Are quad xeon e7 2680 good for rendering?(sony vegas)

[Mohamed Adam]

Hello,

I'm looking for a processor that will reduce my render times in a (budget).I don't know which cpu should i choose.Sadly they also FREAKING EXPENSIVE.Which one is better,quad xeon e7 2870 or xeon e5 2650 or i7 5960x for rendering.I usually makes gaming videos that will be more than 5 hours.Also,which motherboard should i choose?Are Quaddro good for rendering?Are gtx titan 6gb sli will render faster with xeon?I hope i will get answer faster

Thanks
Adam

 

[Rogue Leader]

The words "Budget" and Quad E7s do not belong in the same sentence.

How about you give us exactly what your budget is. Yes Vegas can take advantage of multi core setups, but depending what you can spend and what else you need the PC to do there comes a point of diminishing returns.

 

[Mohamed Adam]

The processors that i saw on internet are only 100 bucks for 4 processors.Is it worth?Forget about the budget

 

[Rogue Leader]

The processors that i saw on internet are only 100 bucks for 4 processors.Is it worth?Forget about the budget

No, for multiple reasons. You need a motherboard to run them (not cheap), and Windows server which is very expensive (consumer windows does not support more than 2 physical processors). And as a normal PC that thing will be slow. It will ONLY do scaled rendering or processing tasks well.

 

[k1114]

MERGED QUESTION
Question from Mohamed Adam : "Are quad xeon (xeon e7 2870) make faster rendering on sony vegas?"

Hello,

I'm looking for a processor that will reduce my render times in a (budget).I don't know which cpu should i choose.Sadly they also FREAKING EXPENSIVE.Which one is better,quad xeon e7 2870 or xeon e5 2650 or i7 5960x for rendering.I usually makes gaming videos that will be more than 5 hours.Also,which motherboard should i choose?Are Quaddro good for rendering?Are gtx titan 6gb sli will render faster with xeon?I hope i will get answer faster

Thanks
Adam

Xeon E7 CPUs are never the best answer for a home user IMO. They are designed for data centers and that is where they should stay.

 

[iamacow]

If you are using Adobe Premiere you can use CUDA acceleration in CC 2017 for video rendering. The video card alone will stomp any CPU combo. If you are going to drop $10,000 on a rendering computer, I suggest picking up Adobe Premiere and a GTX 1080 TI, than call it a day. Cost you less than 1k.

the 2680 does not come in E7 form, only E5. which means you can only use 2 of them. I had one thats how I know. Anyways each 2680 is about the same performance of a i7 3930k. Besides needing a Dual socket X79 motherboard which costs $700 new and now impossible to find used. 2 of those will still be slower than a CUDA accelerated system. But about the same performance as a i7 6950X which is $1500 new.

 

[Rogue Leader]

If you are using Adobe Premiere you can use CUDA acceleration in CC 2017 for video rendering. The video card alone will stomp any CPU combo. If you are going to drop $10,000 on a rendering computer, I suggest picking up Adobe Premiere and a GTX 1080 TI, than call it a day. Cost you less than 1k.

the 2680 does not come in E7 form, only E5. which means you can only use 2 of them. I had one thats how I know. Anyways each 2680 is about the same performance of a i7 3930k. Besides needing a Dual socket X79 motherboard which costs $700 new and now impossible to find used. 2 of those will still be slower than a CUDA accelerated system. But about the same performance as a i7 6950X which is $1500 new.

He PMed me an ebay link to 4 used E7 2870 processors for $100. Too bad everything you need to run them still costs way more than its worth. Your suggestion is far better

 

[iamacow]

Oh I mixed it up. I was thinking of 2680 not 2860s.

 

[CAlbertson]

If you are using Adobe Premiere you can use CUDA acceleration in CC 2017 for video rendering. The video card alone will stomp any CPU combo. If you are going to drop $10,000 on a rendering computer, I suggest picking up Adobe Premiere and a GTX 1080 TI, than call it a day. Cost you less than 1k.

the 2680 does not come in E7 form, only E5. which means you can only use 2 of them. I had one thats how I know. Anyways each 2680 is about the same performance of a i7 3930k. Besides needing a Dual socket X79 motherboard which costs $700 new and now impossible to find used. 2 of those will still be slower than a CUDA accelerated system. But about the same performance as a i7 6950X which is $1500 new.

He PMed me an ebay link to 4 used E7 2870 processors for $100. Too bad everything you need to run them still costs way more than its worth. Your suggestion is far better

If you application is based on CUDA, the best performance per dollar is by stuffing the box with as many GTX1080ti cards as you can afford. They are under $1,000 each. Using two of them seems reasonable if you total budget is $10K then doubling performance for only another 10% of budget sounds cost effective.

 

[Rogue Leader]

If you are using Adobe Premiere you can use CUDA acceleration in CC 2017 for video rendering. The video card alone will stomp any CPU combo. If you are going to drop $10,000 on a rendering computer, I suggest picking up Adobe Premiere and a GTX 1080 TI, than call it a day. Cost you less than 1k.

the 2680 does not come in E7 form, only E5. which means you can only use 2 of them. I had one thats how I know. Anyways each 2680 is about the same performance of a i7 3930k. Besides needing a Dual socket X79 motherboard which costs $700 new and now impossible to find used. 2 of those will still be slower than a CUDA accelerated system. But about the same performance as a i7 6950X which is $1500 new.

He PMed me an ebay link to 4 used E7 2870 processors for $100. Too bad everything you need to run them still costs way more than its worth. Your suggestion is far better

If you application is based on CUDA, the best performance per dollar is by stuffing the box with as many GTX1080ti cards as you can afford. They are under $1,000 each. Using two of them seems reasonable if you total budget is $10K then doubling performance for only another 10% of budget sounds cost effective.

This thread is nearly 3 months old, the OP has abandoned it. Try something more current, and unanswered.