Forum: Bryce


Subject: more important for Bryce- new computer

Beakbryce4 opened this issue on Oct 25, 2008 · 12 posts


Beakbryce4 posted Sat, 25 October 2008 at 5:08 PM

Howdy,
My pentium 700 is getting a little long in the tooth and I am in the market for a new computer.

What is more important for Bryce- memory, GPU (video card), or CPU?  I'm thinking memory then CPU with the videocard not really a player, but felt it was best to ask.

Can Bryce take advantage of multiple cores?

Can Bryce work with windows Vista 64 bit?  I know it works with 32 bit but wonder if the potential is greater with 64 bit windows.

Any other considerations would be appreciated.

Thanks

Beak


nazul posted Sat, 25 October 2008 at 5:17 PM

Bryce works as a lightning with a quad core CPU - one third of the render time on my quad compared to my duo with almost same processor speed - haven't had that much better performance with putting more memory into it

Regards
Arne


skiwillgee posted Sat, 25 October 2008 at 11:25 PM

Attached Link: MY ORIGINAL QUERY

I asked a lot of the same questions just a short while ago.

Presently Bryce doesn't  utilize 64 bit.  The potential is up to Daz.

Bryce 6.1 will optimize 4 cores


AgentSmith posted Sat, 25 October 2008 at 11:53 PM

Tackle the fastest cpu with the most cores, that will make you and Bryce very happy.

After that I would suggest seeing if your budget can place 4GB of ram on the motherboard. That will help with larger, more complex scene files.

Contact Me | Gallery | Freestuff | IMDB Credits | Personal Site
"I want to be what I was when I wanted to be what I am now"


dhama posted Sun, 26 October 2008 at 4:08 AM

Quote -
.....I would suggest seeing if your budget can place 4GB of ram on the motherboard.

But not if you use Win XP or lower. XP can see no more than 3GB. But if you are using Vista then at least 4GB should be installed anyway.


AgentSmith posted Sun, 26 October 2008 at 1:23 PM

Well, IMHO, I would use 4GB of ram even if you are using Windows XP, which is what I use.

Why?;

My last Win XP PC I used had 3 sticks of 1GB ram in it. The Task Manager always showed that I had a Total of Physical Memory of 2.7Gb

In my new rig, I have 4 sticks of 1GB of ram in it. My Task Manager shows that I have a Total of Physical Memory of 3.4Gb. And what with my other programs (photoshop, zbrush, etc) I just need to have every bit of extra ram possible.

Also, and most likely more importantly, motherboards with four ram slots are able to run more efficiently if they use either just 2 sticks or 4 sticks, not 3. It's called "Dual Channel". You would be able to find info on that on just about any motherboard company website. Just know that it is far better to use 2 slots or all 4.

One more thing. Whatever configuration you go with, I would suggest you get your ram in "matched pairs". Meaning, one pack that comes with 2 sticks. Far better tuned and compatible that way.

Contact Me | Gallery | Freestuff | IMDB Credits | Personal Site
"I want to be what I was when I wanted to be what I am now"


Beakbryce4 posted Sun, 26 October 2008 at 2:31 PM

Yo,

thanks for the comments.   Looks like the consensus is a quad core with at leat 4 mb of memory.  thanks for the other comments on dual channel and memory optimization- pretty much up on that as I used to teach computers. 

I was hoping it would work on 64 bit windows as it allows for more memory in the machine which has always seemed to me to be the fastest way to go if you are on a budget as more memory is usually less expensive than a big jump in cpu.

I am looking at a dell 630 with a quad core and 4 mb.  or putting my own together with the same specs. 

Thanks again

Beak


Rayraz posted Sun, 26 October 2008 at 3:11 PM

I'd say at least 2gb, possibly 3 or 4 if you have a habit of making large scenes. Apart from that CPU power is the very most important thing.

(_/)
(='.'=)
(")
(")This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.


AgentSmith posted Sun, 26 October 2008 at 8:28 PM

Yup, seeing Bryce render with all four, 2.4Ghz cores blazing away at 100%.....makes my eyes water up. Especially when I think of my single core 200mhz days.  :o)

Contact Me | Gallery | Freestuff | IMDB Credits | Personal Site
"I want to be what I was when I wanted to be what I am now"


Rayraz posted Sun, 26 October 2008 at 9:05 PM

 oh those were the good ole'  days... :) i remember them well!
Comon AS i bet you cant help a little nostalgic smile at the thought of those 200mhz miracles either ;-)

(_/)
(='.'=)
(")
(")This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.


AgentSmith posted Sun, 26 October 2008 at 9:15 PM

Oh, of course. I can't even imagine ever trying to build anything on that first computer again!
(200mhz pentium 1 - 32mb sdram - 1mb video card)

Contact Me | Gallery | Freestuff | IMDB Credits | Personal Site
"I want to be what I was when I wanted to be what I am now"


Gog posted Mon, 27 October 2008 at 6:01 AM

Quote -

One more thing. Whatever configuration you go with, I would suggest you get your ram in "matched pairs". Meaning, one pack that comes with 2 sticks. Far better tuned and compatible that way.

You've kind of touched on something there that is a good reason for going to 4G, matched pais are particularly important on some memory controllers. On some boards not having matched pairs will cause the memory to throttle back into non-synchronous mode which is far slower then the memories potential, upgrading from something old the new ram will still be faster but if you want to maximise your investment in speed, then matched pairs are important.

----------

Toolset: Blender, GIMP, Indigo Render, LuxRender, TopMod, Knotplot, Ivy Gen, Plant Studio.