Settling a dispute, Pixar's PC Specs.

[lancec2c30]

Didnt say that.



My point is that CUDA makes gpu's work the same way as cpu's, and they do it with more power,
and more efficiently.


F@H is only one of the many programs that can take advantage of this.


CUDA Zone -- The resource for CUDA developers




From what i know the latest xeons and core duos are very very similar...

You can use 300 desktop cpus, or 8 gpus and get the same power... which sounds better??

It's called humor, you should try it sometime. Yes you did mention folding.

Parallel Processing FTW...I love it!

Ive never been able to fold so fast before....knowing that i have the power of 15 PS3's
in only 3 gpu's makes me feel like a king...lol

 

[ricanflow]

It's called humor, you should try it sometime. Yes you did mention folding.

Just one of the great things we can do with CUDA.

 

[zedman3d]

Look im not trying to say anything difficult that boggles the mind... Im just saying, that the article says they used 1024 Xeons to render the frames. Correct? Now what im saying is, if they are using CPU's to do all the work, then there would be no reason to have a workstation video card in each of the pc's in the farm as it would make no difference.

K?

Now if they are using video cards as well as cpu's then yeah sure, they would have workstation cards in there. But it doesnt. Whether they do now is a different story and i know video cards are faster than CPU's, that's not what im debating.

 

[ricanflow]

Zedman, you said that video cards cant help with render speeds...youre kinda contradicting youself since you just said that video cards are faster.

Back then, no they werent able to harness the power of the cards for anything other
than 3d models since they didnt have the proper architecture, and they were nowhere near as fast as they are now.

But were trying to say that right now, it would be much wiser for pixar to run
multiple gpu's instead of 1000+ cpu's, since graphic cards have gotten to the point to where they are extremely fast, and now with the introduction of CAl and CUDA, they can be used in ways never possible before.

 

[Oreo]

what i don't understand, that if GPU's are so much more powerfull than CPU's - why don't they use GPU's inplace of CPU's ? or are they a totally different thing ?

 

[ricanflow]

This is all new techology oreo, and theres lots of companies starting to use gpus instead now.

 

[Apokalipse]

Look im not trying to say anything difficult that boggles the mind... Im just saying, that the article says they used 1024 Xeons to render the frames. Correct? Now what im saying is, if they are using CPU's to do all the work, then there would be no reason to have a workstation video card in each of the pc's in the farm as it would make no difference.

but it does make a difference

 

[zedman3d]

but it does make a difference

Head explodes.
Let me explain in very simple terms, if there not using video cards through/with CUDA, and they are only using the cpu's to render, then it would make no difference if there was a workstation card or not. Jealereh.... (Cypriot Saying)
PS: Ricanflow sorry bout before, forgot about Cuda. I gave you a Kudo, lol.

 

[gurusan]

Zedman is right, they probably had crapola vid cards. Our dell 25 node computational fluid dynamics cruncher just uses CPUs...tbh I'm not even sure if it has any gfx card(s) because you log into it remotely to give it instructions.

With CUDA and GPGPU I'm sure we will see things changing though.

 

[Apokalipse]

Head explodes.
Let me explain in very simple terms, if there not using video cards through/with CUDA, and they are only using the cpu's to render, then it would make no difference if there was a workstation card or not. Jealereh.... (Cypriot Saying)

Of course it'd be pointless to get good GPU's if they didn't use them to their potential. But the fact remains that GPU's are much faster than CPU's. And if they did utilise the GPU's to render the scenes, it would make a difference.
There's Brook+ and CUDA