Le 04/07/2013 22:36, Todd Carnes nous fit lire :
> On 7/4/2013 11:48 AM, Warp wrote:
>> Todd Carnes <tod### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>>> The general user is not going to care how much you've improved the trace
>>> time, if your overall time to finish the scene increases. As far as
>>> they're concerned, the program is slower.
>
> POV-Ray 3.6 took 8.17 seconds to get to the final image.
> POV-Ray 3.7 took 9.749 seconds to get to the final image.
> 
> I don't understand why you can't read these numbers for yourself. I will
> copy them from the OP's post repost them again below.

CPU usage is increased. (from 8s to 9.749s)
Wall clock is less. (from 8s to 5.211s)

Stop misinterpreting the output.
Yes, version 3.7RC7 might be slower (at least on some aspects), but it
is able to handle multicore CPU, a thing that 3.6 did not.

> Anyway, AGAIN, the OP's original numbers...
> 
> Fractracer <lg.### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> Here the times for the same little scene:
>> V3.7
>> Render Time:
>>   Photon Time:      No photons
>>   Radiosity Time:   No radiosity
>>   Trace Time:       0 hours  0 minutes  5 seconds (5.211 seconds)
>>               using 2 thread(s) with 9.749 CPU-seconds total
>> V3.6
>> Total Scene Processing Times
>>   Parse Time:    0 hours  0 minutes  0 seconds (0 seconds)
>>   Photon Time:   0 hours  0 minutes  0 seconds (0 seconds)
>>   Render Time:   0 hours  0 minutes  8 seconds (8 seconds)
>>   Total Time:    0 hours  0 minutes  8 seconds (8 seconds)
>> CPU time used: kernel 1.15 seconds, user 7.02 seconds, total 8.17 seconds
>> Render averaged 37580.50 PPS over 307200 pixels
>

Post a reply to this message