Maxwell Render | Official public forum

Hi all,

has anyone had experience with these:

http://www.boxxtech.com/products/render ... /renderpro

and in particular, the dual 12 cores?

I'm looking at options for a small, easy to use render farm setup.
These look pretty pricey, but if they're rock solid and easy to use, then would this be the best option?

What are the other options, for someone who isn't very technically minded - as far as render farms go.

cheers,

Steve

Yes, I have one with dual xeon 2640's. We bought it because we truly wanted to see what all the hype is about. They are not worth the money and they are super loud. It sounds like a small airplane is lifting off when they start up. Don't get me wrong, they are fast. But for the price I built 2 3930k work stations that combined run way faster than one of them and I can actually work off of them, not just render.

So IMO, and what I will do for the future, you are always off building your own.

Cool, cheers for the info.

Sounds like separate work stations for a small farm are the way to go.

On your 2640, what sort of heat do they chuck out?
And the loud noise you experience at start up, does this lesson when they are up and running or rendering?

cheers,

Steve

They will heat up a small office and the noise is only when it is rendering. Once the cpu kicks up to 100 percent. Cover your ears. I literally had to take it out of my office and put it in a smaller office and run a Ethernet cable through the ceiling. I went through all of the trouble it was so loud. Especially with these maxwell renders that take a long time, I couldn't handle it. I am a little worried about the heating in the small office with the door closed but that was seriously a risk I was willing to take. I couldn't imagine 4 of them stacked on top of each other!!!

They are virtually impossible to work off of. But they are called a "RENDER" pro for a reason.

I am not trying to knock it too much because it can ALMOST keep up with my other render system I built. That has dual 8 core xeons. But I almost paid as much for the render pro as I did for the dual 8 core machine and I can even work off the dual 8 core machine if worse came to worse. Then I ventured in and built two 3930k machines. And I usually work off them simultaneously at my desk and they are super fast, even faster when overclocked to like 4.0. Granted they dont render quite as fast as my renderpro or my other render staion. I think my last 3930k build was $1300 though. I can work off of it and render with it.

Its the most bang for your buck IMO

But for a small render farm, I am still trying to find the perfect ROI. I don't know if I am better off cranking out a bunch of small quad core machines that are cheap. Or do I build more 3930k workstations that take up more space and cost more...

Are those units are so loud simply because they don't have liquid cooling? Our Boxx workstations are dead silent even at 100% for hours.

CodyKallas wrote:Its the most bang for your buck IMO

But for a small render farm, I am still trying to find the perfect ROI. I don't know if I am better off cranking out a bunch of small quad core machines that are cheap. Or do I build more 3930k workstations that take up more space and cost more...

I think it's an interesting question, given the performance of the haswell quads, as according to what's been reported on benchwell; just check out the performance of the i7 4771, as opposed to the 3930k (or 4930k). Over the past decade, I have almost exclusively been using Shuttle barebones to put together machines for myself, and for some friends, so for a quick comparison (nice and simple, since it factors for PSU, case, cooling, etc), here are the prices for one 4930k machine, versus two 4771 machines:

• One hexacore machine
  
  $418 - Shuttle SX79R5
  $569 - Intel i7-4930k CPU
  $294 - G.Skill 4x8GB 1333MHz
  $91 - Samsung 840 120GB SSD
  $39 - EVGA GeForce GT 610
  ------------------------
  $1411
  
  Two quadcore machines
  
  $269 - Shuttle SH87R6
  $319 - Intel i7-4771 CPU
  $294 - G.Skill 4x8GB 1333MHz
  $91 - Samsung 840 120GB SSD
  $0 - integrated graphics
  ------------------------
  $1946 ($973 x 2)

Now, where the (comparing stock clocks; otherwise substitute the 4770k for the 4771) 4930k renders benchwell in the mid-9 minute range, the 4771 does it in around 11 minutes -- meaning that two 4771 machines should perform the equivalent of a single machine running in the sub-6 minute range. If you are already doing your rendering over the network, then a main argument against the quadcores becomes that with them, you end up with twice the likelihood of hardware failure, and twice the administrative work. On the other hand, if the single hexacore goes down, you're down, while if you lose one of the quadcores, you still have the other.

In strictly benchmarking/comparison terms, it might be more fair to put 4x4GB in each of the quadcores, and shave some cost, but in the real world, if you need 32GB to render a scene, then you need it on every machine involved. And unless you use linux, then you also need to factor for purchasing two copies of Windows for the quadcores.

So in the end, I don't know. It seems pretty even, with arguments possible for either approach. All I do know is that I have both 3930k and 4771 machines, and that the latter surprised me, as to how quick it really is.

hatts wrote:Are those units are so loud simply because they don't have liquid cooling? Our Boxx workstations are dead silent even at 100% for hours.

I believe so. It is such a small fan that it needs to run at super high rpms to stay cool.

And Thanks JDHill. That makes sense. Kind of a horse a piece.

I would say 32 gb at the bare minimum now a days. And them shuttles don't come with power supplies either do they? That would be another expense, not much but its there. And what about heat sinks?

I lied, they do come with Power supplies. Hm.. Not a bad option for a node.

Build a few i7-3930K machines with ASUS' most basic P9X79 motherboard and for only around €1100, you still hit the sweet spot of investment/speed in my opinion. I have boxes like this running nearly 24/7 @ 3.8/4.2GHz since January 2012 with only a big Noctua fan directed upwards exhausting the case, and the experience so far was very good.

feynman wrote:Build a few i7-3930K machines with ASUS' most basic P9X79 motherboard and for only around €1100, you still hit the sweet spot of investment/speed in my opinion. I have boxes like this running nearly 24/7 @ 3.8/4.2GHz since January 2012 with only a big Noctua fan directed upwards exhausting the case, and the experience so far was very good.

i run 4 machines like this too, same mobo, @4.2 w. 32GB. same timeframe.
very good board. but not really available anymore.
but i would go for a 6 core again, i feel it is less trouble to take care of less machines.

i use these 2U rack cases, very cheap ~130€, and they hold ps2 power supplys. (needs 8cm only fan ones)
all cpus are cooled with external WC.
http://www.chenbro.com/en-global/produc ... is/RM22300

Readily available from many vendors like Amazon, Circuit City, Newegg, ...

$245 ASUS P9X79 LGA 2011 Intel X79 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard
$570 Intel Core i7-3930K Hexa-Core Processor 3.2 Ghz 12 MB Cache LGA 2011 - BX80619I73930K
$80 Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 Quiet CPU Cooler for Intel LGA 2011 Socket with 6 Heatpipes, 140/120mm SSO Bearing PWM Fans NH-D14 SE2011
$142 Kingston Technology 16GB Non-ECC CL11 DIMM 1600MHz DDR3 RAM (KVR16N11K2/16)
$115 Samsung Electronics MZ-7PD128BW 840 Pro Series 2.5-Inch 128GB SATA 6Gbps Solid State Drive
$100 Corsair Enthusiast Series 650-Watt 80 Plus Bronze Certified Power Supply Compatible with Core i3, i5, i7 and platforms - TX650
$139 Windows 7 Professional SP1 64bit (OEM) System Builder DVD 1 Pack
$95 Fractal Design Define R4 Cases, Arctic White (FD-CA-DEF-R4-WH)

$1486/€1080 and off you go... No need for pricey Boxxes or Apples' Steve Jobs memorial urns ; )

You are right, i bought the pro model and searched for that;
Other models are still available

I'm working on an overclocked i7-4770K as work station. I think they have the highest single core performance available (and a lot of software does not really make use of many cores), which makes them ideal for working, but you need networking rendering and a small farm for maxwell.
we've also bought a couple workstations with dual xeon E5-2687W last year, which are extremely fast for rendering (almost three times as fast as the overclocked i7) but for some tasks or for displaying heavy geometry in rhino5, they are slower. And they cost around three times as much as the i7 workstation

For rendering machines I would still tend to go for more cores instead. I'm even thinking of trying something with dual xeon just for rendering purpose, as it is really a pain to maintain too many computers ... So it would be something similar to the boxx

For the workstation, on which one manipulates geometry, just get an AMD FirePro V4900 - handles an entire car in Pro/E or Alias. And that's real massive geometry, not just a few million polygons. Very cheap graphics card, too.

You can shave off a little extra cost from a node by using Linux (so no Windows license) and even leaving out the hard drive and booting via PXE from a server (or workstation I guess) - search for how to setup diskless linux for the details. Plus you get the happy side effect of only maintaining one computer since all the nodes boot from the same source.

Maxwell runs great on Linux, plus you get to save about 2gb ram that windows eats up by itself (my linux nodes use 300mb ram when idle)

Makes the option of using 2 quad core machines for every hex core machine even more cost effective.

And no, I don't make any money from Linux Just a happy user.

Hi egmehl,

that sounds like a great idea, for cost and a little extra available RAM.

My technical expertise isn't too good though, so I wouldn't even know where to start on that setup, I'm afraid.

cheers,

Steve