On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 13:30:04 GMT, pov### [at] bestwebnetalmost (povray)
wrote:

>
>I have not done a rigorous test (ie - me with a topwatch
>rendering one scene with each version) but I think sometimes
>I get a slowdown also ... not all the time though.
>

OK.  I've since done some testing.  Good thing I did because
that statement I made (above) is just *not* correct.

I didn't use a stopwatch but instead used the Total time
displayed by povray.  I selected some files and rendered each
file in v3.5 and v3.6 and noted the times.  All rendered at
320x240, aa 0.3 ...

file                        pov 3.5 total   pov 3.6 total   note
----                        ----            ----            ----
dice_attempt_01.pov         5 min 32 secs   2 min 47 secs   rad + pho
function_pigment_speedtest  38 secs         34 secs
krokar_01                   51 secs         49 secs         rad
sweet_01                    1 min 9 secs    1 min 7 secs

(the above needs a normal usenet (ie fixed width) font to view)

In all four renders, 3.6 was faster.  The most dramatic performance
increase was when photons and radiousity were both in use.

So even on my sucky P4 CPU, v3.6 is faster.  Nice.  :)


-- 
to all the companies who wait until a large user base becomes
dependant on their freeware, then shafting said happy campers with
mandatory payment for continued usage. I spit on your grave.

Post a reply to this message