AMD Opteron 32-Core - is the Adobe Suite using 32 Cores?

[Fabian Benninghoven]

Hi folks,

like many others i am waiting for the best MacPro alternative option. Maybe Z800/Z820, or a DIY system with an I7 2x6-Core.
But now i checked AMD and the prices are low atm.

CPU: 2x AMD Opteron G34 16 Core x 2,60 Ghz (6282) = 1850 Euro
Ram: 64 GB (16x4) A-Data Reg. ECC 10667R = 594 Euro
Mobo: Supermicro H8DGi-O Dual CPU Sockel G34 = 490 Euro
Grafix: Asus GTX 680 = 500 Euro
SSD: 128 GB Crucial = 100 Euro
HDD: 4x 2TB Raid-5 = 400 Euro
Tower: = 250 Euro
Power: 1100 W = 180 Euro

-> 4364 Euro

Does the Adobe Suite support 32 cores? Maybe AMD is an alternative to Intel. What you guys think about?

 

[Subhadip Sen]

Before you dive in, consider that AMD's CPU architecture (Bulldozer) is vastly different from Intel's (Sandy Bridge). A single Opteron 62xx features 16 'cores', but more accurately 8 modules, while a single Xeon E5 26xx features 8 cores and 16 threads. Really though, the concept of 'cores' is less relevant today so we should consider that both CPUs are basically 16 threads or 8 modules. Intel's approach is to have 8 powerful cores with a hyper-thread, while AMD's approach is to have 8 tightly packed modules with each module having 2 dedicated integer units but sharing a lot of other things. In short, Intel = 8 big threads + 8 tiny threads, AMD = 16 medium threads.

Considering a dual-CPU configuration, Xeon 16 core / 32 thread vs Opteron 16 module / 32 thread, if your application is going to use only 8-16 threads, then Intel will be much faster. However, if your application can saturate 32 threads, the Opterons will come into their own - in heavily multithreaded stuff like X264 it is not far away from Intel's Xeon E5s for nearly half the price. Once you consider the pricing, it is a no-brainer - Opterons are far ahead on price/performance. This is why Cray and many supercomputer vendors (where applications are optimized) have embraced Opteron in favour of Xeon. These Opterons were so successful in the high-performance computing market that it was out of stock in general retail for nearly 3 months after release. I did consider an Opteron G34 solution last year, but decided against it as much of my applications were failing to utilize 16 threads reliably. In many ways, the Bulldozer architecture is way ahead of its time - it is designed for a future where every application is multi-thread aware, schedulers are aware of the modular architecture, floating point operations are transferred to the GPU via OpenCL / C++ AMP / CUDA while CPUs are dedicated to integer operations, applications use advanced instructions like FMA4 or XOP, etc. AMD may have bet right - this future is approaching, but it is ultimately up to the software developers.

Back to your crucial question - does Adobe Suite support 32 cores? CS5.5, not really. However, CS6 is more promising. There's a test buried somewhere in the Premiere 6 thread where Luigi shows CS6 getting 100% usage across 24 threads for a transcode from R3D! So, yes, it is time to start looking at Opteron (once again) as a serious alternative. But we need a little more information as to how well CS6 does utilize 32 threads in different scenario.

If you need the most powerful system that will be running several GPUs, Xeon E5 remains the best solution, but it is difficult to complain considering what AMD are offering for the money - you could only build an 8 core Xeon E5 solution for the same price! Of course, the G34 motherboards can be upgraded with next-gen Piledriver CPUs / Opteron 63xx which will bring significant improvements in 4 months' time.

 

[Petri Teittinen]

Love your hardware posts, Subhadip. Kudos!

 

[Elsie N]

Love your hardware posts, Subhadip. Kudos!

+1. Geek prose that anyone can understand.

 

[Fabian Benninghoven]

Thanks... and now i am at the same point like always: Don't know which decision to make.... :001_huh:
We should buy all three systems: Z800 with 2x6Core, Selfmade I7 Extreme with 2x 6-Core and an Opteron 32 Core system.

Please donate :devil:

 

[Corey Culp]

Before you dive in, consider that AMD's CPU architecture (Bulldozer) is vastly different from Intel's (Sandy Bridge). A single Opteron 62xx features 16 'cores', but more accurately 8 modules, while a single Xeon E5 26xx features 8 cores and 16 threads. Really though, the concept of 'cores' is less relevant today so we should consider that both CPUs are basically 16 threads or 8 modules. Intel's approach is to have 8 powerful cores with a hyper-thread, while AMD's approach is to have 8 tightly packed modules with each module having 2 dedicated integer units but sharing a lot of other things. In short, Intel = 8 big threads + 8 tiny threads, AMD = 16 medium threads.

Considering a dual-CPU configuration, Xeon 16 core / 32 thread vs Opteron 16 module / 32 thread, if your application is going to use only 8-16 threads, then Intel will be much faster. However, if your application can saturate 32 threads, the Opterons will come into their own - in heavily multithreaded stuff like X264 it is not far away from Intel's Xeon E5s for nearly half the price. Once you consider the pricing, it is a no-brainer - Opterons are far ahead on price/performance. This is why Cray and many supercomputer vendors (where applications are optimized) have embraced Opteron in favour of Xeon. These Opterons were so successful in the high-performance computing market that it was out of stock in general retail for nearly 3 months after release. I did consider an Opteron G34 solution last year, but decided against it as much of my applications were failing to utilize 16 threads reliably. In many ways, the Bulldozer architecture is way ahead of its time - it is designed for a future where every application is multi-thread aware, schedulers are aware of the modular architecture, floating point operations are transferred to the GPU via OpenCL / C++ AMP / CUDA while CPUs are dedicated to integer operations, applications use advanced instructions like FMA4 or XOP, etc. AMD may have bet right - this future is approaching, but it is ultimately up to the software developers.

Back to your crucial question - does Adobe Suite support 32 cores? CS5.5, not really. However, CS6 is more promising. There's a test buried somewhere in the Premiere 6 thread where Luigi shows CS6 getting 100% usage across 24 threads for a transcode from R3D! So, yes, it is time to start looking at Opteron (once again) as a serious alternative. But we need a little more information as to how well CS6 does utilize 32 threads in different scenario.

If you need the most powerful system that will be running several GPUs, Xeon E5 remains the best solution, but it is difficult to complain considering what AMD are offering for the money - you could only build an 8 core Xeon E5 solution for the same price! Of course, the G34 motherboards can be upgraded with next-gen Piledriver CPUs / Opteron 63xx which will bring significant improvements in 4 months' time.

Between you and Jeff, Subhadip, I can't be more grateful for what you guys bring to the table. Always insightful and informative, but never critical or spiteful of others looking for answers and some education.

 

[Stefan Antonescu]

Love your hardware posts, Subhadip. Kudos!

+ 1

I feel very fortunate having Subhadip and Jeff on Reduser.

 

[Joseph S.]

CS6 supports all 32 threads (16 cores with hyper-threading), and it uses each and every thread at near 100% during renders.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

+ 1

I feel very fortunate having Subhadip and Jeff on Reduser.

+11

 

[luigivaltulini]

CS6 supports all 32 threads (16 cores with hyper-threading), and it uses each and every thread at near 100% during renders.

I'm trying with Joe, some test renders with its sandy bridge 32 core on windows 7 64bit platform.

for example, rendering red epic 4:23 clip 5k down 1080p h264. with REDCINE-X 1h 12 min , with Adobe premeire CS6 about 5 minutes. impressive.
There lighthouse 'knowledge in the coming days.


thanks
Luigi

 

[Joseph Coleman]

I'm trying with Joe, some test renders with its sandy bridge 32 core on windows 7 64bit platform.

for example, rendering red epic 4:23 clip 5k down 1080p h264. with REDCINE-X 1h 12 min , with Adobe premeire CS6 about 5 minutes. impressive.
There lighthouse 'knowledge in the coming days.

thanks
Luigi

5 minutes? Is this with or without rocket?

 

[Joseph S.]

5 minutes? Is this with or without rocket?

without a rocket.

Joe

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I'm starting to be able to test and confirm here. Finally have one of my dual E5-2687W boxes up and running. I'm being limited by disk bandwidth at the moment until all my other parts get here, but it's looking very promising. More tests / numbers soon.

The problem with REDCINE-X is it's hardly multi-threaded. Old Redcine (pre-Rocket days) was actually multithreaded alright, but didn't scale well beyond 4 CPUs, so it was always dragging its feet. The current RC-X Pro is optimized for the Rocket, but mostly ignores all your system's processors.... Too bad. Anyway, the numbers are starting to show that with properly multithreaded software, the Rocket is becoming less relevant.

 

[luigivaltulini]

I'm starting to be able to test and confirm here. Finally have one of my dual E5-2687W boxes up and running. I'm being limited by disk bandwidth at the moment until all my other parts get here, but it's looking very promising. More tests / numbers soon.

The problem with REDCINE-X is it's hardly multi-threaded. Old Redcine (pre-Rocket days) was actually multithreaded alright, but didn't scale well beyond 4 CPUs, so it was always dragging its feet. The current RC-X Pro is optimized for the Rocket, but mostly ignores all your system's processors.... Too bad. Anyway, the numbers are starting to show that with properly multithreaded software, the Rocket is becoming less relevant.

Jeff you have new Hp z820?

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Jeff you have new Hp z820?

I will have one of those as soon as HP ships it to me! It was supposed to ship on the 19th, then on the 26th, then yesterday... Now they're telling me the 8th. WTF???

I received some of the RAM I ordered from Micron the other day. So I have a system with SuperMicro X9DAi motherboard with dual E5-2687W CPUs and 64GB RAM up and running, but I'm lacking some other parts and need to swap some GPUs around for testing. I have a Quadro 6000 card installed right now, but I'm going to do some testing with an EVGA GTX580 Classified Ultra when I get a chance to pull it from my i7-3960X system.. and probably a GTX680 when the 4GB models arrive.

 

[luigivaltulini]

I will have one of those as soon as HP ships it to me! It was supposed to ship on the 19th, then on the 26th, then yesterday... Now they're telling me the 8th. WTF???

I received some of the RAM I ordered from Micron the other day. So I have a system with SuperMicro X9DAi motherboard with dual E5-2687W CPUs and 64GB RAM up and running, but I'm lacking some other parts and need to swap some GPUs around for testing. I have a Quadro 6000 card installed right now, but I'm going to do some testing with an EVGA GTX580 Classified Ultra when I get a chance to pull it from my i7-3960X system.. and probably a GTX680 when the 4GB models arrive.

Very good, let me know when you get hp z820, I really like.
Here in Switzerland are not yet available.
I'm curious to know your opinion about it

definitely try cs6 remain surprised how fast

Luigi

 

[Joseph S.]

I look forward to Jeff's tests. I wish I was more knowledgeable of what tests to run. All I know is 5K to default Vimeo 1080 in CS6.

Jeff, Luigi, and Subhadip, big thumbs up. Learned a lot from you guys

 

[Subhadip Sen]

I look forward to Jeff's tests. I wish I was more knowledgeable of what tests to run. All I know is 5K to default Vimeo 1080 in CS6.

Jeff, Luigi, and Subhadip, big thumbs up. Learned a lot from you guys

Here's some more to try:

- General playback tests. See if it plays back full res, or it continues to 'hit the wall'. To be fair, 1/2 res is already overkill for general editing...
- Multiple streams... drop to 1/2 res and try 3-4 streams, maybe Multicam.
- Try some of the in-built video effects, maybe the new color corrector, some blurs, see how it plays back. (Of course, I am assuming you have a GTX 580) Then try to render this.
- Render to 4K H.264. Under MainConcept, choose Level 5.1 and 4096, go for a bitrate of 120 Mbps or so.
- Render to 5K DPX. (If you have ProEXR, then to EXR PIZ. Also, if you have Cineform Studio Premium then to 5K Cineform AVI. OK, I am going overboard now, but maybe 5K UT Lossless Codec as well...)

Obviously, keep an eye on the Task Manager to see how much of the CPU is being utilized for each of these tests.

I know that's a lot to ask for, so thanks a lot in advance. The results of these tests will be very helpful!

 

[Joseph S.]

Here's some more to try:

- General playback tests. See if it plays back full res, or it continues to 'hit the wall'. To be fair, 1/2 res is already overkill for general editing...
- Multiple streams... drop to 1/2 res and try 3-4 streams, maybe Multicam.
- Try some of the in-built video effects, maybe the new color corrector, some blurs, see how it plays back. (Of course, I am assuming you have a GTX 580) Then try to render this.
- Render to 4K H.264. Under MainConcept, choose Level 5.1 and 4096, go for a bitrate of 120 Mbps or so.
- Render to 5K DPX. (If you have ProEXR, then to EXR PIZ. Also, if you have Cineform Studio Premium then to 5K Cineform AVI. OK, I am going overboard now, but maybe 5K UT Lossless Codec as well...)

Obviously, keep an eye on the Task Manager to see how much of the CPU is being utilized for each of these tests.

I know that's a lot to ask for, so thanks a lot in advance. The results of these tests will be very helpful!

-- edit: CS6 is playing back 5K at full res. No caching, no nothing. Just straight instant playback in full res.

Unfortunately no high-end cards yet. Just a pair of Quadro 1800's for now. Waiting on the 690's hopefully in a week.

1/2 res playback in CS6 is flawless. Not even a tiny glitch. Video effects are immediate on 1/2 res as well. Three way color correction plays back real-time as I make the changes (assuming that's just the norm). With a bunch of grading, a 4:23 file is encoded in 5 minutes to H.264 1080 CBR at 20Mbps.

I did a 5K encode to DPX 4096x2048 max bit depth 4:23 file in about 30 minutes. But it took 1 hour with color correction (assuming the 1800 cards are the bottleneck).

Every render maxes out the threads the entire way through rendering.

This stuff threw me off, since I'm not a pro:

- Render to 4K H.264. Under MainConcept, choose Level 5.1 and 4096, go for a bitrate of 120 Mbps or so.
- Render to 5K DPX. (If you have ProEXR, then to EXR PIZ. Also, if you have Cineform Studio Premium then to 5K Cineform AVI.

 

[Joseph S.]

Another thing I found. During a QuickTime encode of 5K to uncompressed YUV 10 bit 4:2:2 (1920x1080), (4:23 took 7-8 minutes), strange that the memory maxes out at 83GB (out of 128GB). There's apparently a limit of around 80GB where it doesn't use anymore RAM, even though it was only 75% complete.

Also, during the render, there are 16 processes running called "ImporterREDServer.exe *32". (Qty 16 matches cores and not threads). 32bit and not 64?