Ron Parker wrote:
> 

> >And it should be long enough to parse & render (I stick to my 2 hours on
> > a 1.4GHz Athlon (*))
> 
> But that would prevent people with real-world processors from participating
> at all. I hate to think how long it would take this P200 to run the
> benchmark, for example, but even a Duron 650 would have a tough time of it,
> and that's a current processor.  I'm sure I'm not the only one who doesn't
> expect to break the gigahertz barrier for at least another year or two.
> 

May I add that my current processor is a P200 underclocked for stability
at 180 with a lot of memory. If it took 2 Hours for a 1.4GHz, I would
expect my computer to take about two days. I do not see any problem about that.

If I were to just have a look at the image, whose size for the benchmark
should be bigger than 1600x1200, I could render it at 400x300, which would
be about 16 times faster (if only rendering was concerned), putting me
back in nearly realtime rendering (less than 3 hours).

We cannot have a reasonnable time for slow processor and enough 
provision for precision for fast futur processor and clustered things.

P.S. : I do not expect to upgrade before one full year, either.

Post a reply to this message