Maxwell Render | Official public forum

you 'll find benchmark result here

http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... 10&start=0

here

http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... ight=bench

and here the result with a dual 3.6 xeon

http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... ight=bench

hope it helped

You can find a benchmark of my computer in one of the posts where they were trying to exactly that: benchmark.

Well since it scored with the best benchmark I think it's pretty good.
Bechmark was based on benchmark number in the maxwell log file which NL said was accurate mesurment.

Dual Opteron 248
2GB RAM OCZ low latency
Asus K8N-DL motherboard
Dual 10,000rpm raptors in 0 RAID.

I hope this helps.

Slobodan

ok so that makes the opteron 248 running four threads toping at 43 minutes
while the dualxeon 3.6 tops at 40 minutes

i find those results quite odd because andronikos reach those result with the previous version of maxwell :

Dual Xeon Prestonia 2.8 OC @ 3.34Ghz: 33min 53sec (default scene skydome_test.zip) Maxwell: 1_1_10_0001_alpha


maybe because the number of thread havent been change during your tests guys? i really would like those tests to be updated...

maxwell05 wrote:The price for 2 opteron is 100$ less than 2 dual xeon...
and the benchmark are very equal...

So I prefer INTEL for many reasons...
first of all compatibility...

You mean you prefer AMD? Or is being cheaper an unfavorable quality?

How do you mean compatibility?

I'd get a dual opteron machine now because when the dualcore's drop in price all you would have to do is change the cpu's and have yourself a 4 cpu machine. The 940 socket motherboards are compatible with both single and dual core Opterons.

thomas,

Look at log file for benchmark number don't look at the time. Time is not accurate benchmark value. That's what NL said.

Mihai,

You are right, that's exactly what am I going to do. I love my opterons and with ATI FireGL 7100 the system is excelent. BOXX beat that...

Slobodan