Forum Groups
  All forums
    Help & Feedback
      Work in progress
      Finished Art
      Non-Max related

Featured Threads
  inspiration alert!!!
(37 replies)
  Indespensible MaxScripts, Plugins and 3rd Party Tools
(37 replies)
  The allmighty FREE Resources Thread !
(17 replies)
  spam alert!!!
(4886 replies)
  Maxforums member photo gallery index
(114 replies)
  Maxforums Member Tutorials
(89 replies)
  three cheers to maxforums...
(240 replies)
  101 Things you didnt know in Max...
(198 replies)
  A Face tutorial from MDB101 :D
(95 replies) Members Gallery
(516 replies)
(637 replies)
  Dub's Maxscript Tutorial Index
(119 replies)

Maxunderground news unavailable

More cores and threads vs less
show user profile  Justin101
When it comes to 3ds max 2015, does anyone know if its better to have a cpu with more or less cores and threads?

For instance, the new AMD Ryzen 3.0ghz cpus have 8 cores and 16 threads. Where as the Intel 4.2ghz I7-7700k has 4 cores and 8 threads. Any idea as to which of the two would be better for decreasing render time with 32gb of ram (which is what I plan to have when I upgrade).
Or is the frequency more important? 3.0ghz on the Ryzen vs 4.2ghz on the Intel 7700k.

The new AMD Ryzen threadripper coming out has 16 cores and 32 threads. Is this just over kill or would 3ds max actually make good use of all those cores and threads?

read 384 times
6/7/2017 3:19:50 PM (last edit: 6/7/2017 3:24:11 PM)
show user profile  Justin101
Is 3ds max more of a single core or multi core program?
Because the Ryzen 1700 has faster multi core performance but the Intel 7700k has better single core performance. So if 3ds max is a single core program, then maybe the Intel with less cores and threads is the way to go????
read 380 times
6/7/2017 3:32:13 PM (last edit: 6/7/2017 3:32:13 PM)
show user profile  ijzerman
The core of max is single threaded so you want to have a single core that is fast as possible.
Rendering however benefits from as many ghz as possible.
So do the math, 8*4.2 = 33.6 ghz and 16*3.0 = 48 ghz.
The difference is quite big in favor of the amd.
I would go for a 1700x or a 1800, i believe it runs on 3.6 ghz

Pushing buttons since "86
read 362 times
6/7/2017 5:02:24 PM (last edit: 6/7/2017 5:02:24 PM)
show user profile  donvella
can anyone chime in on how embree could affect this?

read 350 times
6/8/2017 12:46:20 AM (last edit: 6/8/2017 12:46:20 AM)
show user profile  ijzerman
Embree is a intel algorithm that speeds up raytracing, at least in vray it does. Dont have numbers but it helps. Dont know if it counters the extra cores of a amd chip tho.

Pushing buttons since "86
read 340 times
6/8/2017 8:36:24 AM (last edit: 6/8/2017 8:36:24 AM)
show user profile  Nik Clark
Embree is designed to make use of as many cores as you have.

read 336 times
6/8/2017 10:36:48 AM (last edit: 6/8/2017 10:36:48 AM)
show user profile  ScotlandDave
Fwiw embree does a pretty good job of speeding things up in C4D's Physical renderer..

Regards the op:

It really depends how you work.. If you render a lot, more cores is good. Single threaded performance can get overwhelmed/bottleneck really really quickly, and the difference between say a 3.5ghz chip and a 4ghz chips isn't night and day to be fair - both will get tanked pretty quickly on intensive tasks - but every little helps. I would probably advise a compromise of both speed and core count.

I'm curious if there's Cinebench scores for the new AMD chips ( will have to have a look around ). More cores and clock speed will be an indication but architecture plays a big part, and i'd guess most applications won't be yet optimized fully towards the AMD architecture and it'll be a while before they are..

Website | Blog | Contact | Vimeo

read 335 times
6/8/2017 10:47:09 AM (last edit: 6/8/2017 10:47:09 AM)
#Maxforums IRC
Open chat window