Yeah Diogo that was my point when the other person asked for nuke to default to all the cores including Virtual. The was pointed to some article on arse technica and was just like NO WAY so I tested it on real comps. It was your video I believe on qmaster that really made me question what they where saying. We need benchmark comp like that ship comp from shake.
Randy S. Little http://reel.rslittle.com http://imdb.com/name/nm2325729/ <http://www.linkedin.com/in/rslittle> On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 07:45, Diogo Girondi <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes I've always had better luck when using the same number of real cores > for nuke. > > > On 04/02/2012, at 02:57, Randy Little <[email protected]> wrote: > > Im not talking about turning HT off Im talking about setting Nuke to 16 > from 8 on dual core. I tested it on 3 boxes with different comps and on > none was it faster to set nuke to use more the the max real cores. but it > was faster to run 2 instances set to 8 each to render. I don't recall this > being the case on z800's running linux. > > Randy S. Little > http://reel.rslittle.com > http://imdb.com/name/nm2325729/ > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/rslittle> > > > > On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 20:46, Diogo Girondi <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >From what I've seen these new procs run faster with HT on. The old dual >> core Xeons (circa 2007) on the other hand use to be faster with the HT >> turned off. At least with Nuke from the tests I did at the time. >> >> On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 12:47 AM, Deke Kincaid <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> I just said that someone on Ars-technica did a test and found that >>> using hyperthreading was faster then not using it. Not that I tested >>> it. >>> >>> -deke >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 16:59, Randy Little <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > Peter and Deke both said thats not the case anymore and that using the >>> hyper >>> > threads since westmer i7 came out would be just as fast. To which I >>> said >>> > what you just said. I just wanted to verify it. In fact even in comp >>> in >>> > the GUI 8 is faster then 16. So either Peter and Deke are wrong or >>> Mac >>> > threading isn't on par with the other platforms. >>> > >>> > Randy S. Little >>> > http://reel.rslittle.com >>> > http://imdb.com/name/nm2325729/ >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 16:42, Nathan Rusch <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> I would actually *expect* the two separate instances of 8 threads >>> apiece >>> >> to outperform a single instance using 16, for a couple reasons: >>> >> >>> >> 1) Not everything in Nuke is multithreaded. Throwing more threads at >>> some >>> >> things won’t get you anywhere, but throwing (effectively) two >>> machines at >>> >> them will. >>> >> >>> >> 2) There have been test results both from within The Foundry (albeit >>> some >>> >> time ago) and from end users reporting performance degradation when >>> trying >>> >> to get Nuke to make full use of virtual CPUs. Single-threaded >>> operators >>> >> notwithstanding, a performance increase using two 8-thread processes >>> (even >>> >> though they’re technically utilizing the virtual cores) could be the >>> result >>> >> of letting the OS kernel handle the CPU scheduling for the virtual >>> cores >>> >> between the two processes. >>> >> >>> >> -Nathan >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> From: Randy Little >>> >> Sent: Friday, February 03, 2012 4:07 PM >>> >> To: Nuke user discussion >>> >> Subject: Re: [Nuke-users] Threads >>> >> >>> >> dual quad xeon 8 cores real 8 virtual. (westmers?) running 2 >>> instances >>> >> with 8 shouldn't be faster then a single 16 especially if you take >>> all the >>> >> extra memory and i/o thats happening since its doubled. (this just >>> goes back >>> >> to that previous thread where they where asking to change the default >>> >> threads to include the virtual cores. >>> >> >>> >> Randy S. Little >>> >> http://reel.rslittle.com >>> >> http://imdb.com/name/nm2325729/ >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 15:54, Nathan Rusch <[email protected]> >>> >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> How many physical cores do you have? >>> >>> >>> >>> -Nathan >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Randy Little >>> >>> Sent: Friday, February 03, 2012 3:47 PM >>> >>> To: Nuke user discussion >>> >>> Subject: [Nuke-users] Threads >>> >>> >>> >>> ok after the previous conversation I did some test here. on current >>> gen >>> >>> xeon MACS. literally I can render 2 of the same comp with >>> interleaved >>> >>> frames significantly faster then the same comp set to 16 threads. >>> Its not >>> >>> even close. LIke 30% faster to render 2 instances of nuke on the >>> same comp >>> >>> with 8 threads vs one version on 16. Are we still having threading >>> issues >>> >>> on the Mac side. >>> >>> >>> >>> Randy S. Little >>> >>> http://www.rslittle.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>> Nuke-users mailing list >>> >>> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >>> >>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>> Nuke-users mailing list >>> >>> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >>> >>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> ________________________________ >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> Nuke-users mailing list >>> >> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >>> >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> Nuke-users mailing list >>> >> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >>> >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Nuke-users mailing list >>> > [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >>> > http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Nuke-users mailing list >>> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >>> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Nuke-users mailing list >> [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ >> http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >> > > _______________________________________________ > Nuke-users mailing list > [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ > http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users > > > _______________________________________________ > Nuke-users mailing list > [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ > http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users >
_______________________________________________ Nuke-users mailing list [email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/ http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
