Comments

Steve Mann wrote on 11/22/2006, 11:02 PM
I can't find it - is there a link to the old rendertest?
Jeff_Smith wrote on 11/22/2006, 11:26 PM
Try this
http://www.vasst.com/resource.aspx?id=35443070-0b67-4a2e-807c-a7f431ebd02d
Wes C. Attle wrote on 11/23/2006, 3:04 AM
Those core 2 Duo's are impressive and at a great price.

My four Opteron cores overclocked to 2.82 Ghz did the test in 18 seconds. But that's twice as many top of the line cores overclocked against your mid-range stock Core 2 Duo. Dollar for dollar, core for core, Core 2 duo continues to impress.
DGates wrote on 11/23/2006, 3:14 AM
Agreed. My cheapy store-bought HP Core2Duo system (E6300, 1.8mhz, $849) did the test in 33 seconds. I've been impressed.


FvW wrote on 11/23/2006, 5:33 AM
Be happy with your Core duo! I tried the test with my P4, 3,2 Ghz. It needs 84 seconds.
Jeff_Smith wrote on 11/23/2006, 8:26 AM
My P4 2.53GHz (that I just replaced), 2 GB DDR-SDRAM 133 Mhz, D865PERL mobo did it in 186 seconds. I don't do HDV yet and the results on the core 2 duo were what I expected. What I am really pleased about is how much quiter my new computer is.
John_Cline wrote on 11/23/2006, 8:37 AM
14 seconds
Vegas 7b
Rendered to NTSC DV (render quality=best)

nVidia 680i motherboard
Quad-Core Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700
2GB Corsair Dominator @ 1066mHz
WD Raptor 150GB (system drive)
(4) Seagate 7200.10 320GB (2 pairs of Raid0)
DGates wrote on 11/24/2006, 9:59 AM
What did that system cost you, John?
winrockpost wrote on 11/24/2006, 11:28 AM
.000000002
IBM BlueGene/L system
GlennChan wrote on 11/24/2006, 7:34 PM
John, thanks for posting the results. It looks like performance doesn't ramp up linearly with more cores??? In any case, the quad-core processor is clearly a winner. And it looks like we will need a better/slower rendertest.

14s - Quad-core Core2 QX6700 (2GB RAM, Vegas 7b)
John_Cline wrote on 11/25/2006, 12:44 AM
"What did that system cost you, John?"

The EVGA nVidia 680i motherboard was $240
The QX6700 processor was around $1,200
The 2 gig of Corsair PC2 8500 Dominator RAM was $385
Got a REALLY nice Antec "Nine Hundred" case for $140. (This is a GREAT case!)

Already had one nVidia 7950GT video card and wanted another so we could run SLI occasionally if we wanted, so we got the second one for $279. We're running a pair of Dell 2407 24" 1920x1200 LCD monitors.

The Western Digital Raptor 150gig 10,000rpm system drive was $224
The four Seagate 7200.10 320gig SATA2 drives were $95 each
Silverstone SST-ST75ZF 750watt supply for $210

Total = $3058 plus shipping. Got everything from Newegg except for the processor. If you add the cost of the 7950 we already had, the total is $3,337.

Obviously, one wouldn't have to get the pair of 7950 video cards or the 750 watt supply or the Raptor or four of the Seagate drives, so some significant bucks could be shaved off here and there.

John
dhill wrote on 11/25/2006, 1:15 AM
28 seconds
MacBook Pro (w/bootcamp)
2.33 Intel Core 2 Duo
3GB RAM
100 GB 700 rpm HD
VV 7B
Wes C. Attle wrote on 11/25/2006, 3:53 AM
So who will be first to test two Xeon X5355's? 8 cores at 2.66 Ghz would be about 7 seconds! These are already on sale.
DavidSinger wrote on 11/25/2006, 6:28 AM
"8 cores "
But can Vegas do more than 4 threads? Actually use more than 4 cores?
Xander wrote on 11/25/2006, 7:04 AM
Having 8 cores will maximise system performance - 4 cores for Vista and 4 for Vegas - no bottlenecking!
DGates wrote on 11/25/2006, 10:44 AM
Thanks for the stats, John. That should hold you over for awhile.
DavidSinger wrote on 11/25/2006, 12:53 PM
"4 cores for Vista "
Are you sure that will be enough for Vista (grin)?
MH_Stevens wrote on 11/25/2006, 5:41 PM
24 seconds with my old generic P4 3.4GHz optimized as per David's recent post.

You guys who are reporting > 30 seconds with Pentium 4's need OPTIMIZE your machines.
fldave wrote on 11/25/2006, 8:05 PM
MH_

24 Seconds: are you sure your render settings used Best? Overclocked? I have a P4 3.2 and can pull in around 40s with Good only.
MarkWWW wrote on 11/26/2006, 3:13 AM
Which David? Which recent post?

Mark
MH_Stevens wrote on 11/26/2006, 8:33 AM
I'll do it again. Tell me what settings to use. I did not see any settings recommended along with the download.

My refernce was to David Singer.
fldave wrote on 11/26/2006, 11:29 AM
Render to NTSC DV avi; custom settings "Best" render quality.
DavidSinger wrote on 11/26/2006, 3:57 PM
MHStevens,
"24 seconds with my old generic P4 3.4GHz optimized as per David's recent post. You guys who are reporting > 30 seconds with Pentium 4's need OPTIMIZE your machines."
Glad that post was of help. Here it is again for others:
TheseTuningTipe
GlennChan wrote on 11/26/2006, 5:02 PM
In my opinion, some of those optimizations are dubious. For example, turning off system restore. System restore can sometimes be useful for installations that go wrong.