[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/3/ - 3DCG



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: 51ok-g0Bj9L._SX355_.jpg (23 KB, 355x336)
23 KB
23 KB JPG
Apparently Xeon has been dead and buried by 16 core amd threadrippers. Is the old dual xeon system for rendering meme, dare I say, dead?
>>
I'd say CPU rendering in general is on its way out.
>>
>>587607
why do you say that? Redshift and cycles look like shit compared to arnold. Also, arnold is way easier to use and faster
>>
>>587607
This can't happen fast enough.
By default it's quite idiotic to be forced to use CPUs for physics calculations. At least the CISC ones like the x86 based CPUs.

So glad GPU computing became a thing.
>>
>>587611
gpus are horrible. Get a threadripper and arnold and join the masterrace
>>
What about dedicated raytrace chips?
Or FPGA's?
>>
>>587612
I kinda doubt a threadripper I could afford now would be better in computing than my current gpu.
too much of a poorfag to dish out 800 for a fucking cpu
>>
>>587619
The threadripper you want is 1k
>>
>>587610
Orders of magnitude faster and you can achieve higher density (number of GPUs you can stuff in a rack vs CPUs).

>>587619
>I kinda doubt a threadripper I could afford now would be better in computing than my current gpu.

You'd be correct.
>>
>>587610

Arnold GPU is coming
>>
>>587649
Renderman GPU may arrive first.
>>
>>587580
Depends on the price... if all you care about is performance, then yes the 1950X, or if you wish to risk the housefire and have disposable income, the 7980XE are both faster than almost any dual-chip system that came before. On the other hand, you can get second-hand workstations and servers complete for about the price of just one of these CPUs, maybe even less.

>>587614
Ever since Apple dropped Imagination Tech, the prospect of a dedicated raytrace chip basically flew out the window as they no longer have R&D cash to throw around and sold off all their side-projects. It's a damn shame too because they were demonstrating a mere ~20w card that had more raytracing horsepower than a 1080 Ti. That said, raytracing looks too sterile and I generally prefer the look of Monte Carlo path tracers.

>>587619
A high-end platform is still desirable in other aspects; you're basically guaranteed quad-GPU support and still have enough lanes left over for an NVME drive. Additionally, all of the major production renderers are no doubt going to support hybrid rendering, so it's not like your CPU is going to go to waste. VRay already does hybrid, and the others are going to be short on their coattails.
>>
>>587580
Not quite dead, but where it ought to have been price wise a long time ago. I'm using older CPU based rendering, my clients don't care how it's rendered, so being able to scoop up cheap dual xeon servers on ebay is a godsend.
>>
>>589048
Threadripper rips them apart. You're not saving anything
>>
>>587614
future of raytracing. Maybe a decade or more from now.
https://vimeo.com/180284417




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.