Q&A Session With AMD and Troublemakers Behind Opteron and FirePro 'Machete' Hard

[Marcus Yam]

AMD technology behind Grindhouse style movies.

Q&A Session With AMD and Troublemakers Behind Opteron and FirePro 'Machete' Hardware : Read more

 

[joytech22]

Sweeeeeet, so AMD's bang for buck is FINALLY sinking into the heads of film makers.

 

[stingstang]

I've been waiting for this movie since seeing the trailer in Grind House.

 

[elbert]

Troublemakers really is making a name for themselves. I wonder tho does some of this have to do with Robert Rodriguez, being part owner, has learned a bit more on when to use 3D rendering. In 1991 this company was founded under the name of Los Hooligans.

 

[chesterman]

nice, i like amd too, but i'm thinking this has turned into a fanboy news. in fact, it looks like a paid advertisement.

 

[Stifle]

Cheech and Steven Segal in the same movie.... This cannot fail

 

[furylicious]

I'm just glad that AMD is back in the whole arena of competition again and making a name for themselves. So, I don't mind news like this where big moviemakers are going with AMD. As long as there is competition, I can expect lower prices and better product. Can't wait to see that movie though, Steven Seagal is pure lulz.

 

[NotYetRated]

In terms of bang for your buck, AMD has been the choice for quite some time now. Though, raw performance wise, Intel is king. Hands down. I fail to see where it makes sense for a movie studio to use AMD processors. In applications like this, the amount you can get done in a day is normally constrained by how well your PC can keep up. Spending an extra 400 or 500 bucks may seem like a lot, but not when you get even 5% more efficiency while paying someone $40+ and hour. Simple economics. The smart studio would be using the fastest possible.

 

[RazberyBandit]

^ No, a smart studio would maximize it's profit based on price vs. performance.

 

[L0tus]

The incredible developments in AMD platform technology continue to fuel my creativity...

And the winner of the "most rehearsed line" is...

it helps ensure driver quality and platform stability

Are you effing kidding me right now?! ATi?! driver quality?! in the same sentence!? Just 2 days ago, Tom's released an article on nVidia's new offering showing how weak ATI drivers were.

Red thumb me all you like...this is total BS...I know a paid advertisement when I see one.

 

[rhangman]

More "bang for your buck" = more servers/cores in the render farm, so faster speeds, not slower. If it was slower, then AMD wouldn't be "more bang for your buck".

For the workstations Intel may be faster (no idea whether or not using a slower AMD processor would actually effect work output), but then you have to deal with supporting Intel and AMD rather than just AMD.

 

[thejerk]

It reads like a transcript of a NASCAR or NHRA interview...

 

[rand_79]

I think the first payment for that hardware has just appeared here

oh 30% off my next upgrade if i open my pie hole and spew forth amd praises?

 

[warezme]

I don't know if I would claim Spy Kids 2 and Shark Boy and Lavagirl. Most high end video games look better than those movies ever did.

 

[coleipoo]

It's good to see Troublemaker is getting bigger and bigger, and AMD is helping with that. The studio puts out some great content.

 

[megamanx00]

6870 Machete edition anyone?

 

[ohim]

[citation][nom]NotYetRated[/nom]In terms of bang for your buck, AMD has been the choice for quite some time now. Though, raw performance wise, Intel is king. Hands down. I fail to see where it makes sense for a movie studio to use AMD processors. In applications like this, the amount you can get done in a day is normally constrained by how well your PC can keep up. Spending an extra 400 or 500 bucks may seem like a lot, but not when you get even 5% more efficiency while paying someone $40+ and hour. Simple economics. The smart studio would be using the fastest possible.[/citation]And how do you know how those 12 core Opterons behave on their software compared to Intel`s? I believe they know better than you. And when you already have a platform switching to another will cost you.

 

[jecastej]

AMD + ATI + "The software they used" = Stability and reliability. This is the key for this hardware choice: "driver quality and platform stability without which raw speed is really of no consequence. Robert Rodriguez and his crew have zero tolerance for shaky tech."

But, don't make a mistake, there are other specific "winning" combination including Nvidia and Intel.

It has nothing to do with general AMD or ATI performance and this wont show on general performance numbers. The key is to select specific hardware and software configurations that works together flawlessly, even if is just for a very specific use. However they don't specify the applications they are using for 3D or 2D post-processing. But they make the point of hardware selection starting back to AMD most glorious days and the fact that AMD and ATI ensures compatibility. I am not sure Intel + Nvidia could offer the same integration level.

Also, SEE how they work with qualified PRO Hardware and software. NO gaming rig or desktop CPUs or GPUs allowed with loaded bios. I know this is not for everyone but is the main point to produce different hardware for gaming and workstation use.

In the end for a big production there is nothing slower than a system down from failures. These systems fails too but the lower rates are worth the premium prices.

 

[Kelavarus]

[citation][nom]jecastej[/nom]Also, SEE how they work with qualified PRO Hardware and software. NO gaming rig or desktop CPUs or GPUs allowed with loaded bios. I know this is not for everyone but is the main point to produce different hardware for gaming and workstation use.In the end for a big production there is nothing slower than a system down from failures. These systems fails too but the lower rates are worth the premium prices.[/citation]

I was curious about this. I'm personally an ATI user since the days of 9--- series (started out with a measly X1550), and while I jumped from there to a X---- series, to a 3xxx series, I've never experienced the type of driver instability that so many harp upon. Whereas with two Nvidia cards (It's quite possible just bad luck) I had endless driver failures. I don't know why it was, and I'm not trying to sway anyone one way or the other, that's just my experience.

HOWEVER, my question is this: Are the drivers used for their FirePro even the same as they use for their Radeon line? Do they create completely different, much more stable drivers for their professional line of cards?

 

[joebob2000]

[citation][nom]stingstang[/nom]I've been waiting for this movie since seeing the trailer in Grind House.[/citation]
I thought for sure that trailer was just a joke... Guess the joke is on me.

 

[suisenbenjo]

[citation][nom]joebob2000[/nom]I thought for sure that trailer was just a joke... Guess the joke is on me.[/citation]

It was originally a fake trailer so you were right at the time.

 

[jecastej]

Kelavarus

Yes. Actually, it is basically 80% the driver what makes for the price difference (increased memory size adds too and some components) and why many gamers are tempted to load the Pro driver into a gaming card. But yes there are 2 or more separate drivers optimized for very different functions. Pro drivers are optimized for reliability and stability but also are produced to support specific Pro applications features and even some drivers versions are specific for one application. Is in this high optimization process where Nvidia has become more consistent, supports more specific apps and a broader set of functions. But one point with this article is to indicate that you can't count ATI-AMD out of the Pro industry as there are specific scenarios or production pipelines where the integration offered by the same CPU-GPU manufacturer is key.

Pro GPUs are build using better components, where is possible, to produce a longer life and reliability. They usually include more on board memory and are "underclocked" compared to gaming counterparts. The lower clock frequencies helps the hardware to run cooler and more stable. And Pro graphic cards comes with fast exchange warranty programs if the card fails. Also they have support, that you will never have if your gaming card fails any time in the production or development process.

If your job doesn't depend on high reliability or stability it will be hard for you or for a small studio to pay $3000 or more for the top Pro graphic card, plus premium price for workstation parts, but in a big production studio it will be a dumb decision to "play" with the system components you depend on 24-7 to "save" money, when what you really need is the system up and running.

I can't confirm this, but I read you can't load Pro drivers anymore into the latest Nvidia cards as there are included circuity to prevent this. I don't know if AMD-ATI has done something similar.

I have an entry level Pro Nvidia card, a Quadro 580 ($170), and I am extremely happy with it. It consumes 40 watts at full performance and gives me top support in Maya modeling, Zbrush and Photoshop. So I wont expend $400-500 in a top gaming card with loaded drivers. Nevertheless, if I need top Pro performance on a low budget I may try the "cheap" way. I am not judging anyone.

 

[silky salamandr]

And Nvidia gpu's were used for District9,Star Trek and Avitar. Dont know what CPUs were used tho.

Just the other day, AMD dropped the ATI name and are running it under the AMD brand real soon. Could this be a paid advertisement so people of toms can see AMD cpus and ATI gpus ran together harmoniously under one brand? This is all a advertisement so that you can start training your head to see it as one company.

This movie will be at the $2 theater a month after release and then a directors cut on blu ray.

 

[spentshells]

tech aside this movie has promise

 

[dEAne]

thanks tom I need to hear this.