Intel Core i9 7980XE 2.6GHz 18-Core Extreme Edition for 3D and multimedia?

white_wildfire

Ive seen that Intel has released some new super chips with lots of cores. I9 with 10 cores for around 1000 dollars and the Extreme edition for around 1600 dollars. Now I wonder, can it be of a good thing to get one  and what good can it do for us artists? Which software, renderers etc. They cost alot, and I mean alot. but I wonder if they could really amp up the software for faster rendering, simulation, dynamics, video editing, Photoshop etc.
 

PolyHertz

The benefits / disadvantages of going with high core count CPUs are listed in the first post here (CPUs > What to Know): http://polycount.com/discussion/173350/upgrading-or-building-a-new-pc-this-is-the-thread-for-you/p1

Or to quote myself from a recent post in that thread:

As a general rule; Modeling tools (bevel, connect, etc.) and physics simulations are limited by your CPUs per-thread performance. Rendering/baking is limited by how many threads you have. And Basic viewport navigation and  shader performance is limited by your GPU.

If you're going to be focusing primarily on physics simulations, probably a bad idea to go with any CPU that sacrifices per-thread performance for more cores. If you're going to be spending a lot of time rendering though; more cores all the way.

As for video editing...I think scrub speed has more to do with your SSD and CPU per-thread performance (as well as how much RAM you have since it can eat a ton of it), but final video encoding can take advantage of the extra cores. Though not 100% sure on that.

WeatherMan

I could be wrong but your typical 3D software package wouldn't be able to take full advantage of so many cores (Maya is just barely in the early stages of supporting multi-threading, for example). I think they still benefit more from having a workstation class GPU than anything else. Imo it's only really worth that kind of money if you do a LOT of rendering/video encoding.

thomasp

maximum clock speed per core and around 4 - 8 cores would make the most sense to me for interactive tasks. last time i checked, 6-core 3,7 to 4 ghz seemed like the sweet spot for 3D. i'm on 4-core 4 ghz and usually have enough CPU headroom to have a whole bunch of tasks running. RAM tends to be more of an issue now for me with 64 bit software than CPU grunt.

white_wildfire

Its good to get some insight regarding this matter. I understand it a litlle better now. I thought for awhile that with so many cores, you can shoot out more commands into different chambers and it would enchance some of the work. Im ruunning a SKylake I7 6800 with 64GB of DD4 and its fast, but now when I read this, I think I will try to invest in a powerful workstation GPU. And that leaves me with another question. AMD or Nvidia? I hear Vray is now partly GPU based, Redshift and Octane are using CUDA, etc. But I always sort of prefered AMD and it started when I bought a FIREPRO W5000. Im sure there lots of threads on this, so I wont take up your time but its really great to hear these suggestions. Thanks. 

Burpee

I'd go for nVidia, the new 10x serie are really great and kinda cheap. I used a 1070 and I have crazy good performance in Substance Painter / Mari and GPU rendering is hella fast.

white_wildfire

That sounds solid. The price range between 1070 and 1080 is not that bad and I think that it could benefit me more. 

Then we have the TI, which in fact should be around 30% faster. Or, if I get two 1070 and put them together. I will have to do some real research for these cards have pros and cons. 

Im a concept artist student, and soon I will be looking for studios to work at, in fact there is one here in Sweden that promised me an entry level position, and I will be rendering as much as possible. I use Arnold in Maya, Modo, Substance Painter etc. and of course Photoshop. Nuke, Premiere etc is also on the list. I hope I can find the right card for the job and something that will grant me speed and efficiency that is required. 

Burpee

Take a 1070 or a 1080 if you can aford it and you'll be fine ! 

white_wildfire

thank you bro. I think I will. Can afford? No, not yet but soon.....

white_wildfire

PolyHertz said:

The benefits / disadvantages of going with high core count CPUs are listed in the first post here (CPUs > What to Know): http://polycount.com/discussion/173350/upgrading-or-building-a-new-pc-this-is-the-thread-for-you/p1

Or to quote myself from a recent post in that thread:

As a general rule; Modeling tools (bevel, connect, etc.) and physics simulations are limited by your CPUs per-thread performance. Rendering/baking is limited by how many threads you have. And Basic viewport navigation and  shader performance is limited by your GPU.

If you're going to be focusing primarily on physics simulations, probably a bad idea to go with any CPU that sacrifices per-thread performance for more cores. If you're going to be spending a lot of time rendering though; more cores all the way.

As for video editing...I think scrub speed has more to do with your SSD and CPU per-thread performance (as well as how much RAM you have since it can eat a ton of it), but final video encoding can take advantage of the extra cores. Though not 100% sure on that.

Thank you for your summary of the computer world. It really is interesting and important because these things in one way or other alter ouuur ability to do what we do. I wont