Is anyone here using a Threadripper 1950x?I would like to know what its performance is like in ZBrush. If you can, post results from its performance test: Preferences - Performance - Test MultithreadingAfaik, ZBrush scales well with many cores, so this CPU should be very good for it. The RAM speed also matters.Can anyone confirm?
Ryzen 1700 is probaly your best bet. 8C/16T. Can overclock close to 1800X. Best bang for buck.
Why? I didn't ask for a good bang for buck CPU, I asked about the performance of a specific HEDT CPU in a specific software package.
>>586122I don't see what part of using Zbrush would actually justify using Threadripper over Ryzen. Threadripper is hardly better than Ryzen for most workloads. It's a server CPU built for virtual machines and web servers. Keyshot? Maybe.
>>586125You're an idiot. That's why you don't see it.I wrote in my first post that ZBrush scales well with many cores.If you don't see a need for higher performance in ZBrush, you should just keep out of this thread.
>>586127https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_computing#Amdahl.27s_law_and_Gustafson.27s_law
>>586129Here are some other ZBrush benchmarks I came across. Ryzen 1800X vs dual xeon with 32 threads, Xeon wins, now what do you say?AMD Ryzen7 1800x64GB DDR4Single = 2.742Multi = 0.617982Multithreading = 443%Dual Xeon E5-2690 @ 2.9Ghz (3.8GHz Turbo Boost) - 8 hyper threaded cores per CPU = 32 cores total64 GB quad channel ramsingle thread - 3.519multi thread - 0.4429multi thread performance - 794%
>>586131If you're willing to pay three times the price for something like 30% increased performance in things that take vast minority of your time and don't really affect your art, then cool. I just don't see any sense in it.http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?205704-Which-is-more-important-for-ZBrush-Cores-or-RAMhttp://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?205810-Zbrush-CPU-ChoiceAlso if you just want to buy cool hardware for the sake of hardware, I can relate to that.
>>586134To continue I also tried to dig brush engine and dynamesh benchmarks, but those don't seem to exist. It would be cool to see if Threadripper scales at all. I would be very surprised if there's any concrete difference when compared to Ryzen.
>>586134Where did I say that ZBrush is all I use and I wouldn't benefit from the CPU in other software as well? I am only asking about ZBrush because that is the only factor of uncertainty for me and I'd like to see actual benchmarks. The inbuilt performance test is all that is needed.
>>586139Honestly for the money I would pick up 2 used E5-2667 V2's and a new 2S mobo. I got a pair of em for $490 on ebay for a CPU rendering rig for 3ds Max. Was gonna go 1950x but I just needed a spare rig to crunch frames.
>>586127Don't insult the dude when you're the one who came here asking questions. Do you even fucking know which operations in Zbrush are multithreaded or did you just hear a vague 'Zbrush scales well with more cores'?
Jesus christ, why not aswer OPs question? A dual xeon ebay board or a Ryzen isn't good alternatives to a Threadripper in all cases.
Threadripper would be a waste for zBrush, get it if you are rendering in Keyshot, Arnold, Vray, etc. Your performance isn't gonna suddenly get better and if you are sculpting on models with 500 million polygons, something is probably wrong. with your workflow.
It has nothing to do with the polycount and everything with the document size. ZBrush is too slow for me when working on an UHD display where the document size utilizes the available screen space. That is why I want a faster system. My system rates at Multi Thread Timer = 1.6 (lower is better)
>>586422>Jesus christ, why not aswer OPs question?OP should go fucking die in a dumpster fire, he's a degenerate pile of subhuman garbage that should be imprisoned for making a worthless thread about a topic he could google.And worst of all, he fucking expects the users of 4CHAN to do his research for him? The guy should literally be skinned alive.
>>587882I was gonna answer until I saw this reply, He is right OP is a lazy rude cunt.
>>587882Better to be rude to someone unjustifiedly patronizing you, than to be a hypocrite who in one sentence pretends to be unable of coping with light bants, and in the next sentence shows himself to be much worse than who he is spewing poison at.Don't pretend to be offended by someone calling you or anyone an idiot, especially when it's justified, if you are then going to call for skinning someone and talking of subhuman anything. That is not just a double standard, it also shows you to be a 4chan faggot that is used to much worse and behaves much worse than me. You are also factually wrong. I did my research, I even posted what I found out of it ITT, and I wouldn't have bothered to create this thread otherwise. I actually shared knowledge here. I don't just pull statements out of my ass, like the idiot that I called an idiot was assuming.
