VERY surprising results in my “render race” between the two machines.
I posted the MSInfo32 stats for the new AMD server earlier in this thread. Here are the stats for my older Intel machine:
OS Name Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate
Version 6.1.7601 Service Pack 1 Build 7601
System Type x64-based PC
Processor Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 870 @ 2.93GHz, 2934 Mhz, 4 Core(s), 8 Logical Processor(s)
Total Physical Memory 7.99 GB
Here is the scene I was rendering: http://www.flickr.com/photos/garstor/6981911339/in/photostream
Scene Render Settings
Object Accuracy 0.5
Shadow Accuracy 0.5
Sky Light True
Indirect Light True
Light Thru Transp. True
Lighting Quality Excellent
Irradiance One for all frames
Tile Size 16
Caveat: on the new machine, Carrara could not find the Lana Elite texture or bump maps for Victoria (so she had a zombie/undead pall to her…poor thing!) or the texture for Michael’s jeans. I am not sure if this affected the render times.
Old Intel Machine
Start Time: 8:15:49 AM
End Time: 12:24:36 PM
New AMD Server
Start Time: 10:14:21 AM
End Time: 1:49:40 PM
Surprisingly close! I think that this shows Intel chips have better overall computational strength. However, bang-for-buck, AMD gets my vote…I simply wasn’t willing to spend the $$$ needed for a 2-socket hex-core Intel machine.
If anyone thinks I did something wrong here, I’m happy to re-test with further suggestions (at least until I pave over the Intel box…I’m thinking of getting rid of its SSDs as it keeps blue-screening on me).