 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
hello:
some time ago, i believe i came across
a posting which referred to a web site which
kept a list of times for different OSes and
machines rendering a 'standard' setup file.
could someone point me in the direction
of this site, if it still exists.
TIA.
- tim k.
PS. just acquired a blue&white G3 mac and
itchin' to do some tests....
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim,
I think you mean POVbench...a quick lycos later...
http://www.haveland.com/povbench/index.htm
Tim Kaelin wrote:
> hello:
>
> some time ago, i believe i came across
> a posting which referred to a web site which
> kept a list of times for different OSes and
> machines rendering a 'standard' setup file.
> could someone point me in the direction
> of this site, if it still exists.
> TIA.
>
> - tim k.
>
> PS. just acquired a blue&white G3 mac and
> itchin' to do some tests....
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <36adfc93.0@news.povray.org> , "Tim Kaelin" <tka### [at] ohmart com>
wrote:
> PS. just acquired a blue&white G3 mac and
> itchin' to do some tests....
Please wait for any Mac comparisons until version 3.1b is out, the current
one is _not_ competitive! :-)
Thorsten
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Graham Redway <red### [at] compuservecom> wrote:
: I think you mean POVbench...a quick lycos later...
: http://www.haveland.com/povbench/index.htm
I think that this test is being more and more inaccurate.
If the current scene takes, for example, 10 seconds to render in computer
A and 12 seconds in computer B, that means nothing. You can't really say
which one of those are faster. The 2 extra seconds in the computer B
may be some overhead which isn't so important in longer renders. It's
entirely possible that a render which takes 10 minutes in the computer A
would take only 8 minutes in B because in this longer render that
little overhead doesn't add so much to the rendering time.
IMHO a scene which takes about 1 minute to render in the cray T3E should
be much better.
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich wrote in message <36ae899b.0@news.povray.org>...
>
>Please wait for any Mac comparisons until version 3.1b is out, the current
>one is _not_ competitive! :-)
>
> Thorsten
Thorsten:
no problem.
just curious, is the MacOS version moving
to a CodeWarrior/PowerPlant implementation?
- tim k.
Tim Kaelin
OhmartVega Corp.
tka### [at] ohmartvegacom
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <36af8a65.0@news.povray.org> , "Tim Kaelin" <tka### [at] ohmartcom>
wrote:
>just curious, is the MacOS version moving
>to a CodeWarrior/PowerPlant implementation?
No PowerPlant (no time for learning it, and it still has some limitations),
but to a full object oriented, C++ design for the Mac part. Scripting is
high on the list as well, during the development of POV-Ray 3.5 we will
decide what will be the final features of the Mac side of POV-Ray 3.5.
68K *will* be dropped because of all the development problems: It is nearly
impossible to debug anything a computer that _is_ different from the
PowerMacs we have...
Thorsten
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
