Communigate Pro AE-List@media-motion.tv Message 55000

>Did we ever establish that anything above 4 cores for After Effects was worth it for performance gains when >coupled with adequate Ram per core?

It’s a dramatic improvement. I get double the rendering speeds on 6 cores with 64GB vs. 4 cores at 32GB as system overhead ends up limiting 4 core to three threads at 6GB each whereas I can have no issues running all 6 cores with 6GB on 64GB of RAM.

Getting the right RAM, drive configuration mated to your CPU and you get amazing performance for the money using –E I7 processors vs. Xeons.

I’m able to run 3 64GB Hexcore systems built for less than a single Xeon 12 core. Hands down a much, much faster way to work for me.

stephen van vuuren

336.202.4777

http://www.insaturnsrings.com/

http://www.sv2dcp.com/

http://www.sv2studios.com/

A film is – or should be – more like music than like fiction. It should be a progression of moods and feelings. The theme, what’s behind the emotion, the meaning, all that comes later.

–Stanley Kubrick

From: After Effects Mail List [mailto:AE-List@media-motion.tv]
Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2014 10:35 AM
To: After Effects Mail List
Subject: [AE] OT intel i7 8 core just announced at PAX

Considering I have been sitting on a 980x for the last 4 years I am definitely curious. Did we ever establish that anything above 4 cores for After Effects was worth it for performance gains when coupled with adequate Ram per core?

-Rob

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone

-------- Original message --------

From: "Mr. Eric D. Kirk"

Date:08/30/2014 7:08 AM (GMT-08:00)

To: After Effects Mail List

Subject: Re: [AE] GTX 780 Board Question

Just an update for those interested.

Still no solution but I did update my bios successfully today, hoping that last ditch effort would do the trick.

Ran Norton utilities as well. Everything online seems to point to the error being memory related. I ran the memory check with no problems though.

So still at a loss.

Eric

On Aug 29, 2014 6:26 PM, "Jim Curtis" <AE-List@media-motion.tv> wrote:

I just received the K5000 a week or two ago, and frankly, I can't tell a lot of difference over the Quadro 4000 it replaced, EXCEPT for a ray-trace Ae project I re-rendered, and it was twice as fast.

I got this nifty utility called "iStat Menus" that has a GPU meter, and so far, on Ae and Pr, I can't get the thing to go over 40%.

I was expecting better real-time in Pr, and I sure can't say it's a night and day difference. I still get dropped frames with a couple of accelerated effects on Alexa ProRes 4444 footage. And that's with the CPU and GPU meters running below 50%. I'm perplexed. It's not my RAID either. It's super-fast.

I don't play video games, so I haven't much of an idea how much horsepower it has, day to day.

On Aug 29, 2014, at 4:58 PM, rendernyc <AE-List@media-motion.tv> wrote:

i dont think i could ever buy the k5000 as its slow and $$$

the GTX 780M has faster RT performance in my iMac, and comes with a computer ;)

On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 5:54 PM, Jim Curtis <AE-List@media-motion.tv> wrote:

Probably getting work done!

;-)

On Aug 29, 2014, at 4:51 PM, "Mr. Eric D. Kirk" <AE-List@media-motion.tv> wrote:

Where were you when everyone was advising me to buy this. :) ha

On Aug 29, 2014 5:48 PM, "Jim Curtis" <AE-List@media-motion.tv> wrote:

This is the kind of stuff I avoided by buying the K5000 for my Mac, instead of trying to hack a GTX.

Godspeed, boys.

--

danny princz

vimeo.com/rendernyc