Decoyman Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 I ran Cinebench R15 on my 4-year-old 17" MacBook Pro and got the following results: OpenGL 10.72 fps CPU 136 cb The OpenGL figure seems in line with Jim's test measurements, the CPU one completely at odds with them. Looking at the OpenGL result only it looks like I need a new computer! A very helpful thread, thank you. Quote Link to comment
Vectorworks, Inc Employee PVA - Admin Posted November 6, 2013 Vectorworks, Inc Employee Share Posted November 6, 2013 For any users that were interested in the benchmarking topic: I just benched my own machines again with R11 and R15 of Cinebench. The OpenGL metric seems to have stayed very similar, I got an OpenGL score of 36 in r11 and 38 in r15. However the CPU scores were very different and marked with a new type of unit. r11 scored my iMac at 3.92 "pts" while r15 used a new metric and scored the same machine 344 "cb" So it appears they have indeed changed how they rate CPUs. Quote Link to comment
bcd Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 Cinebench 11.5 score for MacMini (a great little workhorse worth its weight in silver) Intel (i7 3720QM) 4 core 8 threads @2.6 GHz OSX 10.9 64 BIT Intel HD Graphics 4000 OGL Engine OpenGL 25.62 fps CPU 6.26 Quote Link to comment
digitalcarbon Posted November 6, 2013 Author Share Posted November 6, 2013 bcd, what was that comment about a mac mini? that is my original question, get a top of the line mac mini, which i only keep for a year or low end mac pro there is about a $2000 difference and if a mini can get me through another year why spend the extra money.. if i get the mac pro am i going to see $2000 worth of speed? Quote Link to comment
Bryan G. Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 From what I know (and I may be wrong) is that yes the OSX can be handed off like you say. but that they have opened the door for developers to do the same. and that the system will feed overtaxing data to the graphics cards. The use of GPU in a computer is the only way to massively boost the performance of these workstations. the primary cores feed data to the GPUs, this may take some time for all third parties to write in to code (if truly needed) but this is the same route Cray Research took with the super Computers. And yes I know this is not a Super Computer but years ago when I was at Cray the Y-MP (was round just ALOT BIGGER) had 2,4 or 8 processors and a performance of 333 megaflops and max 512 MB of ram this was 1992 and cost $15,000,000.00. In 2002 the X1 would process to 50 teraflops and be sold in excess of $50,000,000.00 and is still used today. Here is a system that can process 7 TF at a price (guessing as it is not released) of around $10,000.00. Apple has moved from desktop as we know it today to workstations that are designed to be workhorses. And the implementation of GPU processing takes up the gap in speed improvements that the chip manufacturers(intel) are lacking on, as the overall processing of the Intels have not gained that much lately. And yes the dual GPUs should work with Renderworks as they are bridged and process jointly. Sorry for the long rambling, I am quite excited as I saw years ago Cray doing unbelievable things and now I get a "Mini Cray" just fun! Quote Link to comment
Bryan G. Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 Jim W, from my understanding they will be linked, thus processing faster. Although probably not twice as fast. This is to use OpenCL but would have to come from you in code. Guess we'll have to wait. Quote Link to comment
Bryan G. Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 My Cinebench R11.5 scores Mac Pro (2007) intel Xeon CPU 5150 4 cores, 4 threads @ 2.66 Ghz OSX 10.6.8 64 Bit ATI Radeon HD 3870 Open GL Engine Open GL- 23.79 fps CPU- 2.93 I will post new scores with new Mac Pro when in. Quote Link to comment
IanH Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 And yes the dual GPUs should work with Renderworks as they are bridged and process jointly. Isn't Renderworks good old Intel CPU based rendering, albeit multithreaded, so graphics card isn't doing much other than displaying the rendered pixels? OpenGL there will be a difference, but that isn't Renderworks. That's my understanding. Quote Link to comment
Kevin McAllister Posted November 6, 2013 Share Posted November 6, 2013 My Cinebench R15 scores for my late 2012 Retina Macbook Pro - 4 cores, 8 threads 2.70 GHz Intel Core i7 - 3820QM CPU Nvidia GeForce GT 650M OS X 10.9.0 OpenGL - 50.94 fps CPU - 588 cb This is an interesting comparison. Kevin Quote Link to comment
digitalcarbon Posted November 7, 2013 Author Share Posted November 7, 2013 ok ok ok ok? what would really be useful is this: 1. the vw web site have a file that we can all download. this file has a lot of renderings and section vps 2. we open it and do "up date all viewports" this file has a way of recording the time it takes and collects some computer info 3. this info is sent back to the web site and listed for all to see. NOW we have a common reference point for something real. we can all compare our render time to everyone else. so instead of "i got a Cinebench # of this or that" we can see that you took 5 min to render the file, a file that i am familiar with, and it took me 10 min. this is what we would see: file test 1 5min 45sec 4 cores, 8 threads 2.70 GHz Intel Core i7 - 3820QM CPU Nvidia GeForce GT 650M OS X 10.9.0 THAT'S what we need.. Quote Link to comment
digitalcarbon Posted November 7, 2013 Author Share Posted November 7, 2013 then we can calculate the value for our own offices. like this: 20 hr work week (modest) times 50 weeks (2 weeks vacation) hourly rate $35/hr (modest) $2000 difference in mac mini & mac pro so 20hrs x 50wks = 1000hr for the year of working with vw $2000 / 1000hrs = 2hrs per 20hr work week so if i spend the extra $2000 will the mac pro shave off 2hrs of work? updating viewports each week? 2hrs = 120min so 120min / 20hrs = 6min per hour so this 6min per hour is a number that an office can really use in making a judgment in how much to spend on hardware. Quote Link to comment
bcd Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 Cinebench R15 score for MacMini Intel (i7 3720QM) 4 core 8 threads @2.6 GHz OSX 10.9 64 BIT Intel HD Graphics 4000 OGL Engine OpenGL 17.83 fps CPU 569 Quote Link to comment
Bryan G. Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 Ian, yes, I believe you are right that the Renderworks rendering option is intel based. I was referring to The package as a whole, ie. openGL and others. but also hope there will be something in the short future for RW option. Quote Link to comment
Bryan G. Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 digitalmechanics, yes I like this idea. this would be a fantastic benchmark for users on determining which computer works best for them in there workflow and budget. This would get real results that can be monetarily measured. Quote Link to comment
Vectorworks, Inc Employee Matt Panzer Posted November 7, 2013 Vectorworks, Inc Employee Share Posted November 7, 2013 ok ok ok ok? what would really be useful is this: 1. the vw web site have a file that we can all download. this file has a lot of renderings and section vps 2. we open it and do "up date all viewports" this file has a way of recording the time it takes and collects some computer info 3. this info is sent back to the web site and listed for all to see. NOW we have a common reference point for something real. we can all compare our render time to everyone else. This would be great for rendering, but the other VW functions are just as (if not more) important. Since most VW functions are not multithreaded, they would most likely benefit from different hardware configurations than Renderworks does (faster processors vs more threads). For many of us, we want things as snappy and fluid as possible while we're doing the actual work. Things like waiting for complex PIO's to regenerate (or open their settings dialogs) interrupt the workflow much more than Renderworks speed. So maybe this "benchmark file" we download could also have a way to test many other VW functions. The information this would provide users could save users hundreds or thousands of dollars in making hardware purchases. It could even prompt many users to hold off on new hardware if the speed difference is only minimal. Quote Link to comment
Bryan G. Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 New Cinebench R15 Scores OpenGL 32.51 CPU 251cb I find that the i7cpu's are much faster than my old blister, but openGL is faster with my GPU than the mini. Quote Link to comment
Bryan G. Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 Matt, yes yes this could include something like DTM calcs (just speaking for us land guys). the real world data would be invaluable. I have contacted some other users here locally to see and post there scores but I like this idea of a real benchmark. Quote Link to comment
Vectorworks, Inc Employee PVA - Admin Posted November 7, 2013 Vectorworks, Inc Employee Share Posted November 7, 2013 Jim W, from my understanding they will be linked, thus processing faster. Although probably not twice as fast. This is to use OpenCL but would have to come from you in code. Guess we'll have to wait. We do not yet have support for OpenCL. Quote Link to comment
Vectorworks, Inc Employee PVA - Admin Posted November 7, 2013 Vectorworks, Inc Employee Share Posted November 7, 2013 And yes the dual GPUs should work with Renderworks as they are bridged and process jointly. Isn't Renderworks good old Intel CPU based rendering, albeit multithreaded, so graphics card isn't doing much other than displaying the rendered pixels? OpenGL there will be a difference, but that isn't Renderworks. That's my understanding. Correct, video cards will currently only process the OpenGL rendering mode and a bit of wireframe/hidden line. The video card will not currently affect any of the full Renderworks rendering modes. Quote Link to comment
Vectorworks, Inc Employee PVA - Admin Posted November 7, 2013 Vectorworks, Inc Employee Share Posted November 7, 2013 (edited) ok ok ok ok? what would really be useful is this: 1. the vw web site have a file that we can all download. this file has a lot of renderings and section vps 2. we open it and do "up date all viewports" this file has a way of recording the time it takes and collects some computer info 3. this info is sent back to the web site and listed for all to see. NOW we have a common reference point for something real. we can all compare our render time to everyone else. so instead of "i got a Cinebench # of this or that" we can see that you took 5 min to render the file, a file that i am familiar with, and it took me 10 min. this is what we would see: file test 1 5min 45sec 4 cores, 8 threads 2.70 GHz Intel Core i7 - 3820QM CPU Nvidia GeForce GT 650M OS X 10.9.0 THAT'S what we need.. The problem I see with this is that you would have to fully install Vectorworks on the machine in order to benchmark it in this manner. So you couldn't simply go around benching multiple machines, since you would rapidly run into the max activations limit installing Vectorworks on so many machines. That system would work great for judging machines that already had Vectorworks on them, but would not be so useful for testing prospective new computers. I was attempting to devise a procedure that would allow a user to drop a small utility or two onto a machine and test it, without the entire process of installing Vectorworks itself. Edited November 7, 2013 by JimW Quote Link to comment
Patrick Fritsch Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 (edited) Check out how maxwell does it with a test file and a nice post page. http://www.maxwellrender.com/index.php/benchwell One thing I find useful with this method is to confirm if my system is at least running at par with others. Edited November 7, 2013 by Fritsch Quote Link to comment
Vectorworks, Inc Employee PVA - Admin Posted November 7, 2013 Vectorworks, Inc Employee Share Posted November 7, 2013 Check out how maxwell does it with a test file and a nice post page. http://www.maxwellrender.com/index.php/benchwell One thing I find useful with this method is to confirm if my system is at least running at par with others. Excellent! This is exactly what I am already working on here with all of the hardware available to me. Quote Link to comment
Bryan G. Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 Jim W, I understand the issues with full VW on a machine but with as many users out there and being able to benchmark computers would aide in many users purchasing decisions. What I mean is in my case I would like to go to a new mac pro, I will take the chance that it is a superior machine and spend the money. I will then benchmark this machine and post. Then when John Doe (imaginary person sorry if your name is John Doe) is looking to buy a new machine, he can look at the posted computers and make his selection based on his workflow and budget. I just spoke with a user that renders custom furniture pieces and does not need a workhorse of a computer so he can find the computer that gives him the results he wants at a price he wants. For me if I can spent $2000 more and save 10-20 min a day then money well spent. Dont look at it as testing all new models but a general benchmark for users by users to make better decisions for their business. Quote Link to comment
Bryan G. Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 sorry delayed post. Yes my thoughts exactly! Quote Link to comment
Bryan G. Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 But this should be based on computers not CPU. And there should be the ability to check and benchmark rendering and general CPU- GPU(maybe for future) calculation intensive processes. ie DTM calcs or whatever. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.