[Aji Enrico]

ivox3 ---> Did you look at the taskmanager and see if all the cores where at 100% usage? Did you put the Threads to 8?

Syntax for MXCL.exe
------
SYNTAX: -mxs:name [-animation:A,B-C,D-E(frames) | -a] [-seed:id]
[-output:path | -o] [-bitmaps:path | -b] [-bitmaps:0 | -b:0]
[-res:xRes x yRes | -r] [-time:minutes | -t] [-priority:low | -p:low]
[-threads:numThreads | -th { 0 for autodetect } ] [-display | -d]
[-sampling:sampling level | -s] [-harddisk | -hd | -hd:maxMemory]
[-ml | -multilight] [-mxi:path,resume | -mxi:path,r] [-nowait]
[-layers:r,v,c,a,o,m,z(min,max) | -l] [-server]
------

[ivox3]

Naturally I did ... , but I didn't monitor it rather a quick glance to see that all 8 were showing up and then I closed out. I will run it again and with all the checks and see what comes up ...

[daimon]

Hey guys,
Can anyone tell me if its possible to overclock an HP XW8400 with dual dual core cpus.
Thanks

[sandykoufax]

Hey Chris.

I really want to see the octacore almighty of 22min.

[iker]

Waiting here too, and it's beeing a long waiting

[ivox3]

Sandy, ... I hope we'll see it. I did discover that Maxwell doesn't pin each core in task manager at 100%, but it fluctuates wildly from as low as 25% > 100% throughout the render.

Anyone with ideas about this, ...I'm listening. I'm pretty sure if I can maintain a constant usage we'll see a different result.

** I really hope it's not something obvious on my part ...

[Mihai]

Maybe it fluctuates at the beginning when it updates the SL, but when it takes longer between SLs, all cores are at 100%?

[beppeg]

...but it fluctuates wildly from as low as 25% > 10% throughout the render

so, what time we can expect when the "monster" will work at 100% ?


@ deadalvs: no problem thanx

[glebe digital]

This might be clutching at straws, but combined with the 'one ram-stick per core' issue the IMC might be part of the problem?
Here's what I got from tomshardware:

The Opteron's integrated memory controllers (IMC) result in much better latency, while Intel's solution is the use of a larger shared 4 MB L2 cache, which highly reduces memory access time. Which of these two methods is superior is controversial. The advantage of Intel's approach is that by keeping the memory controller on the chipset, they have greater flexibility as to what type of memory can be used, where an integrated memory controller would need a redesign of the CPU core. Given that Intel's Xeon processors share the same architecture as the desktop version CPUs, it is more efficient to have one core architecture that can be used with the standard DDR2 as well as the servers' FB-DIMM modules. Also, the fact that cache uses less power than an integrated memory controller is a plus in a market where power consumption is a significant factor. Having said this, it is a known fact that an IMC results in significant performance gains, but is it the additional cost and power requirements? Intel has decided that it is not.

[ivox3]

Mihai: ...you might be onto something, .. it seems to have a regular cycle of hanging out around 100% then doing a dip to like 35%, ..quick spike to 75% then back to 100 for awhile. So, ..maybe there's something there during the write times ... I'll check it out. Still, shouldn't it just pin the cores at 100 ?,
.




beppeg, ... I meant to say from 25% > 100%.

[ivox3]

hey Stuart, ... if you have straws, ..I'll be happy to clutch at 'em.

[Maximus3D]

Chris: I just read back in this thread a little about your new monster system amazing.. wow! i barely knew such powerhorses existed. That thing must have cost you a fortune, or two..

About this speedtest scene thingy, for how long should it run ? until it stops or ?!

/ Max

[ivox3]

hey Max, ... it exists alright. ...and thanks.

As far as the speedtest goes, ..it's setup to stop at SL=16, ..so you just run it il it finishes.

[glypticmax]

Mihai: ...you might be onto something, .. it seems to have a regular cycle of hanging out around 100% then doing a dip to like 35%, ..quick spike to 75% then back to 100 for awhile. So, ..maybe there's something there during the write times ... I'll check it out. Still, shouldn't it just pin the cores at 100 ?,
.




beppeg, ... I meant to say from 25% > 100%.

Hi Chris,
My puny dual core does the same thing during updates, then pegs back to 100%. Could that be what's going on?

[Maximus3D]

My first speedtest is finally done!

CPU: Intel Pentium 4, 3.06GHz with HT support.
Cores: 1
RAM: 2,0GB
OS: XP32
Time: 4:02:33
Bench: 27,26

Screenshot proof below


Chris: Hehe wow man! it must be an amazing computer, something you can build a shrine around and pray to thanks for the tip about the speedtest scene. But i'm ashamed about the slowness of my system now compared to yours..

/ Max