|
 |
Am 06.08.2014 03:41, schrieb jhu:
> "green" <rov### [at] gmail com> wrote:
>> something i found today
>> http://www.pugetsystems.com/blog/2014/07/14/POV-ray-on-Quad-Xeon-and-Opteron-579/
>> -or- http://tinyurl.com/mkc3bkz
>
> That is interesting. Of course, the Linux version is faster because it's a
> custom compile. What I'm surprised about is that hyperthreading kills
> performance on Windows for some reason. Can anyone explain why?
Must be a high-core-count thing; on my 4-core i7, running Windows 7, I
see this for a random scene:
HT ON:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peak memory used: 64352256 bytes
Render Time:
Photon Time: No photons
Radiosity Time: 0 hours 0 minutes 33 seconds (33.337 seconds)
using 8 thread(s) with 256.666 CPU-seconds total
Trace Time: 0 hours 0 minutes 34 seconds (34.647 seconds)
using 8 thread(s) with 274.590 CPU-seconds total
UberPOV finished
-
CPU time used: kernel 0.86 seconds, user 532.95 seconds, total 533.80
seconds.
Elapsed time 69.51 seconds, CPU vs elapsed time ratio 7.68.
Render averaged 8286.22 PPS (1079.05 PPS CPU time) over 576000 pixels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
HT OFF:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peak memory used: 54779904 bytes
Render Time:
Photon Time: No photons
Radiosity Time: 0 hours 0 minutes 44 seconds (44.133 seconds)
using 4 thread(s) with 173.050 CPU-seconds total
Trace Time: 0 hours 0 minutes 45 seconds (45.100 seconds)
using 4 thread(s) with 177.746 CPU-seconds total
UberPOV finished
-
CPU time used: kernel 0.72 seconds, user 351.95 seconds, total 352.67
seconds.
Elapsed time 90.32 seconds, CPU vs elapsed time ratio 3.90.
Render averaged 6377.04 PPS (1633.25 PPS CPU time) over 576000 pixels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
As you can see there's enough gain from HT to make it worthwhile.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
