|
 |
The kindly Rev. overheard
per### [at] aol com?subject=PoV-News:%20&body=Relating%20to%20POV-Ra
y:%20 (Bob H.) saying on 20 Oct 2000:
>By "numbers" maybe you meant prices?
Er, no, actually I was looking for raytracing benchmarks. Price is no
objects. OK, I see you don't believe that one. But since I've never
had a computer that was by any stretch of the imagination state of the
art, I thought just once I'd get something nice. Within reason.
I noticed that the POVRay benchmark hasn't been updated in a while, and
there isn't even an Athlon in the spreadsheet.
Basically I was wondering if people had data to support that Athlons do,
in fact, do POVRay faster than PIII's do, like the spec numbers indicate
they ought to. Considering that PIII's cost twice as much (or more)
than Athlons, and Athlons are (at least in the benchmarks I've read)
faster, especially in floating point math (opposite to the K6's vs.
PII's), I just wanted to make sure that held true in the real (i.e.,
POVRay) world. Getting a chip that will play Quake faster is a real
don't-care. Getting a chip that will run POVRay faster is a do-care.
>> I'm finally fixin' to sink this boat anchor of a P-133 and I
>> desperately want something that'll render POVRay scenes fast, run
>> modelers fast, and fill my life with sunshine, rainbows, and little
>> birdies singing.
>
>That last part will probably never happen except when going outside
>into the fresh air of springtime ;-)
>Far as speeds go I'll guess that your 133MHz is about 10 to 15 times
>slower than a 1GHz, translating to 10 to 15 minute renders being only
>1 minute (or less?), a render taking a day now only taking a couple
>hours. Would be nice to experience that kind of change, if true. I'm
>no expert.
Cool! Of course, all that means is, I'll be doing more elaborate stuff.
If it doesn't take all night, it isn't raytracing.
--
Rev. Bob "Bob" Crispen
crispen at hiwaay dot net
There are two rules for success in life:
(1) Don't tell people everything you know.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
