How about more than 64 cores support of rhino?

Just curious, when you run Rhino on a system with more than 64 cores, what happens? Are you getting an error message?

– Dale

From this post it sounds like it will not install. 63 core limit on install


I saw a forums people said that it crashed, and gave helping. The answer is disable the hyper-threading function. And the spec. of rhino is under 64 cores. I haven’t 64+ cores system. I think Mcneel have a money to buy or to borrow this machine to test it, thx!

I wonder they unknown it…!

The latest V-Ray For Rhino 2.0 has been compiled with with 64+ CPU core support for a user request. I am assuming they were using this machine for a DRSpawner. I am guessing this question will be more common in the future.

It does take a large amount of code to support more than 64 threads. Here is some Microsoft documentation on it.

Yes, I know vfr 2.0 is ok to work now, so I wonder most people think, it is a impossible or no need to solve it. thx!:sob:

I understand that accessing over 64 cores might need extra work. I am just wondering if anybody with access to such hardware has even tried running Rhino WIP (not Rhino 5) on that. As far as I understand Rhino WIP should at least start, even if it couldn’t utilize all those transistors for its thing.

I’d love to give it a go as well, it is just that I sadly don’t have access to that kind of goodness :frowning:


yeah, you’re probably right.,

When they will release Rhino 6?:laughing:

If you’ve registered at this forum with the same e-mail address as you used to validate your Rhino 5 license you should be able to Welcome to Serengeti where you can download Rhino WIP (pretty much the upcoming Rhino 6).

That will obviously be when it is done, but see the Rhino WIP so you can already verify whether it will even start or not :slight_smile:


What about threadripper 3970x? 32 core but 64 threads for rhino 6?

1 Like

That would be Epyc : )

Is it time to resume this post?
AMD Ryzen ThreadRipper 3990X 64 core / 128 thread…
Is Rhino going to run on a machine with more than 64 Cores?


Ok, so the answer is “Probably no…”

Dimitar on the italian Discourse has made a test on a 64 cores machine

It works!


Am I wrong in suggesting that these high core count processors are all really slow clock speeds and for Rhino you’d be way better off with something snappier that turbos to like 4.7ghz or whatever. The fewer cores the better for thermal management. The 3990X is only 2.9ghz.

I only get heavy utilization on a single logical processor in normal use.

I guess the only exception I can think of would be if your job was to literally make2D all day every day.

If you wanted to render also would be better off with a more pedestrian 4 or 6 core processor with a really high turbo speed and then add a heavy duty compute GPU to do the render grinding.

Well that used to be the thing, but the reviews on these new ones are that you don’t really face that compromise anymore–well, there is, but you’ll only notice it in benchmarks–as they can boost plenty high on lightly threaded loads. There is still the problem of how to actually make use of the core count, yes.

I agree, it’s less of a big deal than it used to be. However I just can’t imagine it making much sense to build a workstation that way. You could buy a processor that will give you a better experience in Rhino for like $300 and then take the $4000 the 64-core ryzen costs and put it into a GPU if you absolutely need to render on the same machine.

I don’t imagine it does for anyone except “creators” who still need some software rendering for…something to do with video editing.

Of course the massive number of PCI lanes you get is nice if you want to run a quad-GPU rendering setup.

I am going to chime in…

It used to be that chips that can render could not workstation, but times are changing. Chips such as the Threadripper has shown that a 32-core 64-thread chip can hit 4.5GHz in lightly threaded applications. Who wouldn’t want to have everything they want?

Though, from what I hear, Windows itself has core-count issues with anything over that.

The comparatively low memory will keep quite large renders from being rendered on the GPU.

[In Cycles, I use the CPU more than GPU. My 3900x is faster than my GTX 1080.]

1 Like

IMO, Linus is a bit of a AMD fan, just as Tom('s Hardware is a bit of a Intel Fan). Still AMD has a lot to be fanned about lately, like this chip, well except for the memory, but I would not refuse it. Linus’s focus is generally gaming rings, but has largely drifted to servers for 8k video.

Notice that he uses Cinebench for testing, giving Maxxon free advertising for their renderer. I had thought that Holobench/Rhino distributed that in a manner could test systems with Cycles, too, for just an occasion. The Rhino would need to be stripped of anything that that would allow it to be used for a full application, because having to register a demo on a computer under test would be impractical. I don’t think he has yet heard of (Holomark).

(cough cough… It’s called Holomark… :smiley:)
And yeah, I don’t think it would take that much to develop Holomark to new heights, but I have no interest in doing so alone as of today. Gathering and organizing the data online would be the first thing to solve I guess. So if you find somebody who has the skills, time and interest in doing it for free then please shout out :slight_smile:

Sorry about the mistake Holo. I can’t keep typing good things about Holomark as often (and as humbly) as I have, and not make a mistake sometime. : )

I think that new one will be great. Yes, you should have some help packaging it from McNeel.

1 Like