Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Which processor is best for 3D Rendering?

Last response: in CPUs
January 5, 2009 11:00:10 AM

Hi all? I'm a professional 3D artist who is working in Architectural visualization field. So when I'm using 3D rendering, processor plays the main character there. I wish to get new PC for my works and there are 2 processors in my mind to get. So I wanna know which one from them most efficiency in 3D rendering?

01. E8400 3.0Ghz Core 2 Duo 6 MB L2 Cache 1333Mhz Front side bus

02. Q6600 2.4Ghz Core 2 Quad 8MB L2 Cache 1066Mhz Front side bus

So someone tell me which one is the best? First I thought Quad core one is better. But I have a doubt because its buss speed is lower than the core 2 duo one.

More about : processor rendering

a b à CPUs
January 5, 2009 11:07:50 AM

If the rendering software you use supports multiple (2+) threads then the quad would be better, otherwise the higher clocked dual. Front side bus as such doesn't really mean that much...
January 5, 2009 11:22:13 AM

Most 3D rendering software (if up to date) would benifit from the Quad core2 CPU's, so the Q6600 would be the better option.

The lower frequency can be adjusted by a slight tweek in the BIOS.
from experience, the Q6600 can easily run at 400x6 at stock speeds (2.4ghz), and still give u a nice 1600mhz FSB to run on.

although the system will be work related, if the problem with raw power is a problem, then change the FSB to 1600mhz, and wack the multiplier to 8 for a nice overclock to 3.2ghz, which should run nicely with a minor upping of the voltage (may even run on stock voltage = 1.2v).

so the quad should fit in the system quite nicely, and still give the speeds that u require if ur willing to tweek a bit.

good luck, and hope i could have been of some help.
Related resources
a b à CPUs
January 5, 2009 10:31:41 PM

The Q6600 will run better. For your field, you might even consider a 2p Opteron setup with tons of RAM.
January 6, 2009 1:35:49 AM

Thanks kari, Thanks papalarge123, thanks amdfangirl. I think I got a sufficient answer from you all. Thank you very much again.
a b à CPUs
January 6, 2009 5:58:14 AM

If needby, overclock the processor. Q6600 is great for you.
a c 108 à CPUs
January 7, 2009 3:16:34 PM

I would not substantially invest in 3d rendering hardware at this time.

2009 will most likely be the 'watershed' year we have been waiting for in near real-time photorealistic 3D rendering with GPU-based authoring tools.
January 7, 2009 3:22:30 PM

look into Xeons. They tend to have better performance in stuff like 3dsmax, milkshake, Maya, Blender, etc.
January 7, 2009 9:19:51 PM

Depending what software you are using.

If using studio max 9 or higher 64 bit or Maya than the quad core with a butt load of memory.

If using 8 or below studio or maya than the duo core. 8 does not use anything beyond 2 cores.

Dont use over clocked PC's studio max flakes out and autdesk will even tell you that.
a b à CPUs
January 8, 2009 11:29:19 AM

Can I change my answer to Phenom II? Given the high performance results in these catagories, I'm gonna re-recommend the Phenom II 920.
August 20, 2011 12:02:19 PM

bravo29 said:

Dont use over clocked PC's studio max flakes out and autdesk will even tell you that.

Core 2 series were/are amazing at overclocking and stability. My E6320 (266fsb) could easily run on 333fsb with stock voltage, but I have it on 400mhz with stock cooling, no overheating. Of course, good and stable chipset helps with that...

I ran every stres test i could find and I`m using software like Artlantis and 3ds max Design for 4 years now, always overclocked to some point or the other. No problems whatsoever...

i5/i7 2xxx series are equally good at stability, as I`m told.