[chedda]

I was waiting to see what the next mac mini would bring they were released yesterday. The server version has a quad core i7 @ 2 ghz and can take 8 GB of ram. I am thinking this would be an ideal render node ? I noticed the server version has an onboard intel graphics card i am guessing this is not a problem ? So all i need i an ethernet switch and i can start adding mac minis with node licenses ? One more question do these nodes help with fire or is it simply the final render ?

[numerobis]

Maybe you should think of it this way: would you add your notebook to your renderfarm?!?
The mac mini has notebook hardware inside... slow, bad cooling for 24/7 and expensive (1200€ with 8GB!!!). It's small, yes - but that's it...

If you need it small, better take a micro atx board. For these 1200€ you get a i7 hexa core with 24GB RAM and SSD!


Fire can't use network nodes...

[chedda]

I never buy ram from apple it's about triple price ! No i wouldn't use a laptop in a render farm because it's screen trackpad & keyboard is un-necersary. Your right about laptop components this is a problem especially the 5400 rpm drives but the server uses 7200 rpm. The CPU also is a mobility version i think even the high end quad, i will wait for some benchmarks to see it's suitability. The size and form factor is a bonus and also it's low power use.
I have ever only used mac so i'd prefer to stay in this environment, networking is super easy. I know there are some other mac users here who may be contemplating such a node. I think the gain may be sufficient if the quad is indeed sandy bridge based rather than westmere. The mini uses 85W of power so i will save some cash in the long run plus it is silent.

the options i see for 2.0 are:

i7 QC 2635QM / 8 Logical cores / 6MB Cache : PassMark 6327
i7 QC 2630QM / 8 Logical cores / 6MB Cache : PassMark 6294

[numerobis]

No i wouldn't use a laptop in a render farm because it's screen trackpad & keyboard is un-necersary.

you know what i meant!
But do what you want...


you can easily reduce the power draw of a 2600k sys to 85W... if you clock it down to 2,x GHz
The money you save on the lower wattage of the mobile processors you will have to spend for the more expensive hardware... and because the render will take longer it will suck these 85W for a longer time

Here are some cinebench scores:

i7 2635QM - 2GHz score 4.77
i7 2600 - 3.42GHz score 6.78
i7 970 - 3.24GHz score 8.50

from http://www.cbscores.com/

and a passmark comparison
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu ... 40+2.00GHz

[chedda]

Thanks for the help. I wonder how the scores compare to my mac pro 2.93 x12. I am little new to this tech of passmarks. Apple has never been cheap for me ! I like the fact it's ready to go plug & play. I would have to dive in at the deep end to build my own machine.
I work in a tight space so any extra hardware will be within earshot.The last thing i want is howling fans !

I am going to look into it a bit more and compare results.

on the passmark website:

i7-2635QM gets 6537
X5670 (mac pro x2) so that's 18674 ?

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu ... 40+2.93GHz

looking at cinebench scores i get 15.16 (mac pro) or 4.7 for the i7-2635QM

i expected the mac mini to get 1/3 rd of that score it's pretty close ?

[numerobis]

no, you can't double the score for dual cpu systems, it's always a bit lower. Here is the score for a dual X5670

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu ... 40+2.93GHz

and the cinebench score:
dual Xeon X5670 - 2.93 score 15.45

[chedda]

So it's actually slightly better than a third as fast, the cinebench scores are slightly slower than a third ? It is less than a 3rd of the price of a mac pro i know they are both expensive !

[chedda]

I just found the geekbench score for the quad server model it scores 9401 (64 bit bench) compared to my 12 core mac pro which sees 22500 (32 bit bench). I know all of these benchmarks are not real world and have flaws but they do give a rough idea. You can see i am trying to justify this addition at some point because solely using macs i have little choice. It is expensive when you look at the power over cost. But it does mean an assembled quiet small machine.

[numerobis]

yes, maybe... but as said before, i think quiet in this case means very high temps on full load over a longer time. I don't think it's made for this

[chedda]

Yeah heat is the problem it always accelerates hardware death. Being a server model i am hoping it is designed to be on 24/7 but at full bore ? That is the big question.

[balt]

You also might want to consider upgrading and overclocking as viable options for renderbeasts. I just upgraded my old workstation from an i7-930 to an i7-980 for $600. OC'd it to 4.5 GHz and it is now only 10% slower than my new workstation, the 12 core MacPro that cost $8k 6 months ago!

Cheers

- Balt