 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Well they BETTER have agreed to it, sheesh! It would go
against the spirit of POV to say no....
excited to see where this leads....
--
http://www.teleport.com/~dearmad
But why bother? I'm not interesting.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Jan 2001 20:00:07 +0100 Gilles Tran wrote:
>Intel plans to run demos that would use POV-Ray (and possibly Megapov)
>at the next LinuxWorld (in New York, Jan 29-Feb 2). The idea is to
>demonstrate the speed of their Intel "Alpha" Linux Compiler on a P4 at
>1.5 Gz.
Hi, Gilles. This wouldn't be the first time that POV-Ray has been used
to show off Intel processors. Remember this demo presented by IBM?
http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9903/16/super.idg/
Obviously, when it comes to networked computers, Skyvase.pov may no
longer be a valid benchmark for processing power of this magnitude. For
single cpu home-based systems, though, it's still fun to see how close
we can get to the Cray <s>.
--
Alan - ako### [at] povray org - a k o n g <at> p o v r a y <dot> o r g
http://www.povray.org - Home of the Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gilles Tran wrote:
> In fact, they contacted me because they wanted to use my "Wet Bird" IRTC
> pic for the demo, expecting it to render in 5 minutes (something that
> Moore's Law don't agree with unfortunately). Very probably, they'll
> contact the POV-Team and/or Nathan Kopp about compiling POV/Megapov in
> an optimal way. (they also agreed for me to report this here, BTW).
>
It would be good, if they make this optimal way compiled program
available, so those who have money to burn and buy new processor, can
take advantage of it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann wrote:
> I doubt that optimisation matters that much if it's mainly about pure FPU
> computation speed. I would estimate not more than about 5-10 percent.
> Anyway I agree that it would be interesting to see the result.
>
The Intel person I talked to says that their latest compiler, when running on a
Pentium 4 1.5GHz, gives about 2x performance over GCC. But don't ask me what it means
since my knowledge of processors and compilers is close to nil.
G.
--
**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
Graphic experiments
Pov-ray gallery
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
J Charter wrote:
> Congratulations! or as we used to say..."Way t' go!"
In fact they won't be able to use the Wet Bird pic. It took almost a day to
render on a PII 350 so that even with their configuration it would take a few
hours. What they want is a scene able to render during the presentation, so
they're looking for something more attractive than skyvase.pov but fast enough
(like 5 minutes).
G.
--
**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
Graphic experiments
Pov-ray gallery
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
They could have my Seattle Space Needle script if they wanted it. I'd guess something
like it would render
just right. Does about an hour or two on my 500MHz PIII all depending on how large a
res., whatever AA
settings, etc.
Wonder how much faster they expect it to be?
Bob H.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3A66B87A.899A70AA@inapg.inra.fr> , Gilles Tran
<tra### [at] inapginrafr> wrote:
> In fact they won't be able to use the Wet Bird pic. It took almost a day to
> render on a PII 350 so that even with their configuration it would take a few
> hours. What they want is a scene able to render during the presentation, so
> they're looking for something more attractive than skyvase.pov but fast enough
> (like 5 minutes).
Well, what if you reduce the output image size? Or does parsing takle very
long, too?
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gilles Tran wrote:
>
> The Intel person I talked to says that their latest compiler, when running on a
> Pentium 4 1.5GHz, gives about 2x performance over GCC. But don't ask me what it
means
> since my knowledge of processors and compilers is close to nil.
>
That would be quite impressive although i doubt it's true for povray.
Anyway there is not much sense in speculations, so let's wait for the
result.
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> Well, what if you reduce the output image size? Or does parsing takle very
> long, too?
Of course, a very small size could render fast, but they want something that
impresses people, so a thumbnail is out of the question I guess. Also, this image
renders very fast for the first 600 lines and then slows down because of the big
isosurface + reflections + motion blur + media in the bottom part. Even if it could
be run in 15 minutes, the people at the show would get bored by looking at the last
200 lines being rendered pixel by pixel. People like us who are used to watching
pixels crawl on the screen would perhaps cheer up but not the general public who has
video games and movies as unique references for 3D.
G.
--
**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
Graphic experiments
Pov-ray gallery
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gilles Tran wrote:
>
> they're looking for something more attractive than skyvase.pov but fast enough
> (like 5 minutes).
How about http://images.honesty.com/imagedata/h/506/15/25061569.jpg :)
Shiny! The way general public likes it's CG. Microsoft and nVIDIA
like it too.
______________________________________________________________________
Kari Kivisalo http://www.kivisalo.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
