?

If I understand you correctly, you will add that machine only for rendering, instead of replacing your current workstation? In that case you need a Cinema 4D version which allows network rendering anyway, so you can use at least 3 clients in addition to your workstation.

So get yourself several simple 2600(K)-class boxes. Even with the required duplicated hardware (case, PSU, RAM, HDD) you'll likely spend less than for a dual Xeon/Opteron for the same performance. You could also go 2600K and overclock the boxes. You can do staggered aquisition/replacement: i.e. get one 2600K now. In April/May, get the Ivy Bridge successor. Next year, add a Haswell system. 2014, a new Broadwell and retire the 2600K.
This way you'll always have some modern and efficient hardware instead of having a single big box which quickly gets old but is painful to replace because of the cost.

Final note: even if you want to build a big box, you should definitely wait for the SB-E Xeons to come out (in 1 month or so). They should be much more power-efficient, slightly faster for the same price and they support AVX. Once Cinema 4D adds AVX support you should get a free speed boost. Stay clear from the Westmere Xeons, that's a 2-year-old architecture and pretty obsolete.

 

[AtenRa]

He's talking about a quad Opteron. He needs to put 32 Derpdozer cores up against 6 Xeon cores.

AMD Opteron 6272 is a 16 Core CPU,

At almost the same price we have,
Two AMD Opterons 6272 with 32 Threads vs single Intel Xeon 5670 12 Threads (6 core + HT).

Dual Opterons 6272 will eat a single Intel XEON 5670 for breakfast 😉

Later, he can install two more Opteron 6272 (Quad) for a total of 64 Threads. That setup is the best price/performance at the moment.

 

[Wriptire]

AMD Opteron 6272 is a 16 Core CPU,

At almost the same price we have,
Two AMD Opterons 6272 with 32 Threads vs single Intel Xeon 5670 12 Threads (6 core + HT).

Dual Opterons 6272 will eat a single Intel XEON 5670 for breakfast 😉

Well, nobody in his right mind is talking about 5670s in this context… might as well bring up the E7-8870.

The OP specified 5645s, which have a pretty competitive price/performance for this purpose. While they offer ~10% less bang/buck than the 6272s on purchase price, their TDP is 30% lower. This will offset the CPU prices over time if the machine sees heavy use. Of course the Opterons are better for machines which are never turned on, that's a given.

 

[AtenRa]

Well, nobody in his right mind is talking about 5670s in this context… might as well bring up the E7-8870.

The OP specified 5645s, which have a pretty competitive price/performance for this purpose. While they offer ~10% less bang/buck than the 6272s on purchase price, their TDP is 30% lower. This will offset the CPU prices over time if the machine sees heavy use. Of course the Opterons are better for machines which are never turned on, that's a given.

Im aware he was talking about Xeon 5645 vs Opteron 6272 but the Opteron can be used in a quad socket system when the Xeon 5645 can only be installed in a dual socket.

Opteron 6272 is faster than Xeon 5645
Opteron 6272 is more feature reach (AVX etc)
Opteron has better upgradability than Xeon 5645

A single quad socket configuration Opteron system it will be cheaper to build and it will consume less power than two separate dual socket Xeon 5645 systems.
So at the end, the AMD Opteron 6272 is a much better choice.


You only see the CPUs individually, try to see the whole picture. 😉