Known Participant

Question

larger cpu core or more cores better?

Forum|Forum|9 years ago
February 21, 2017
2 replies
4802 views

is it better to have a 4ghz 4 core chip or a 22 core 2 ghz xeon for ae? i need to know what runs premiere the best and the fastest out of those types of extremes

my ae is CHUGGING

i have 4 titan x graphics cards and i don't think it's really making use of that

i have the core i7 6700k

i am running a 4k monitor so i can't tell if that's the issue that is slowing AE down

64 g ram and running off of ssd's too

This topic has been closed for replies.

A

A.I.1

Legend

One site that sells AE systems (not sure if I'm allowed to say the name or if it would be flagged as advertising, but it starts with P),

says that:

4 core i7 6700K 4 to 4.2 Ghz gives the best performance over those with many cores, including Xeons - for 2D anim.

On another page for recommended systems they say the Core i7 6850K 6 core 3.7 to 4.0 Ghz is the best for 2d anim (some AE operations are said to work better on other CPUs).

I suppose it depends on the version of After Effects you are using (some versions - eg. earlier? may be better than others for using more cores etc.). eg. does using an older version of After Effects allow you to use more cores/better multiprocessing better than the more recent one?

I expect the fact you are rendering/viewing at 4K will probably be a big reason for it being slower. Maybe that system would go much faster at 1080p/1440p (or is it the monitor only that is 4K but the compositions aren't 4K?).

I'd also check the Windows Task Manger/Performance thing to see what's being run high/maximum. Possibly even more RAM might help with the size/type of renders (eg. 4K) you are doing (perhaps especially if "render multiple frames simultaneously" is enabled?)? Perhaps also configuring After Effects differently in the memory & multiprocessing or media & disk cache settings might help. I think it's probably recommended against it but perhaps AE could be set up to use the GPU for previews etc. (I think it was recommended not to enable OpenGL - even though that may give faster previews - and I think that might be removed from later versions)? Also, is there any special setting that needs to be edited if the GPU wasn't in the list of supported AE video cards - so that After Effects (depending on the version) will support it and use it it to it's best capabilities (eg. CUDA etc.)?

Also was there some test done on this forum/site with different processors or systems to see the best systems for AE rendering etc?

Szalam

Community Expert

A.I.1 wrote
One site that sells AE systems (not sure if I'm allowed to say the name or if it would be flagged as advertising, but it starts with P),

Was it Puget Sound or something like that? I've heard lots of good things about them. Especially for folks building multi-GPU rigs for using Octane or Cycles4D in Cinema 4D. They seem like a very competent company with great customer service.

And, yes, to answer the original question of this thread: in the current version of AE, it is better to have a very fast core speed and fewer number of cores.

That holds true for using Cinema 4D IF (but only if) you're using a third-party GPU renderer (like Cycles4D). At my full-time job, I use C4D's Standard renderer or Physical renderer for a majority of my projects, so I opted for many cores in my new machine. (Same for at home until I just got Cycles...now I want to pack in more GPUS!!!)

If I were just doing AE work, I would have gone with a single i7 running at the fastest clock speed I could get out of it.

A

A.I.1

Legend

Szalam wrote
Was it Puget Sound or something like that? I've heard lots of good things about them. Especially for folks building multi-GPU rigs for using Octane or Cycles4D in Cinema 4D. They seem like a very competent company with great customer service.

Yes Puget Systems. They have graphs and stuff with comparisons. I was a bit confused about why in their recommended hardware they seemed to be saying the i7 6850K was mostly best (eg. in 2D anim), except for some tasks, but following the link that they said the i7 6700K 4.0-4.2 Ghz was better (but just now it seems like they don't recommend the 6700K because it doesn't support more than 64 GB RAM) (they also recommend the Core i7 6900K - even though their graph said it was slower for 2D anim.).

Since the 6700K is what the OP has - and if more RAM could help at all (eg. for 4K stuff - I don't know if the comps are 4K or just the monitor) I assume the processor would need to be changed (based on the above website). While using something like a 6850K instead might be slightly slower (processor-wise) - it should allow a lot more RAM so more could be cached - which could speed various things up.

P

Pat481

Known Participant

Aftereffects isn't terribly well optimised for highend hardware at the moment. It doesn't make much use of the graphics card in normal 2D operation and multithreaded rendering was disabled in a previous version. My advice would be to wait for a future version or switch to a different motion graphics tool in the mean time.

andrews90790780Author

Known Participant

wow that is really brutal. i'v;e spent so much money on after effects plugins etc. hoping to make great use of the software on my new machine and i'm finding out it can't handle the gear.

adobe needs to step it's game up!!

what are some other options?

andrews90790780Author

Known Participant

any idea why the multithread rendering was removed?

Sign up

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Sign in to Adobe Community

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded