Skip navigation

Monthly Archives: January 2012

Sibernik Cathedral

(Download links dead), now available on web archive: .max | 3ds | lp

SPONZA ATRIUM

Advertisements

I got an AMD FX-8150 chip in a new PC build.

_It sucks._ It’s no better than the AMD 1090T, which incidentally was taken _off_ the market by AMD. Now I know why. The 1090T performs very similarly (with no overclocking at all, either chip) to the “new” AMD 8 core.

I was already using an AMD 1090T to do parallel raytraces. I thought I’d get a second machine as a workhorse. Built one for $500. Shoulda gone with Intel. I’m running the same raytrace in parallel, one on this machine (which I’m also using to write this post) and I’m leaving the FX 8150 alone. The FX 8150 spawned 8 threads to raytrace on (7 for raytracing and 1 for the UI) because 8 cores were detected, here on the 1090T only 5 raytracing threads are running, +1 for the UI thread.

So far they are neck and neck, even though I am using this machine to write this post. The FX 8150 machine has completed 119/300 jobs (each “job” is 2 800 pixel long rows), this machine 117/300 jobs. Totally terrible. I expected _some sort_ of improvement, with a 400 MHz faster clock speed and 2 extra cores, but you get absolutely nothing.

It’s the SAME core as the 1090T, far as I’m concerned.

Further proof