bob h <omn### [at] charternet> wrote:
: The new benchmarking scene file was being worked on last month and slated
: for inclusion later when finished.  Christoph Hormann was putting it
: together.

  The good thing about the new benchmark file is that it's more up-to-date
in render time. It also is a lot more diversified (ie has more primitives which
are used quite often). It also has some kind of official status as a benchmark
file.

-- 
#macro N(D,I)#if(I<6)cylinder{M()#local D[I]=div(D[I],104);M().5,2pigment{
rgb M()}}N(D,(D[I]>99?I:I+1))#end#end#macro M()<mod(D[I],13)-6,mod(div(D[I
],13),8)-3,10>#end blob{N(array[6]{11117333955,
7382340,3358,3900569407,970,4254934330},0)}//                     - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

I see, thank you. I guess I've been skipping over too
many posts lately.


-- 
Phil
Behold, for I am the keeper of the sacred coffee brewing method.

Post a reply to this message

Phil Clute wrote:
> 
> A replacement for skyvase.pov as a benckmark has been
> brought up several times in the past, has anyone put a
> new file together that could be included with pov3.5?

How about one of my Rusty scene files?  Everyone can render a different
frame for me...

-- 
ICQ: 46085459

Post a reply to this message

"Phil Clute" wrote:
> I see, thank you. I guess I've been skipping
> over too many posts lately.

I believe it happened in groups that are not public...

Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World:    http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated Nov 5)
POV-Ray Users:   http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk

Post a reply to this message

Hmmm...sounds like you have other motives to me ;)

-- 
Phil
Behold, for I am the keeper of the sacred coffee brewing method.

Post a reply to this message

"Tom Melly" <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> wrote in message
news:3c0f9fc0@news.povray.org...
> 3.1g watcom.win32 = 9 seconds
> 3.5 beta.8.icl.win32 = 6 seconds
>
> on p3 733 win2000 at work.... I got the impression that people thought 3.5 was
> slower? Or did I miss something?
>
>

Since hardware improved greatly since skyvase
started being used as a povbench it has become
clear that there is a need for a new file.

http://www.tabsnet.com/

uses chess2.pov and offers a higher degree of granularity
for results comparisons as the longer times spreads out
the minute differences that skyvase obscured.

tabsnet will do until (or if) there is a better povbench

currently there is a good set of results to compare your
machine against - single cpu - overclocked - multiple cpu

the times are long enough that useful distinctions can be
drawn from the differences; i.e. the numbers I got from a
abit kg7-raid mb/amd 1.4 cpu/1gB ram encouraged me to
put together a kr7a-raid mb/amd 1900/1gB ram machine
because it seems clear ths is the way to best performance
from a single cpu box

Post a reply to this message

In article <3c13d9da@news.povray.org> , <pan### [at] syixcom>  wrote:

> http://www.tabsnet.com/

Ah, great, they are measuring background activity on every OS.  For neither
platform there is anything mentioned of the rendered CPU priority.  And for
the Mac version someone even had the brilliant idea to suggest the medium
setting.

Together with the lack of any instructions for Windows or Linux how to set a
suitable priority the whole benchmark still measures more noise than
anything else and the results are useless for any comparison because they
are random...

    Thorsten

Post a reply to this message

"Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trfde> wrote in message
news:3c13ece0@news.povray.org...
> In article <3c13d9da@news.povray.org> , <pan### [at] syixcom>  wrote:
>
> > http://www.tabsnet.com/
>
> Ah, great, they are measuring background activity on every OS.  For neither
> platform there is anything mentioned of the rendered CPU priority.  And for
> the Mac version someone even had the brilliant idea to suggest the medium
> setting.
>
> Together with the lack of any instructions for Windows or Linux how to set a
> suitable priority the whole benchmark still measures more noise than
> anything else and the results are useless for any comparison because they
> are random...
>
>     Thorsten

Are you talking about the gui and render priorities in the menus for
the win version?
I thought it was understood that those settings are irrelevant for windows;
i.e. they don't work or affect anything in the real world.  The windows
evnvironment is always going to have "noise" in the sense that box a
might be os active in a different way than box b even though the same
.pov is being run. Maybe a reccomendation to shut down all windows
except pov, turn off all devices and pull any interenet plugs would
improve the results? Not reasonable for 'joe-user'. Thus, repeated
tests, like in all well done testing regimes, is called for. If, over time,
a consistent result is obtained regardless of 'noise' then some measure
of trust can be invested. One could even use a set of reuslts to measure
so-called 'os noise'.
Fo *nixs the same applies. Shut down all daemons, pull all plugs, anything
else that might keep  pov from running as the sole user of resources.
Again unlikely. Repeated testing is again indicated.
Comparing box a to box b? If the purpose is to gain some points for
having the fastest machine - I don't care and am not interested.
I do think some level of confidence can be attained in comparison
between machines. Develop some factor (call it omega) that describes
'os noise' for a particular box that can be included in the results set
comprising multiple and different machines. Omega can be arrived at
by running results for a particular box through some statistical routines.
If omega turns out to be significant, then it can be used in the matrix of
collected results to develop classes of performance or other metrics.
But - is 'omega' an important factor? I doubt this is a measure of
difference with any distinction - in the sense that any reasonable person
is not going to be running many other processes that would diminish
the best possible numbers. I would think omega would be meaningful
only at the level where a few seconds might be added or subtracted
from the parse and render times. On low end machines 'os noise' might
be an overwhelming factor, but what are you talking about here?
Some P II 200 mghz with 64 mB?
I could isolate a cpu in as noiseless environment as possible, but
how many pov users are going to do that? There will always be an
interest in a povbench that joe-user can simply run on his box
regardless of 'noise'.
I'm not arguing against a good suite of povbench methods being eventually
developed - using chess2 is better than skyvase. If anything else
comes around I'll be among the first to use it. Hasn't happened yet.

Once 3.5 is final it will definitely be a project to script a good .pov
for benching. Got to wait until then.

p.s. Of more importance is benching technique x vs. technique z
to accompish the same image aspect. Having the fastest hardware is not
the same as learning efficient coding.

Post a reply to this message

There is already a new benchmark file, written specifically for this
exact purpose. We just haven't released it yet (still being fine-
tuned).

-- Chris

Post a reply to this message

"Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trfde> wrote in message
news:3c13ece0@news.povray.org...
> In article <3c13d9da@news.povray.org> , <pan### [at] syixcom>  wrote:
>
> > http://www.tabsnet.com/
>
> Ah, great, they are measuring background activity on every OS.  For
neither
> platform there is anything mentioned of the rendered CPU priority.  And
for
> the Mac version someone even had the brilliant idea to suggest the medium
> setting.

Actually, this might even be desirable - it's a bit like the difference
between a DOS app and Windows app.  One of them will have much better
performance (say, 3-4x), but the other one is what people will actually use.
And it's more useful knowing how your machine will do in a genuine setting,
rather than a manufactured one.

To put it another way, I don't care if my car will go 0-60 in 4.6 seconds,
and get 32 mpg on the racetrack - I want to know how it responds when I
drive it on real roads, and the mileage I'll get with my actual commute.

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message