So Scott, make believe you are talking to an editor with computer geek tenancies Do the results indicate that the double socket sandy e ( with latest fastest cpu's) does not dramatically improve PrP performance over the single socket sandy e with same cpu? Why would that be? So which system on your site are you suggesting is the best bang for buck? My only concern is when using AE or AME with dual processors I get lots of fast threads on my 8 core Mac Pro. Wont I loose that with only 1 processor ?Remember, simple minded editor is your audience here .
Let's look at recent history of dual processors versus single processors. If you look at the top scoring PPBM5 benchmark it is an ADK dual X5680, while it has the best score (make sure you only compare other Premiere 5.0.x scores) the performance difference over similar i7-980/990 machines is only marginal over the next highest scores. Yet you have to double or maybe even triple the cost to get there. Is it worth that for your application?
Thanks Bill, that is what I seek to determine. The common wisdom that 2 is better than 1 applied to the Mac Pros I have been using thus far. From what you imply it sounds like that is not the case for sandy e with 2 vs. 1 processor. That does come as a great surprise to me. I want to maximize the capabilities of PrP for the kind of projects I work on (all formats / long and short form / lots of motion graphics). But not at the cost of a second processor that doesnt add a lot to the power. And the ADK HD Juggernaut at $15,000 is just to ridiculous to even consider. Right now I have a dual quad system running 8 cores. These speed things up in AE (esp. in multiprocessor mode) and AME for exporting. By running a 6 core instead of a 12 core system I would speculate I am reducing the systems capabilities by half. Faster rendering and exporting are of primary importance in my editorial sessions.
By running a 6 core instead of a 12 core system I would speculate I am reducing the systems capabilities by half. Faster rendering and exporting are of primary importance in my editorial sessions.
So the question is: would the increase in clock cycles help more than the loss of the threads would hurt? Remember also that the Xeons in your Mac Pro (I have the same model, the 3,1) aren't capable of hyperthreading. All new chips can, including the Nehalems and Westmere chips in the newer Pros. So, your proposed single-processor 6-core system would act like it has 12. More or less.
ok going to try to put this as simply as possible and try to not ruffle Jasons feathers at the same time
1) dual vs single processor does NOT equate to 2 times the processing power never has and probably wont ever even with the best of multi-thread software.
there are a few linux based programs that do come close (server app type stuff)
too much to explain. its usually more like 25-40% increase. and this depends on how well both the OS and the program can handle threads.
(apple OS is one of the worst sadly and is odd considering its unix based, which yes is different from linux. its needs a complete re-write @ this point like win7 was. with all the $ Apple has i dont know why they dont do it..
oh wait yes i do they have little concern anymore over pro level clients and are more concerned with consumer goods, i this and i that )
2)Dual Xeons have thier place but most have no need of them and this includes Apple. in fact the dual vs single over time has become far less needed than ever before even with software becoming more mulit-threaded.
Part of this is that GHz is still is vastly more important than core count for the most part at least within the same architecture.
for example it takes a Dual 2.8GHz 12 core to come close matching a single 980/990 or 2600/2700
while older ( i keep forgetting to update with newer numbers) its pretty sad a system thats 2 times or more the cost cant keep up!
it takes a 12 core 2.93GHz or higher to beat the single systems in normal editing even with heavier red 4k.
animators and uncompressed heavier codecs would need a dual Xeon and one like the absurdly priced Juggernaut.
several of our animator guys actuslly will use smaller more affordable systems and have several of those rendering rather than buying 1 big nasty box..
trying to think of an anlogy that works. (man i am going to sound like i am from KY)
got a dodge durango truck and a big dodge 350 truck towing a small 21' boat. (avergage editing of most) both are flying down the highway @ 75 with no issues.
now we have the same trucks but towing a 40' (uncompressed) boat the little dodge can barely get it going, 50 is its max speed without overheating but the big truck has no trouble cruising @ 75 still.
most people own a 21' boat.
i know not the best analogy
its my job to keep people from buying that Dodge 350 when they only need the durago and knowing when someone may need that big one..
as far as Apple i almost always recommend a single 3.33GHz (buy a used 2.8Ghz and swap out the CPU yourself) if you have to stay on Apples OS.
as apple does not even offer the 3.46GHz dual Xeons much less running @ 4GHz.
as to what is the best option on our site? the 3900 with the new Sandy E unless you need the big dodge.
Thanks to Scott and Eric from ADK for their time and expertise. I see a PC in my future. Bye bye Crapple.
I see a PC in my future. Bye bye Crapple.
I'm gettin' to ya', ain't I?
I guess thats the reason Jim ;-) (That and some major blunders by Apple like FCP XXX and a fixation on the more profitable conumer rather than professional population.)
Well, I guess it doesn't really matter why. I'll take as many professional converts from the dark side back to Windows as I can get.
I dont really understand your child like obsession with this " my computer system is better than yours" behavior. Yes Ive seen folks have Ford / Chevy battles and lots of other variations on a theme. Its seems kind of silly to me. Im more zen about stuff. If what people have makes them happy then I am happy for them. No need to convince everyone that my way is the best way. Each to their own. I dont mean to be rude, but feel its rather insenstivie on your part to denigrate other peoples choices.
I have two main reasons for disliking the fact that people in this industry use Macs disproportionally to the worldwide user base.
First is purely personal. I really hate the interface. Compared to Windows, it's just very unintuitive and frustrating and often times difficult to "figure out". (I really use my right click a lot, and I'm lost without it using a Mac.) So it really sucks for me that so many professionals in this industry use Macs, because chances are very, very high that if I ever want to work for someone else, I'd be forced into using a Mac myself. I have to use one on occasion with the work I do, but having to une a Mac every day would send me to a loony bin. (And before you suggest I'd get "used to it" if I had to use one every day, know that I started programming in Assembly Language on an Apple IIe back in the mid 80's. I was trained on the Avid, which at the time was only for Macs. I worked at a company for years that used the Media 100 on a Mac. I have plenty of experience with the GUI, and I still absolutely HATE IT!!!)
Secondly, and more importantly, Macs do certain things differently, and those differences cause compatibility issues. The standard video container in Windows is AVI, on a Mac it's QuickTime. The standard for audio on the PC is WAV, on a Mac it's AIFF. The standard file system on a PC is NTFS, which Macs cannot natively read and write to. All those differences cause problems. People who use Macs actually create problems by doing so.
That's why the crusade.
If Macs used AVI, WAV and could natively read/write to NTFS, if the industry penetration was only about 8%, I'd be pretty zen about it too.
Well, I wont comment on the looney bin reference out of respect to the forum. But I right click all the time in my Mac apps so you are operating under a misnomer with that assumption. Its unfortunate that you dont tolerate people doing things differently than you, but get used to it. No one wants to hear snide judgmental comments about their choice in computers. I suggest a little adult restraint. Theres no need to alienate a bunch of the folks participating in this forum.
Well, the reason for the "right click inaccessability" problem lies in the fact that the standard Apple mouse has only one button - period. Thus, it functions only left-click functions. Therefore, right clicking requires the purchase of a third-party Mac-compatible mouse just for that function to even work at all.
Therefore, right clicking requires the purchase of a third-party Mac-compatible mouse just for that function to even work at all.
Incorrect. Ctrl+click with one-button Mac mouse will bring up the context menu. Feel free to debate the merits of "one hand on the keyboard, one hand on the mouse" designs. But be careful not to criticize that design too harshly, or the Blender faithful will show up in force!
Sorry, but that's how much I know Macs since I have never owned one.
RJL-Sorry, but that's how much I know Macs since I have never owned one.
Yes, this seems to be the experience of some of the most vehement critics....none whatsoever.
In my case, it's because I had extremely difficult access to a store that carries Macs (in particular, one that has a Mac out for demoing). What with no automobile whatsoever and a commute that requires a ton of route transfers (and a ton of money).
That aside, the current Macs are poor buys new (if one must purchase from Apple or an authorized Apple reseller). And these same dealers charge an astronomical amount of money just for seemingly small upgrades (in other words, they steal you blind for upgrades).
Back to the original question of dual-socket Sandy Bridge E systems:
Apple will not be coming out with one in any line for the foreseeable future. Nor will they introduce a new Mac Pro line with these CPUs at all (at least not in the near future). As a result, the 2010 Mac Pros are still the current ones.
RJL- being the OP I think you missed the point of my question -
"Since there are lots of PC users on this site, I would like to get your opinions on the soon to be released Sandy E dual socket computers. I have had an ongoing dialog with Eric at ADK that has peaked my curiosity. How do you anticipate it will impact use of PrP?"
As someone contemplating switching back to PCs I wanted opinions on the impact of dual vs single socket Sandy E bridges on how PrP performs. Sorry if that wasnt clear.