Devin Johnston Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 I was supposed to get 10 dual core Athlon 5000 system in but apparently AMD is having big trouble producing enough of these chips and as a result I can't get these systems right now. I've been looking for a replacement and I would like to know which of the Woodcrest chips or the Core Duo chips compare in price and performance to the Athlon X2 5000+. Any information is appreciated as I know noting about either of these processors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tecton3d Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 a core 2 duo E6700 will give you compable rendering prowess to the x2 5000+ as far as woodcrest, those are quadcore (dual-dualcore) systems, of which you'd only need 5-6 of them to make up for 10 X2 systems... but in the end would probably be more expensive as per initial purchase cost but may pay for themselves from a power consumption and logistics standpoint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Hess Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Vray Benchmark data E6600: 4min 27.1 seconds E6800: 3min 32.8 seconds 4400 X2: 5m 47.4 seconds 5000 X2: 5m 5.3 seconds (Oc'd chip not actually a 5000) Dual 270: 3 min 36.8 seconds The single X2 and single opterons are not comparable in performance to the new coreduo2 processors. There is a rather large performance difference. Coreduo2 chips are closer to dual opteron boxes in rendering performance then single chips. If I had to pick, an E6300/E6400 would be equiv to a 5000+ X2. An E6700 would slaughter it like a wolf to sheep. I personally wouldn't buy anything slower then an E6600, but thats just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3dfreelancer Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Hi Greg I just want to make shure this is right; The 270 in your list is a dual dual-core opteron which is beaten by an E6800 (a single dual core)? Kind regards Michael Nielsen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STRAT Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Hi Greg I just want to make shure this is right; The 270 in your list is a dual dual-core opteron which is beaten by an E6800 (a single dual core)? Kind regards Michael Nielsen i too would like to know this. im just on the verge of buying new kit, and i want to know if a x4 opteron is the baby to buy (as peeps advise me) or is a single coreduo2 the big boy to plump for? it all gets confusing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Hess Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 The 270 Opt in the list is for a Dual 270 Opteron...ie 4 cores. So yes...the coreduo2 chips are REALLY fast. (Coreduo2 are 2 cores). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tecton3d Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 unless you want to splurge on a higher end dual dualcore Opteron system... i.e. 275's - 285's, which is pointless until AMD drops prices of said chips ~ you won't top the rendering performance of a decent core 2 duo system Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pygoh Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 I'd like to know where the Dual dual Xeon (woodcrest) fit in. Are the dual core xeons the the same as the core 2 dual? Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJLynn Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Woodcrest (Xeon 51xx series) is the Xeon version of the Core 2 Duo (Conroe). The Xeon uses different motherboards and can be used in dual-dual (4 core) configurations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Hess Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Someone posted benchmarks of a woodcrest system the other day, but I can't find the exact number. I "thought" it was in the 1 minute range...but that could just be my right brain playing the "imagination game". Basically take a coreduo2 score and reduce it by 40%, and thats about the score you'd get with a similarly spec'd woodcrest system. (rough estimate). I wish amd would lower the opt prices already...I've had this tyan opteron board for nearly 8 months now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STRAT Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 so what you saying, the core2duos are maybe 40% than the woodcrests? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Hess Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 I swore I replied to this earlier... What I mean is... A dual 3.0 woodcrest xeon would reduce rendertimes about 40% vs a single 3.0 based setup. Ie if the coreduo2 took 10 minutes to render, the woodcrest xeon's would take ROUGHLY 6 minutes. (at the same clock speed) Could be faster then that...this is just a ROUGH estimate, since I don't think any has yet to post woodcrest vray benchmarks yet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now