Multiple Core Computers

D

Denny

New elf
Joined
Jan 18, 2012
Messages
23
Location
Casa Grande, AZ
I will be using pixel control with LOR this year for the first time and am confused over the selection of a multi-core processor for my computer. Would it be better to use a six core processor with a higher speed or an eight core processor with a lower speed? For example, a six core at 4.1GHz or an 8 core at 3.6GHz. Is the speed of the processor more important or the number of cores?
 
The number of channels is going to be the governing factor on how fast your computer needs to be. Unless you are going to many 1000's of channels then LOR should have much trouble running on anything much faster than an old dual core machine. I ran about 400 channels of mainly dmx last year through LOR on my dual core lappy.
 
There are many factors that go into this equation that just cores can not answer. Im assuming your looking at AMD processors with 6 and 8 cores. The Pentium 4 core processors have the same overall power in many areas as well with half the cores. The AMD has a few advantages even with more cores they are minor and Pentium has its advantages with less cores. These new processors are way overkill for a show computer. As there is very little work done once the sequence is open for play. This is not the same as if you are sequencing as Sequence Editor likes power, still these new lines of processors are brutes when it comes to handling programs like this. If you have a budget and your just using it for a play computer then you can get by real cheap. If you are making a new rig for sequencing, video editing, games, HD movie compression about $1000 bucks right now will get you a long way.
 
Actually, I am trying to avoid a new computer. My show computer last year without pixel control was a 4 core and it worked great. I didn't want to have to upgrade again and it sounds like I am OK. From some of the posts I was reading, I was beginning to get the impression that I needed something more powerful. Will only be running 24 strings of 42 pixels this year, so I should be OK. Thanks for the advice!
 
You really only need something new if the current computer is very slow with doing sequences, the actual running of the show takes very little load.

As far as what is the best option then that will vary based on budget and requirements. A multicore helps with multitasking and LSP somehwat takes some advanatge of this but memory is also very important for sequence creation. A good video card, preferably a dedicated video card can also help with using the visualizer. Then you can also look at if you want a solid state drive so you can dramatically reduce bootup, load and save times.
For me i upgraded last year to a i7 3.4ghz with 16GB ram, i used my already 1/2 decent dedicated video card, but still would like to get a SSD. This seems to perform well with LSP with 5K + channels.

Its best to set a budget and then work on what is important and what sacrifices you will have to make to keep within your budget.
 
I ran 8000 channels last year with a dual core Toshiba laptop (1.73GHz Core 2 Duo CPU) and LSP with no dramas at all. Initial loading of each sequence was slow, but I could deal with that, and think that was partly the CPU and partly the HDD speed.

I did program the sequences on an i7 PC with 12GB ram, or my Macbook Air i5 with just 1.5GB of ram available for windows, and both were fast enough to program, but the show PC above was a bit slow to actually sequence with
 
Denny said:
I will be using pixel control with LOR this year for the first time and am confused over the selection of a multi-core processor for my computer. Would it be better to use a six core processor with a higher speed or an eight core processor with a lower speed? For example, a six core at 4.1GHz or an 8 core at 3.6GHz. Is the speed of the processor more important or the number of cores?
Click to expand...

OK, some Facts without having all the facts..........

Starting position: I run AMD processors at home and use Intel Processors at work so fairly balanced view. My show computer is a 8 Core BE(black edition) AMD FX, my main Home Office Machine is a 6 Core AMD BE. Both with 16GB RAM.

Fact:
A multicore processor is good for running multiple applications at the same time or running applications that have been coded to support multiple cores.

Fact:
Vixen, LSP at least do not take advantage of more than one core, though LSP does have a background activity that will use a second core.

Guess:
LOR has not been written to take advantage of multiple cores, easy to test by doing something intensive and watching overall processor usage.

Fact:
Thousands of channels of pixels does need a modern processor. If you have a quad core this may well be good enough and is considered modern.

Fact:
Applications not specifically coded to take advantage of multiple cores will benefit more from higher clock speeds as a generalised statement, ie the 6 core above would be better than the 8 core.


Comment:
My move to a 8 Core show machine last year was a mistake for 2011 as the software i was using couldn't take advantage of those cores........ however the software i'm planning to run this year will so i'm considering it an investment for this year now.

Hardware thoughts:
Whilst I am an AMD, if you (or any reader of this) is considering spending the money on a new show machine then a FAST Intel i5 or i7 is most definately the best option in my opinion. AMD will certainly do the job but the Intel's generally have the performance edge that could mean the difference on the night.

Final comment:
There is a world of difference from 500 channels that a lot of people consider a large show to the thousands of channels used when doing RGB pixels on the performance required from your computer.

Cheers
Phil
 
I think, the number of cores is more important than the frequency of processor, for a six core at 4.1GHz or an 8 core at 3.6GHz, I will choose the 8 cores.
 
nicho said:
I think, the number of cores is more important than the frequency of processor, for a six core at 4.1GHz or an 8 core at 3.6GHz, I will choose the 8 cores.
Click to expand...

*sigh* please fully read at least the last post. Phil has tested this hence the reason he is saying fact for some and guess for others.
 
All my time wasted looking for an answer on other boards and the answer is right here. Thanks Phil (a few months late).
 
remoteutah said:
FYI - LSP 2.5 - 64 bit supports multiple processors and cores.
Click to expand...

Correct all one has to do is watch the CPU resource monitor and you will see LSP using more than one core
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top