 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3a699f39@news.povray.org>, "Andy Cocker"
<big### [at] mariner9 fsnetcouk> wrote:
> 1024x768 AA 0.3
> Windows (render priority HIGH)
> 540 s total
>
> Not so good eh? No point me mentioning the spec of my clockwork,
> steam-driven PC....
Hmm...1024*768, AA method 2 with recursion 2 and threshold 0.3, PowerPC
G3 350, 128MB RAM, Mac OS 9.0.4, rendering priority "Tyrannical":
Time For Trace: 0 hours 3 minutes 8.0 seconds (188 seconds)
Just a little bit slower than a Celeron 400...what is your processor?
--
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
skyvase.pov
1024x768 AA 0.3 (Highest render priority)
Time for parse: 1 sec
Time for trace: 48 sec
Total Time: 49 sec
Compaq Presario 7000, 1.2 GHz AMD Athlon, 128 Mb
Sorry, but it's brand new and I just HAD to tell someone who would
understand!
Cris Williams
"Halbert" <hal### [at] earthcompudrivelcom> wrote in message
news:3a67cd67$1@news.povray.org...
> Just upgraded to a PIII 800Mhz (256Mb) from a Celeron 400 (192Mb). I ran
> skyvase before and after here are my results:
> Before:
> skyvase.pov
> 1024x768 AA 0.3
> 168 s total
>
> After:
> skyvase.pov
> 1024x768 AA 0.3
> 77 s total
>
> I'm stoked!
> Isosurfaces, here I come!
>
> (email is up but webserver is still down)
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Here's mine:
skyvase.pov
1024x768 AA 0.3
Render Priority: Highest
699 s total
Anybody higher? :(
Rune
--
\ Include files, tutorials, 3D images, raytracing jokes,
/ The POV Desktop Theme, and The POV-Ray Logo Contest can
\ all be found at http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated January 6)
/ Also visit http://www.povrayusers.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Cris Williams wrote:
>
> skyvase.pov
> 1024x768 AA 0.3 (Highest render priority)
> Time for parse: 1 sec
> Time for trace: 48 sec
> Total Time: 49 sec
>
> Compaq Presario 7000, 1.2 GHz AMD Athlon, 128 Mb
That 250 MHz makes a BIG difference. I got 56 sec. on my 950 Athlon.
Got me beat by a whopping 7 whole seconds. Time to upgrade again !
:)
--
Ken Tyler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rune wrote:
>
> Here's mine:
>
> skyvase.pov
> 1024x768 AA 0.3
> Render Priority: Highest
> 699 s total
>
> Anybody higher? :(
I've got an old 486 DX2 80 around here somewhere that I am sure can
do worse than that. If that doesn't work I can also put together my
old 386 33 that is sure to take a couple of hours :)
--
Ken Tyler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rune wrote in message <3a6a02e9$1@news.povray.org>...
>Here's mine:
>
>skyvase.pov
>1024x768 AA 0.3
>Render Priority: Highest
>699 s total
>
>Anybody higher? :(
I'd try it on my old 486SX33, except that there isn't enough disk space
available for me to install POV-Ray!
--
Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The very latest Athlon has DDR memory and a 266 Mhz bus. I'd like to see
the numbers on this one.
I don't know if it's shipping in any systems yet - I saw it on AMD's site.
Mine has a 200 Mhz bus with SyncDRAM memory. I forgot to mention that I'm
running Windows ME.
Cris Williams
"Ken" <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote in message
news:3A6A6286.2B24B0E9@pacbell.net...
>
>
> Cris Williams wrote:
> >
> > skyvase.pov
> > 1024x768 AA 0.3 (Highest render priority)
> > Time for parse: 1 sec
> > Time for trace: 48 sec
> > Total Time: 49 sec
> >
> > Compaq Presario 7000, 1.2 GHz AMD Athlon, 128 Mb
>
> That 250 MHz makes a BIG difference. I got 56 sec. on my 950 Athlon.
> Got me beat by a whopping 7 whole seconds. Time to upgrade again !
>
> :)
>
> --
> Ken Tyler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Halbert" <hal### [at] earthcompudrivelcom> wrote in message
news:3a67cd67$1@news.povray.org...
> Just upgraded to a PIII 800Mhz (256Mb) from a Celeron 400 (192Mb). I ran
> skyvase before and after here are my results:
<snip>
> After:
> skyvase.pov
> 1024x768 AA 0.3
> 77 s total
Running POV3.1g on Win2000 with all my usual applications running in the
background (including OE ;) my AMD-TB 800 produced the same render time;
skyvase.pov
1024x768 AA 0.3
77 s total
Not surprising perhaps, given they're both 800MHz... The only thing that
makes me a little smug is that I only have 128megs RAM. Can I make a
sweeping statement and say AMD > P3? :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Given the evidence I would have to say "inconclusive" (because I know the
AMD may actually be superior). But if we were redering something that
required much more memory, I would probably come out on top because of the
memory. When I reran my test on the upgraded system I too had my usual
programs running, had POV set on the standard redering priority and I
haven't upgraded to Windows 2000 yet. (I did have Win2k on the Celeron
system but I had to reinstall my OS after upgrading)
It would be interesting to find out if the AMD does better with POV though.
www.compudrivel.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Andy Cocker" <big### [at] mariner9fsnetcouk> wrote in message
news:3a69bdb5@news.povray.org...
> "Halbert" <hal### [at] earthcompudrivelcom> wrote in message
> news:3a69a03e$1@news.povray.org...
> > Pentium 166? Perhaps 200?
>
> Yeah, P200 MMX. I find that it's the design of a scene that takes the
time..
> tweaking media parameters etc. I don't mind so much waiting for a final
> render.
Okay, that's scary. My K6-2 400 (196MB Ram, 512K L2) clocked in at exactly
400 seconds under exactly the same conditions as yours (I'm running Windows
2000, though).
That means that yours is goin' at 7.303 pixels per second per MHZ and mines
goin' at 4.915 pixels per second per MHZ. I knew K6-2s were not as powerful
in FPU power as P2s but I didn't expect to be beaten by a Pentium MMX!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
