I've made a little comparsion on my own PC, on a fireworks scene.
Hardware :
P166mmx overclocked to 200Mhz
32Mb EDO
1 Mb Cache.

win95 : 
  Litestep as shell, no unnecessary programs run.
  no editor, no menubar, no animation.

Test scene can be posted in .text.scene-files on demand.
Same .pov file and .ini file in both tests.

Scene info :
two infinite spheres
sky_sphere
a HF, 512*334*16
4 lights of diff. colour
a fog.
3207 objects total
Resolution 640 x 480
Antialiasing Off
Radiosity Off


Dos-Stats
Memory : 6 194 964
Parse  : 20.0 seconds
Trace  : 8 minutes   3.0 seconds 
Time   : 8 minutes  23.0 seconds

Win-Stats
Memory : 6 191 008
Parse  : 27 seconds
Trace  : 8 minutes   56.0 seconds
Time   : 9 minutes   23.0 seconds

As you can see there is not much difference between the two.

//Spider

Post a reply to this message

Spider wrote :
> 
> 
> Dos-Stats
> Memory : 6 194 964
> Parse  : 20.0 seconds
> Trace  : 8 minutes   3.0 seconds
> Time   : 8 minutes  23.0 seconds
> 
> Win-Stats
> Memory : 6 191 008
> Parse  : 27 seconds
> Trace  : 8 minutes   56.0 seconds
> Time   : 9 minutes   23.0 seconds
> 
> As you can see there is not much difference between the two.

"not much" ?  Well, 10% faster is appreciated on longish renderings...
It gives more than 2 hours difference in a not-so-rare-for-me 24 h 
render...  Also, the DOS version (if clean DOS boot) gives more
useable memory to POV.  Appreciated by people who have 32 megs or so.
(I got 128 Mb, but still prefer the dos "interface" in most cases).

Cheers,
Fabien.

Post a reply to this message

Not much was compared to my first test run.
I had draw vistas on, and there happened to be a a 4 min change in parse
then, because of the caption update bug in the render window. That
difference was far more tahn I had appreciated.

And, I agree with you for finals, but i had still expected windows to
make it slower than this. Oh, came to think of it now, Pov dind't run at
full priority at the time either...
//Spider

Post a reply to this message

Spider <spi### [at] bahnhofse> wrote:
: two infinite spheres

  What's an infinite sphere?

-- 
main(i){char*_="BdsyFBThhHFBThhHFRz]NFTITQF|DJIFHQhhF";while(i=
*_++)for(;i>1;printf("%s",i-70?i&1?"[]":" ":(i=0,"\n")),i/=2);} /*- Warp. -*/

Post a reply to this message

Nieminen Mika wrote:
> 
> Spider <spi### [at] bahnhofse> wrote:
> : two infinite spheres
> 
>   What's an infinite sphere?


An infinite sphere is one that your camera is inside of, such
as when you are using a sphere for the sky, and forget to use
the inverse keyword to flip the sphere's surface normal.
Why it is considered an infine sphere, I know not, but it has
puzzled me for years now.

-- 
Ken Tyler

tyl### [at] pacbellnet

Post a reply to this message

Actually, the difference is much less than 10% between DOS and Win,
provided you have enough memory and care to tweak your system settings a
bit. On my machine, skyvase (640x480 AA) took 1:12 (DOS) and 1:14 (Win).
Still, there's no denying Win is a recource hog and a no-no for large
scenes.
Perhaps sb. could give the results on Linux/Unix as a comparison? I am
considering getting Linux; this might be a nice incentive to take the
trouble.

Margus

Fabien Mosen wrote:
 
> "not much" ?  Well, 10% faster is appreciated on longish renderings...
> It gives more than 2 hours difference in a not-so-rare-for-me 24 h
> render...  Also, the DOS version (if clean DOS boot) gives more
> useable memory to POV.  Appreciated by people who have 32 megs or so.
> (I got 128 Mb, but still prefer the dos "interface" in most cases).
> 
> Cheers,
> Fabien.

Post a reply to this message

Spider wrote:
> 
> I've made a little comparsion on my own PC, on a fireworks scene.
> Dos-Stats
> Time   : 8 minutes  23.0 seconds
> 
> Win-Stats
> Time   : 9 minutes   23.0 seconds
>
I must try this with the unofficial Linux version
and my own personal unofficial BeOS port :)

-- 
Dave, on his linux box...
"I'd prefer the non-smoking lifeboat, please."

Post a reply to this message

Ken wrote:
> 
> Nieminen Mika wrote:
> >
> > Spider <spi### [at] bahnhofse> wrote:
> > : two infinite spheres
> >
> >   What's an infinite sphere?
> 
> An infinite sphere is one that your camera is inside of, such
> as when you are using a sphere for the sky, and forget to use
> the inverse keyword to flip the sphere's surface normal.
> Why it is considered an infine sphere, I know not, but it has
> puzzled me for years now.

So THAT's why. I thought it was enough to have it hollow.
does the invere give me any other advantages except that the infinite
goes away?

//Spider

Post a reply to this message

Like they say, that *little* grows when doing long renders.
Btw, I've seen an average 8% difference on this 233MMX 32Meg SDRAM (now
64) but haven't done any DOS renders since).
POVpro, the dos "speed-optimized" version of POV-Ray 3, was usually 20
to 40 percent faster, depending on the scene.

Spider wrote:
> 
> I've made a little comparsion on my own PC, on a fireworks scene.
> Hardware :
> P166mmx overclocked to 200Mhz
> 32Mb EDO
> 1 Mb Cache.
> 
> win95 :
>   Litestep as shell, no unnecessary programs run.
>   no editor, no menubar, no animation.
> 
> Test scene can be posted in .text.scene-files on demand.
> Same .pov file and .ini file in both tests.
> 
> Scene info :
> two infinite spheres
> sky_sphere
> a HF, 512*334*16
> 4 lights of diff. colour
> a fog.
> 3207 objects total
> Resolution 640 x 480
> Antialiasing Off
> Radiosity Off
> 
> Dos-Stats
> Memory : 6 194 964
> Parse  : 20.0 seconds
> Trace  : 8 minutes   3.0 seconds
> Time   : 8 minutes  23.0 seconds
> 
> Win-Stats
> Memory : 6 191 008
> Parse  : 27 seconds
> Trace  : 8 minutes   56.0 seconds
> Time   : 9 minutes   23.0 seconds
> 
> As you can see there is not much difference between the two.
> 
> //Spider

-- 
 omniVERSE: beyond the universe
  http://members.aol.com/inversez/POVring.htm
=Bob

Post a reply to this message

Bob Hughes wrote:
> 
> Like they say, that *little* grows when doing long renders.
> Btw, I've seen an average 8% difference on this 233MMX 32Meg SDRAM (now
> 64) but haven't done any DOS renders since).
> POVpro, the dos "speed-optimized" version of POV-Ray 3, was usually 20
> to 40 percent faster, depending on the scene.
yeah, but I can't say taht this was fair to windoze.
If I shall make a true compariosn I'll boot with poray as shell, using
no editor and at highest priority.

But then... Perhaps not.

//Spider

Post a reply to this message