Rendering with Dual Core processor.

I know that a Photoworks will use both processors in a dual processor set up, and so speed up the rendering process significantly.
My question is will I see an improvement in rendering speed with a Dual Core processor.
Brian Law
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Hello Brian-
I recently built a new computer with a 939 X2 4200 Dual Core AMD processor. I use Photoworks everyweek. For example, I have an existing PW Render. On my old 754 AMD 3000 single core system, this render took about 60 seconds. On the new Dual Core system, this render takes about 21 seconds, almost a 3X improvement.
Best Regards, Devon T. Sowell www.3-ddesignsolutions.com

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Am I right in thinking that Solidworks cannot utilise the dual core when modelling though.... its actually slower than a single core.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Hey Brian,
I have a x64 Althalon 4600+ dual core. During rendering with PW both cores of the processor work great and I notice about the same performance improvment as Devon does.
Craig
Devon T. Sowell wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I think for the same price a dual core may be slower than a single core for modelling though... is this right?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
will snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.co.uk says...

For some things it uses multi-threads, like drawings, assemblies, Cosmos, Photoworks, but for just grunting long feature trees, I think you're right. I bet on that by buying an FX57 processor, because I do mainly single complex parts, and for multitasking I generally use an old retired computer for email, ftp, web, download, etc. I do, however, have a multi-core laptop on the way for working when traveling, so I'll be able to do some comparisons.
On Toms Hardware, they did a comparison of processors, and for some tasks, even Intel's hyperthreading slowed down single applications.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Did you get the Alienware/Sager/Clevo AMD dualcore laptop?
matt wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com says...

Hypersonic, but yes, the same thing. They say it will be here March 4. Originally I was fixated on the FX60, but reading the Toms Hardware article, the X2 4800+ is way cheaper, and almost as fast, within 10%.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
My Ship In A Bottle ran 10% faster. But, I also went from an AGP8X FX500 to a PCIx FX540.
Best Regards, DEvon T. Sowell www.3-ddesignsolutions.com

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
bit of a random basic computer question from a beginner (can't seem to find the answer online)... I understand what the processor is and the core is located on the processor... but what does the core actually do and what does the remaining part of the processor (not the core) do? Just trying to figure out why dual processor is faster than dual core.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Yes.
The advantage of dual core is that the single cores are almost as fast as the fastest single cores.
Example:
STAR2.1 for an AMD 64 FX53 36 seconds STAR2.1 for an AMD 64 2X 4400+ 41 seconds
But the 4400+ will render much faster than the FX53.
A 4800+ should be on par with the FX53. Quite adequate for most work.
And the dual core will help with drawings. I have watched the task mgr. I estimate a 25% increase in speed over a single processor when regenerating a large multisheet drawing.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Thanks very much for the response.
I take it then that if I go with the A4800+ I would be no worse off for normal modelling work but would gain significantly when rendering.
This is really good news because on some day's, perhaps two days per week I can spend most of the time rendering to prepare material for presentations.
A dual pocess would be even more desirable but considerably more expensive.
A supplementary question on 64bit processor, will I see an improvement if I change over to the 64bit version of Solidworks or is that to liable to crash at this early stage.
Thanks for your hep.
Brian Law

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
As far as the running a 64 bit application I don't have data on the newest release of SW2006 that is supposed to be compiled in 64 bit as opposed to being a 32 bit application running in 64 bit mode. SW as a 32 bit application running on a 64 bit OS was slower. Running SW on a 32 bit OS on a 64 bit system is at present the fastest till more data comes in. Confused yet? Bottom line, run SW on WindowsXP Pro (not 64).
There is at present only one good reason to run SW on a 64bit OS and that is for very large assemblies. If you are in the 10,000 part and up assembly range then that move is important because it will allow you to use more than 4GB of ram.
Finally, the absolute fastest 64 bit AMD chip would be the FX60 which is dual core. I don't know if you can easily find these. You can find a number of good systems using dual core Opterons also. Sun has one and so does HP.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.