Hi,

I'm looking at putting together a system for rendering using maxwell. The benchmarks suggest a dual mid-range xenon quad system might be better than a single high end core 2 quad.

http://www.benchwell.com/

Are there any drawbacks to a dual quad xenon system compared to the core 2 quad? I've read the xenon runs on server architecture, what are the advantages/disadvantages of this over the desktop based core 2.

I've tried looking for this in the forums, so apologies if I missed a post that covers this.

Thanks,

Andy

Conventional desktop memory subsystems are generally faster and much less expensive than server systems. To get the most out of your memory in a server/workstation system you usually have to operate in 4 channel mode, an expensive proposition. Depending on your budgetary constraints, this could present a significant issue, however this is only one subsystem, there are other considerations to take into account, depending on budget, proposed usage of the system, etc.

Maxwell appears to thrive on large cache multicore systems, however, you have to decide if spending 3X as much or more on your base system is worth the faster rendering times.

Thanks for the advice.

My idea was to try to put together a system on a reasonably tight budget. I noticed the Intel Xeon E5410 (2.33GHz) was almost half the price of the C2D Q9550 (2.83GHZ) and thought it would be woth investigating. But seems like a basic system is the way to go.

while i know little about this
i would give you this advice:

1) workstation cards for 3d apps in most for some apps - you need to research your app

2) error correction as built in to some severs is not an issue

3) a cpu is a cpu, so zon or quad is same thing - do not focus on the cpu but what other things you need for your app: i.e. a fast raid or 3d workstation card

Intel has a processor feature set chart and transistor count for all thier CPU's. I'd suggest you look at these carefully.THG has also done the skulltrail review and you should also look there for the required benchmarks, from memory a single QX9650 faired well in most tests but the 8 core advantage of the D5400XS system did outstrip the single CPU in render time.

Seems to me (after reviewing your link) that you would be paying a financial penalty trying to leap from a single quad core to a 2p/4p system

A single q6600 @ 3.6GHz timed in 14m-21s (with 32-bit OS & 2Gb RAM). To double that speed is it worth 5-10 times the cost ??

What is the impact of a 64-bit OS and 8-16Gb of RAM on a single quad ???

What is the status of distributed rendering ???

Two rigs with OC'ed q6600s working together across a 2Gbit LAN looks pretty good from here even if you have to purchase an additional license ....

Thanks wisecracker,

Thats good advice. Im dont have any experience in overclocking and prefer a stable quiet system I can rely on to something that might be loud or overheat. Im thinking of putting together a system based on the Q9550 and then as you suggested if I still need more grunt I could look at adding another system over LAN.