 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I ran standard POV-Ray 3.5 as the only task on dual processor machine
under Windows XP. Does that mean that it will use both processors ?
Should I use any non-official build to utilize both processors (PVMPOV
or smth. like that)?
Gena.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3DFA3237.11DDBAAE@mail.com> , Gena <obu### [at] mail com> wrote:
> I ran standard POV-Ray 3.5 as the only task on dual processor machine
> under Windows XP. Does that mean that it will use both processors ?
Read the manual, section "9.1.3.2 Can POV-Ray use multiple processors?"
> Should I use any non-official build to utilize both processors (PVMPOV
> or smth. like that)?
If you want to.
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> In article <3DFA3237.11DDBAAE@mail.com> , Gena <obu### [at] mailcom>
> wrote:
>
>> I ran standard POV-Ray 3.5 as the only task on dual processor machine
>> under Windows XP. Does that mean that it will use both processors ?
>
> Read the manual, section "9.1.3.2 Can POV-Ray use multiple
> processors?"
Then post in p.g asking 'SMP.... When.....'
--
Rick
Kitty5 NewMedia http://Kitty5.co.uk
POV-Ray News & Resources http://Povray.co.uk
TEL : +44 (01270) 501101 - FAX : +44 (01270) 251105 - ICQ : 15776037
PGP Public Key
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 06/12/2002
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Is there any trick which I should use if I want to start many instances of
POV-Ray under Windows XP ? It looks like I cannot do that just clicking
shortcut. It always brings up the first copy.
Gena.
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> In article <3DFA3237.11DDBAAE@mail.com> , Gena <obu### [at] mailcom> wrote:
>
> > I ran standard POV-Ray 3.5 as the only task on dual processor machine
> > under Windows XP. Does that mean that it will use both processors ?
>
> Read the manual, section "9.1.3.2 Can POV-Ray use multiple processors?"
>
> > Should I use any non-official build to utilize both processors (PVMPOV
> > or smth. like that)?
>
> If you want to.
>
> Thorsten
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
> e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
>
> Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3E03C50E.A13D0D0E@mail.com>, Gena <obu### [at] mailcom> wrote:
> Is there any trick which I should use if I want to start many instances of
> POV-Ray under Windows XP ? It looks like I cannot do that just clicking
> shortcut. It always brings up the first copy.
I think unchecking "Keep Single Instance" in the Options menu will give
the behavior you want.
--
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christopher James Huff wrote:
> In article <3E03C50E.A13D0D0E@mail.com>, Gena <obu### [at] mailcom>
> wrote:
>
>> Is there any trick which I should use if I want to start many
>> instances of POV-Ray under Windows XP ? It looks like I cannot do
>> that just clicking shortcut. It always brings up the first copy.
>
> I think unchecking "Keep Single Instance" in the Options menu will
> give the behavior you want.
Just remember to assign each instance of povray to a seperate CPU in task
manager before you start rendering
--
Rick
Kitty5 NewMedia http://Kitty5.co.uk
POV-Ray News & Resources http://Povray.co.uk
TEL : +44 (01270) 501101 - FAX : +44 (01270) 251105 - ICQ : 15776037
PGP Public Key
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rick [Kitty5] <ric### [at] kitty5com> wrote:
> Just remember to assign each instance of povray to a seperate CPU in task
> manager before you start rendering
It would be incredibly stupid multitasking from WinXP if it
assigned two extremely heavy processes to the same processor, while the
other processor is mostly idle.
I don't believe that even MS can do things that bad.
--
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Rick [Kitty5] <ric### [at] kitty5com> wrote:
>> Just remember to assign each instance of povray to a seperate CPU in
>> task manager before you start rendering
>
> It would be incredibly stupid multitasking from WinXP if it
> assigned two extremely heavy processes to the same processor, while
> the other processor is mostly idle.
> I don't believe that even MS can do things that bad.
It dosnt know a process is going to be a heavy one when it decides which
processor it will be running on, it just sticks it on the CPU that at that
instant has less load.
--
Rick
Kitty5 NewMedia http://Kitty5.co.uk
POV-Ray News & Resources http://Povray.co.uk
TEL : +44 (01270) 501101 - FAX : +44 (01270) 251105 - ICQ : 15776037
PGP Public Key
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rick [Kitty5] <ric### [at] kitty5com> wrote:
> It dosnt know a process is going to be a heavy one when it decides which
> processor it will be running on, it just sticks it on the CPU that at that
> instant has less load.
You mean it can't switch a process from one processor to another on
the fly?-o
That's hard to believe (no matter how much I would like to believe
something like that from MS). AFAIK that doesn't involve anything
complicated for a multitasking manager.
--
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3e04b967@news.povray.org> , "Rick [Kitty5]" <ric### [at] kitty5com>
wrote:
>> It would be incredibly stupid multitasking from WinXP if it
>> assigned two extremely heavy processes to the same processor, while
>> the other processor is mostly idle.
>> I don't believe that even MS can do things that bad.
>
> It dosnt know a process is going to be a heavy one when it decides which
> processor it will be running on, it just sticks it on the CPU that at that
> instant has less load.
No, that isn't how scheduling works. The next process in the queue will
always be scheduled on the next processor available. It would be a lot more
difficult to implement it any other way. And in fact the performance
problems one may get when using the P4 SMT feature suggest that this works
the same on WinDOS.
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
