Ryzen 3900x rendering: Reddit — Dive into anything

447 Comments

New Microarchitecture, New 7nm Process Node, New Chiplet Design Memory Hierarchy Changes: Double L3, Faster MemoryX570 Motherboards: PCIe 4. 0 For EverybodyBenchmarking Setup: Windows 1903Test Bed and SetupSPEC2006 & 2017: Industry Standard — ST Performance & IPCBenchmarking Performance: Web TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU System TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU Rendering TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU Encoding TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU Office TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU Legacy TestsGaming: World of Tanks enCoreGaming: Shadow of WarGaming: Ashes Classic (DX12)Gaming: Strange Brigade (DX12, Vulkan)Gaming: Grand Theft Auto VGaming: F1 2018Power Consumption & OverclockingConclusion: Shy Of The Very Best, Overall Absolute Winner

** = Old results marked were performed with the original BIOS & boost behaviour as published on 7/7.

Rendering is often a key target for processor workloads, lending itself to a professional environment. It comes in different formats as well, from 3D rendering through rasterization, such as games, or by ray tracing, and invokes the ability of the software to manage meshes, textures, collisions, aliasing, physics (in animations), and discarding unnecessary work. Most renderers offer CPU code paths, while a few use GPUs and select environments use FPGAs or dedicated ASICs. For big studios however, CPUs are still the hardware of choice.

All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.

Corona 1.3: Performance Render

An advanced performance based renderer for software such as 3ds Max and Cinema 4D, the Corona benchmark renders a generated scene as a standard under its 1.3 software version. Normally the GUI implementation of the benchmark shows the scene being built, and allows the user to upload the result as a ‘time to complete’.

We got in contact with the developer who gave us a command line version of the benchmark that does a direct output of results. Rather than reporting time, we report the average number of rays per second across six runs, as the performance scaling of a result per unit time is typically visually easier to understand.

The Corona benchmark website can be found at https://corona-renderer. com/benchmark

LuxMark v3.1: LuxRender via Different Code Paths

As stated at the top, there are many different ways to process rendering data: CPU, GPU, Accelerator, and others. On top of that, there are many frameworks and APIs in which to program, depending on how the software will be used. LuxMark, a benchmark developed using the LuxRender engine, offers several different scenes and APIs.

Taken from the Linux Version of LuxMark

In our test, we run the simple ‘Ball’ scene on both the C++ and OpenCL code paths, but in CPU mode. This scene starts with a rough render and slowly improves the quality over two minutes, giving a final result in what is essentially an average ‘kilorays per second’.

POV-Ray 3.7.1: Ray Tracing

The Persistence of Vision ray tracing engine is another well-known benchmarking tool, which was in a state of relative hibernation until AMD released its Zen processors, to which suddenly both Intel and AMD were submitting code to the main branch of the open source project. For our test, we use the built-in benchmark for all-cores, called from the command line.

POV-Ray can be downloaded from http://www.povray.org/

Cinebench R15

The latest version of CineBench has also become one of those ‘used everywhere’ benchmarks, particularly as an indicator of single thread performance. High IPC and high frequency gives performance in ST, whereas having good scaling and many cores is where the MT test wins out.

Benchmarking Performance: CPU System Tests
Benchmarking Performance: CPU Encoding Tests
New Microarchitecture, New 7nm Process Node, New Chiplet Design Memory Hierarchy Changes: Double L3, Faster MemoryX570 Motherboards: PCIe 4.0 For EverybodyBenchmarking Setup: Windows 1903Test Bed and SetupSPEC2006 & 2017: Industry Standard — ST Performance & IPCBenchmarking Performance: Web TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU System TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU Rendering TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU Encoding TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU Office TestsBenchmarking Performance: CPU Legacy TestsGaming: World of Tanks enCoreGaming: Shadow of WarGaming: Ashes Classic (DX12)Gaming: Strange Brigade (DX12, Vulkan)Gaming: Grand Theft Auto VGaming: F1 2018Power Consumption & OverclockingConclusion: Shy Of The Very Best, Overall Absolute Winner

PRINT THIS ARTICLE

Intel or Ryzen for Graphics, Rendering and Video Editing

With the introduction of the new line of Ryzen 3000 series processors (3900X, 3800X, 3700X, 3600), AMD has successfully closed the gap with the best offerings from competing Intel. As a result, most of the new CPU models smash direct competitors in every type of task.

UPD. November 2020 — a separate article about the new AMD 5000 processor series

The site has additional articles on the following topics:

Best computer for GPU rendering (Octane, Redshift, V-Ray GPU)

Best Computer for 3D Modeling and Rendering (CPU) in 2019

Best Computer for Video Editing

Let’s take a closer look and compare AMD and Intel products to conclude: which current processor should I use when building a computer at the end of 2019? Let’s start holivar ))

For those who want quick advice and don’t like to figure out «why?» right from the end I will give a list with the most productive solutions in each category.

Ryzen or Intel in 2019?

Video Editing Processor
Top Performance — Intel Core i9 9980XE
Best Value — AMD Ryzen 9 3900X
Budget Option — AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

Processor for graphics
Top performance — Intel Core i9 9900K
Best Value — AMD Ryzen 9 3900X
Budget Option — AMD Ryzen 5 3600

CPU Rendering
Top Performance — AMD Threadripper 2990WX
Best Value — AMD Ryzen 9 3900X
Budget Option — AMD Ryzen 5 3400G

Overall Performance
Top Performance — AMD Ryzen 9 3900X
Best Value — AMD Ryzen 7 3700X
Budget option — AMD Ryzen 5 2600X

History of confrontation AMD vs Intel

If you are interested in how the development of technology led to such conclusions and want to understand a little more about the difference between processors, read on.

AMD and Intel have been a rivalry for almost half a century and one of the oldest topics for technical holivar between fans of their products. And in the future, the confrontation is unlikely to stop.

For years, the advantage in the CPU market was held by Intel, in the 21st century, at least the last decade, AMD was trailing behind. However, everything changed with the release of the AMD Ryzen line in 2017. Intel’s
has long stood out due to its higher performance, wide range of models for various market segments, which in general made them a better and easier choice for any purpose.

Whether the customer needed a gaming computer, a workstation or an office computer, the conclusion was clear — take Intel and don’t rack your brains.

Intel’s IPC advantage

The difference in overall performance is rooted in companies’ fundamentally different approaches to processor architecture that were introduced around 2010-2011.

Intel focused on improving IPC performance (Instructions per cycle — operations per cycle), AMD focused on parallel data processing. One approach implied the creation of processors with a smaller number, but very productive cores, and the second — a larger number, but individually weaker cores.

What is IPC?

Instructions per Cycle is the number of operations that the processor can perform during one cycle. What does this mean in practice?

See. For more than 10 years there have been processors with a clock speed of 3 GHz. However, if we compare any modern processor with an older one, but the same frequency, it turns out that the modern one is much faster. Why? Because of the IPC. For 1 cycle, the newest processors perform more operations than the older ones. While increasing operations per clock directly increases the overall performance of the processor, and increasing IPC is the most obvious and important goal when designing faster CPUs.

AMD: low IPC and failure of the FX line

In 2011, AMD released the FX processor line, which was created almost from scratch, but sales failed. The fact is that new processors were often slower than their own processors of previous generations, which they replaced!
The FX 4000 series arrived a few months later, but simply couldn’t compete with Intel’s Sandy Bridge CPUs. This allowed Intel to consolidate its dominance and increase sales.

Over the next few years, history moved in the right direction, as both companies increased the performance of their processors in new generations.
The result is logical: Intel was the undisputed leader both in the areas of maximum performance of individual cores and in tasks that required the power of multi-core processors.

Of course, sooner or later new developments from AMD had to shake the leadership of Intel. But it’s worth giving credit to Intel engineers: their decisions and strategic vision in 2011 predetermined the superiority of the company for many years to come.

First Gen Ryzen vs. Intel 7th Gen

When AMD first announced the Ryzen series of processors, people were pretty skeptical. The memories were still fresh when the FX series was also promised mountains of gold, but in fact they received an 8-core processor that could not catch up with the 4-core one from Intel even in multi-threaded tasks. To complete the picture, add the crazy heat dissipation and high operating temperatures of those processors that gave rise to tons of memes on the Internet.

When Ryzen did hit the market, even the diehard AMD fans were surprised. Compared to the FX series, ops per clock performance has increased by 52%, bringing it very close to the performance of Intel’s 7-series processors. Of course, this was not a victory yet, but after the failure of the FX series, it was a huge step towards increasing performance based on the new architecture.

The low cost of production made it possible to position the 8-core processor with 16 threads from AMD against the 4-core, 8-thread processor from Intel. The Ryzen series offered users not only high frequency, but also performance per clock, and coupled with a larger number of such cores, the new AMD Ryzen easily came out on top in terms of performance in multi-threaded tasks.
However, Intel has been polishing the architecture and frequencies of its processors for years and still holds the lead in maximum processor frequencies and operations per clock, making them the best choice for single-core workloads.

In addition, since Intel had held the market leadership for years by this point, most applications were optimized specifically for their processors, which was also reflected in comparative tests.

In games and standalone graphics applications, Intel processors remained the best choice due to their superior single-threaded performance.

Ryzen vs. Intel in 2019

That all changed with the launch of AMD’s updated line of Ryzen 3000-series processors based on the Zen 2 architecture. AMD was well aware of exactly where they lagged behind the competitor. The objective of the upgrade was precisely to increase the IPC performance in order to catch up and overtake the ninth generation of Intel processors. As you understand, if it weren’t for Intel’s advantage in frequencies, the competition would have ended a couple of years ago without really starting. And now there would be nothing to talk about.

Ryzen and Intel benchmarks in various applications

When it comes to building a computer, it is important to understand that the choice of configuration should be based on the profile of the main tasks for which the computer is purchased. Below I will give several benchmarks comparing Intel and AMD Ryzen processors in the field of video editing, rendering and other graphics-related tasks in one way or another.

Ryzen or Intel: Cinebench R20 tests

Although the main task of the 12 core Ryzen 39 processor00X was to beat the 8-core Intel i9 9900K in multi-threaded modes, quite unexpectedly, Ryzen outperformed the competitor in terms of performance on a single core.

Ryzen or Intel for Video Editing

In Adobe Premier Pro 2019 and Vegas Pro 16 tests, 3rd Gen Ryzen delivers impressive results. Please note that the Ryzen 3900X has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the top-end Intel 9980XE has 18 cores and 36 threads and, in addition, is much cheaper, but the results are very close to the leader.

Another Ryzen 3950X with 16 cores and 32 threads should be released in the fall, and then Intel will definitely not be good. Adjusting for the cost of solutions, Ryzen still looks like a better buy for video editing.

Video editing hardware
Power without compromise Intel Core i9 9980XE + RTX 2080Ti/Titan Xp
Value for money: AMD Ryzen 3900X + RTX 2070
Budget solution Ryzen 7 270 0X + GTX 1660Ti

In Intel mounting tasks so far in the lead, but 12 core 3900X shows results close to 18-core Intel, which hints that when the 16-core Ryzen 3950X comes out, Intel will be torn to shreds. However, the i9 9980XE is still technically the leader.

Intel or Ryzen for graphics work, a fast viewport

For graphics work and a fast viewport, the maximum frequency of one core and the number of operations per clock are important, so the superiority of Intel has been here for many years.

However, the release of Gen 3 Ryzen processors brings a significant change to this established paradigm, as the new processors deliver performance very close to Intel’s top processors.

Graphics hardware
Power without compromise Intel Core i9 9900K
Value for money: AMD Ryzen 3900X
Budget solution Ryzen 5 3600

Once again I emphasize, the superiority of Intel here very small, but in fairness for the sake of the palm give honestly. At the same time, I would not advise buying the Intel 9900K now — the Ryzen 3900X is negligibly inferior, but the additional cores will be able to prove themselves in other tasks, such as rendering.

Ryzen or Intel for CPU rendering

For CPU rendering, the Ryzrn 9 3900X seems to be the preferred choice right now. Therefore, if you render in V-Ray, Corona, etc. — take the 3900X and you won’t regret it. If necessary, in the future it will be possible to upgrade to the Ryzen 3950X without changing the motherboard.

Speaking of motherboards.
If we consider the purchase of Ryzen and a motherboard for it, then this is a more profitable purchase and in a strategic perspective for the long term. The AM4 slot based upgrade options for AMD processors are much better than the Intel LGA 1151. Intel has a bad habit of forcing users to change their motherboard even if it is only 1-2 years old if they need to upgrade to a more modern processor.

To sum up, the Ryzen 9 3900X looks like the best buy right now. If you are considering buying a new computer a little later, you should wait for the Ryzen 3950X to hit the market for maximum performance. The added benefit is that if you opt for a Ryzen based AM4 motherboard, you can easily upgrade to the new line of Ryzen Zen 3 processors coming in 2020.

The first 64-core workstation from AMD and Lenovo.

Man5ON

AMD recently announced a new line of AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO processors with up to 64 cores and fairly high throughput performance. These processors are designed for OEM professional workstations. Manufacturers are confident that these processors will be the best choice for artists, architects, engineers and data scientists.

It became known that the first workstation with the presented processor will be released by Lenovo. The Lenovo ThinkStation P620 should be on sale in September this year, with an estimated starting price of $4,600. The station will be equipped with Threadripper Pro 3995WX, delivering unparalleled levels of power, performance and flexibility in a single processor chassis.

The workstation will support up to two NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 or four RTX 4000 graphics cards, up to 1TB of RAM and up to 20TB of storage, as well as support for PCIe 4.0 interface and thoughtful cooling system.
We can say that the new workstation is universal for use in any industry. Now you don’t have to choose between the number of cores and clock speed. It remains to wait for the release and the corresponding tests, is everything really so good.

728
0
850
7

67

2020-07-17

And the video cards are still Nvidia))) When will the Intel ones appear ???
Promised this year! I would like to read the first reviews already 🙂
Promised this year! I want to read the first reviews 🙂

Intel? Why not radeons? )

2020-07-17

Oh, a little bit earlier and Applemakpro at the price of an apartment would not be needed. with all the consequences) although it remains to be seen how much this machine will cost.

2020-07-17

Suspiciously cramped case for such iron

2020-07-17

In fact, this power, apart from renderings, is far away not all software can not use. Somewhere between 8 and 16 cores will hang out on optimized applications, and 2-4 cores will generally be used in the aftereffect.
And the render will certainly take off, but when all the cores are loaded, the turbo frequency will reduce the megahertz by 600.

2020-07-17

I don’t know what can be collected there for the remaining 600 bucks of the total cost, because 3990X now costs $ 4k and this is the closest brother of this processor

2020-07-17

Jen, 4k is retail.

2020-07-17

Shinetek, Rendering, simulation, compo — resource-intensive tasks, and the goal is on them. Why load all 64 cores when we extrude coligon at the cube?

2020-07-17

Simulation is far from being optimized for such a number of cores everywhere. But to compile some anrial will probably be to the fullest. And Nuke will probably boot.

2020-07-17

Emin Yusifov
Intel? Why not radeons? )

Because while Nvidia disappointed me, 15 years passed, and then they were ruined by the office’s policy, like Adobe and Autodesk, and ATI Radeon did not live with me even for several months — I exchanged it with mats for Nvidia and was satisfied, I don’t even remember what exactly I got hot in it. I have been using Intel processors for 25 years and I am more than satisfied, lately I have to use the built-in video, so there are no complaints about it either, and if Intel video cards prove themselves, then I will opt for them. I will add that I am a very sophisticated PC user — compiling programs, rendering multimedia, playing games and watching Blu-ray quality movies.

2020-07-18

I’ve never seen anything worse.. five minutes and hit the wall!!!

2020-07-18

Crazy Gamer
Because while Nvidia disappointed me, 15 years passed, and then they were ruined by the office’s policy, like Adobe and Autodesk, and ATI Radeon did not live with me even for several months — I exchanged it with mats for Nvidia and was satisfied, I don’t even remember what exactly I got hot in it. I have been using Intel processors for 25 years and I am more than satisfied, lately I have to use the built-in video, so there are no complaints about it either, and if Intel video cards prove themselves, then I will opt for them. I will add that I am a very sophisticated PC user — compiling programs, rendering multimedia, playing games and watching Blu-ray quality movies.

Well, to be honest, it is not necessary to judge the quality of the GPU by the CPU, after all, different divisions are engaged in this. And if AMD with a GPU somehow doesn’t have CUDA support, for example, then their central processors are now simply a must-have when it comes to working with 3D graphics.
The fact that you are consistently satisfied with Intel processors is a little strange, just like AMD, this company offered products of different quality over the years.

2020-07-18

Jen, most likely the article is just crookedly written and for sure the starting price will be only at 3945, which has 12 cores, branded workstations like dell, hp, lenovo usually have a pretty decent markup, not like an apple, of course, but still

2020-07-18

current is sitting in the fsh

2020-07-19

Artyom, this is maya

2020-07-19

Alexander, is Lenovo doing shit? Are you talking about the best Windows laptops Ever?

2020-07-19

I’m talking about Lenovo, it says

9 there0002 2020-07-19

Alexander, yes, I said so, Thinkpads are the best Windows laptops ever

Alexander, clearly, the author is 10 years old

2020-07-19

laptops have to do with it? What is the topic of the post about?

2020-07-19

Alexander, «Knowing what shit Lenovo is doing, I don’t feel like it anymore»
Lenovo also makes laptops, in the post we are talking about their new computer, what is the disagreement?

2020-07-19

and they are just as shit, since it matters Can you prove

?

2020-07-19

Alexander, yes, I can

2020-07-19

prove it you’re Lenovo shit, so you either didn’t use them, or you just don’t know about them, which means you are 10 years old, because how can you be carried away by technology without knowing about them . ..

2020-07-19

did not see confirmation, and your fantasies do not interest me 02 you are going to submit some documentary evidence , or continue to lie?

2020-07-19

Alexander, you probably haven’t been in the army yet… And how does the army feel about Lenovo doing shit?

2020-07-19

Alexander, the army makes a man a man, and not this one in your picture …

2020-07-19

2020-07-19

Alexander, yes, you are impenetrable, so I decided to just make a joke

0002 Alexander, well stop strangling, are you really 10 years old or something

2020-07-19

well, can you prove it?

2020-07-19

Alexander, I never lie 3

Alexander, so you prove that I lied

2020-07-19

— you say something
— insist
-you can’t prove, therefore — you lied

2020-07-19

Alexander, and if I say that there is a god, but I can’t prove it, am I lying or not?

2020-07-19

we are not talking about God now, not about your preferences in faith, but about the fact that you lied about some exact data

2020-07-19

Alexander, no, you are not avoid the question, answer

2020-07-19

I’m not interested in answering the questions of a liar, given the fact that it is you who are trying to avoid the answer

2020-07-19

2020-07-19

I’m just not interested in talking to a liar. That’s all

2020-07-19

Alexander, obviously the author is tired of

2020-07-19

Awesome comp. judging by the stuffing. If I had extra ones that I don’t feel sorry for and don’t drink, I would take it without hesitation, even just to play. It is a pity that such equipment is not given for a «test drive», or, for example, for leasing, for a year or two. Recently, on the i9-9940X, and this is only 14/28 cores, and already, even the slowest of Arnold renders pleases, but on this monster it would probably give out something close to real-time.
ps By the way, I don’t follow AMD at all, and I don’t know the pros/cons. It was like that, in the year 2002-03, when the office decided to save money, and instead of intel upgraded the entire production to AMDhi, and what started here. Almost all projects more complicated than cubes / balls (I exaggerate) fell five times an hour, especially on render. I don’t know what was there, they said the batch of motherboards got caught. Yes, in general, don’t give a damn, but since then I don’t even consider AMD as a working percentage, although I understand that a lot of water has flowed under the bridge, but the sediment remains. Hoyat in the late afternoon and I hear that in some places Intel is doing it. and not only in games, but in 3D applications. But with GPU renderers they have a real problem, and it’s a pity

2020-07-19

Georgeman Awesome comp. judging by the stuffing. If I had extra ones that I don’t feel sorry for and don’t drink, I would take it without hesitation, even just to play. It is a pity that such equipment is not given for a «test drive», or, for example, for leasing, for a year or two. Recently, on the i9-9940X, and this is only 14/28 cores, and already, even the slowest of Arnold renders pleases, but on this monster it would probably give out something close to real-time.
ps By the way, I don’t follow AMD at all, and I don’t know the pros/cons. It was like that, in the year 2002-03, when the office decided to save money, and instead of intel upgraded the entire production to AMDhi, and what started here. Almost all projects more complicated than cubes / balls (I exaggerate) fell five times an hour, especially on render. I don’t know what was there, they said the batch of motherboards got caught. Yes, in general, don’t give a damn, but since then I don’t even consider AMD as a working percentage, although I understand that a lot of water has flowed under the bridge, but the sediment remains. Hoyat in the late afternoon and I hear that in some places Intel is doing it. and not only in games, but in 3D applications. But with GPU renderers they have a real problem, and it’s a pity

I own a system on AMD 3990X / 256 GB / RTX 5000. The stone is overclocked to 4.2 GHz on all cores. Compared to the previous machine on 18 core 2699v3 with boost unlock for all cores, I got an increase of 6! times in scenarios of 100% CPU utilization. I think there is no need to comment here. I will only add the fact that when compared with rendering on the GPU (E-Cycles), the rendering speed on the CPU is approximately comparable to that on an RTX 5000 or two 1080 TIs in overclocking.

2020-07-19

Michael, old maya somewhere in 2013-2016.

2020-07-19

Nadir Mursalov (Cooler3D)

I own a system on AMD 3990X / 256 GB / RTX 5000. The stone is overclocked to 4.2 GHz on all cores. Compared to the previous machine on 18 core 2699v3 with boost unlock for all cores, I got an increase of 6! times in scenarios of 100% CPU utilization. I think there is no need to comment here. I will only add the fact that when compared with rendering on the GPU (E-Cycles), the rendering speed on the CPU is approximately comparable to that on an RTX 5000 or two 1080 TIs in overclocking.

those. 2 1080ti better than 3990x?!? and then it makes sense to overpay for the 3990s ???

2020-07-19

Max Vic
those. 2 1080ti better than 3990x?!? and then it makes sense to overpay for the 3990s ???

If we talk about hybrid renderers, then yes, it’s better, but as long as the scene fits in the video memory. In OUT of Core GPU mode, rendering slows down about ten times. The CPU does not have such a problem, at 256Gb the scene usually somehow fits. Such a CPU should be considered primarily for tasks where the GPU is of little use.

2020-07-20

Now I’m just scratching my head about what to invest in, either to assemble a system on the basis of the 3950x, or simply take two (four) 1080 ti from hands for 30 tr on the existing platform. from the farm, or if there is too little memory (11 Gb), then instead of the entire platform, you can take Titan RTX, is there already 24Gb ???

2020-07-20

I’m only interested — where can I get such a case?

2020-07-20

And what can roughly fit into 11Gb 1080ti?

Item fits perfectly. I modeled a Persian or a car and quickly rendered it and immediately set up the mats.

2020-07-21

Max Vic Now I’m just scratching my head about what to invest in, either to assemble a system on the basis of the 3950x, or simply take two (four) 1080 ti from hands for 30 tr on the existing platform. from the farm, or if there is too little memory (11 Gb), then instead of the entire platform, you can take Titan RTX, is there already 24Gb ???

I released mine from farms up to almost 20 tons, and then they were reluctant to take them apart, they were like dirt on the secondary. IMHO, underestimated card, for this price as a gift.

2020-07-21

Nadir Mursalov (Cooler3D) I released mine from farms up to almost 20 tons, and then they were reluctant to take them apart, they were like dirt on the secondary. IMHO, underestimated card, for this price as a gift.

Yes, if it weren’t for the bacchanalia of the crypto boom, we wouldn’t have seen such prices. According to the PTX series, judging by the prices, everything is bad.

2020-07-21

Andrej Logvin
The item fits perfectly. I modeled a Persian or a car and quickly rendered it and immediately set up the mats.

The subject, this is somehow not enough, but what about interiors, exteriors ?! I looked at the redshift gallery, there are projects, but what they are made of, a mystery

2020-07-22

Max Vic
The subject, it’s somehow not enough, but interiors, exteriors ?! I looked at the redshift gallery, there are projects, but what they are made of is a mystery

In practice, interiors, and especially exteriors, almost never fit into 11Gb of video memory, unless you specifically bother with optimization.

2020-07-23

So where is the actually thought-out cooling system? What a game, one cooler for blowing in, one for blowing out, and one added to the disks, that’s all.

2020-07-28

Nadir Mursalov (Cooler3D) In practice, interiors, and especially exteriors, almost never fit into 11Gb of video memory

I would very much like to see the interior, which does not fit in 11 gigs.

2020-08-05

the computer is over powerful, I would love to have one myself, but I understand that with my salary I would have to start AT LEAST the same computer desk as the girl from the photo 😀 I saw a similar one in hoyz , but a fly badge will have to pay 7-10 thousand, and this is + $ 100 … Xs, maybe I’ll still decide to buy, otherwise mine is already dying. The computer is from rendering, and the table is from punching during the hassle and merged deadlines hah.

2020-08-21

Shlipidron all this, I really don’t know what it is connected with, and there are suspicions of some kind of conspiracy. In general, I bought another Ryzen 3900x, Nvidia RTX 2070s that winter, I’m sitting making a video in 3DsMax, I think let’s try to pin it into something while it’s being rendered on a Vray hybrid — and lo and behold, at maximum speeds I roll into a warzone and there are no drawdowns with FPS no freezes and on the render, the speed dropped by 5-10%.