AMD Threadripper -?


#1

Prices were just announced yesterday for the 16 core and the 12 core versions (16 cores! My renders would take a quarter the time of my current quad core?)

Has anyone been using similar AMD hardware with Rhino recently? Any issues? Problems? I’ve always used Intel processors so I’m not familiar with the AMD side of the fence.


#2

We used to be Intel only as well, since the release of Ryzen we bough one machine for testing, and we were very happy with the results. Performance to Price made a lot of since, and we decided that new machines will be Ryzen based.

Hardware is utilized in rendering, and it works great.

We did the testing with the current 8 core, 16 threads Ryzen, not with threadripper, but we are looking forward to test it as soon as it becomes available.


#3

Thanks for the reply.


#4

My future plans to upgrade from my Intel 3930K will be to replace the MB, memory and CPU with a Threadripper The rendering benchmarks I’ve seen show the 16 core TR to be roughly 3 times faster than my 3930; that meets my personal criteria for an upgrade as soon as I can afford it. Cheers, Rob


#5

Same here. GigaByte LGA 2011, GA-X79-UD3 (rev. 1.0), 16Gb RAM (I just ordered 32 Gb)

So I’d be interested in knowing more details about your upgrade plan.

// Rolf


#6

probably yes. cinebench shows that they scale really well in this kind of scenario.

I’m on a i5-6500, 32GB right now and feel that the four cores are very limiting at times.
my minimum of opened programs at the same time is usually chrome (with many tabs), atom and rhino. chrome and atom for example are very good at multi-threading. very often more programs join in.

my initial plan was to upgrade to an i7 but with ryzen now I think/hope that my daily workflow will benefit much more from having 16 threads compared to just 4 or 8.

but threadripper would probably be overkill for me. I’m planing for ryzen 1700. cheap and I can still manage to fit the hardware into a compact and silent case.

interested to hear about your experiences.


#7

This is a bit OT but in my evaluation so far it seems that switching to a GPU renderer will give you the same speedup for less money, and you can scale it easily by just adding/swapping cards.


#8

Because I render in Flamingo, the more cores the better. I even gave some thought to setting up a render farm using two quad core laptops and my 3930K workstation. I did not go down that path as it ties up all the computers in our little office. So, the best bang for the buck with Flamingo is cores, cores, and more cores. I am probably a month or more away from upgrading for fiscal reasons as well investigatory reasons; I want to see how Thread Ripper really works out before dropping a grand on a cpu. I’ve attached a couple of renderings modeled in Rhino and rendered in Flamingo. As Rhino V-6 comes out my hopes are that an improved Flamingo will accompany it as well. As far as GPU based renderers goes, AMD offers one for free or at least they did…we currently live is such a rich environment of choices, babes in toy land!


#9

True. But if you’re on the verge of upgrading to a new computer, AMD has to be considered. I was going to upgrade last month but had to put it off. Glad I did now. I’m also going to wait a month or so now to read reviews as they come in.