Hi all, I am planning on building a PC to dedicate towards rendering lengthier medium-high quality MB3d animations. I understand that CPU is by far the most important consideration for rendering times (as the program does not render on GPU), and given such I am giving most of my attention into selecting the right processor. Particularly attractive to me is the AMD FX-8350, given its 8 cores and low price (see:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113284). Normally I like to go Intel, but I could almost buy two of these chips for the price of a lower end i7. This chip is reported to be easily overclocked to the mid 4's (4.5-4.7 GHz) range, and such headroom makes it even more attractive of a purchase.
My other (Intel) considerations are the i7-4790K Devil's Canyon (see:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=i7-4790K&N=-1&isNodeId=1) or going 6-core with the i7-5820K (see:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117402).
My main questions are: Which is most important: number of cores, threads, single clock speed, or cache?
I ran an experiment the other day with my i5 quadcore desktop, in which I ran one instance of MB3D at varying threadcount and noticed an increase in render time with a decrease in threadcount (which seemed to stand to reason). Additionally, I tried running two instances of MB3D simultaneously (each at 2 threads) to see if that would decrease total render time of an animation by having each instance render half of the total frames of the animation--similarly each of the instances ran slower than just one instance given max number of threads.
Another thing that deters me from the Intel chips (other than their higher price) is a statement made in the MB3D ReadMe that warns against running a higher threadcount than the number of actual processor cores, due to stability issues. How valid is this? The 17-4790K is a quadcore with 8 threads, but if running more threads than actual cores truly causes stability issues, then does that not "limit" this chip to being ran as a 4 core? Similarly with the 17-5820K, which has 6 actual cores but 12 threads--would this chip be "limited" to running at 6 threads due to prevent crashes or whatever? Admittedly, I have not tried running my MB3D at a higher threadcount than 4, so I have no experience with the behavior of the program when threadcount is set greater than number of cores.
Is anyone on this board running any of the above cards for MB3D rendering and can share their opinions? I know that it is always repeated that per-core performance of Intel is always much better than AMD, but given the +0.5-0.7 GHz in clock speed that can be gained from OC'ing the AMD FX-8350, does that not essentially negate that difference in performance? Additionally, the AMD card has basically the same cache as the i7-4790K (though less than that of the i7-5820K). I mean, for its price it seems that the AMD is the way to go. Anyways I look forward to anyone's insight regarding these cards--I promise I have read through these forums and done my homework before posting, but many of the CPU related threads are slightly dated. Thanks in advance.