I installed Debian 7 (armhf) on my phone within a chroot jail. So I decided to
test out the CPU with Povray 3.6 (so far I'm having issues compiling Povray
3.7). I also compiled a softfp version for comparison. Here are the results:

  Debian 7.0(armhf), gcc 4.6, -mhard-float -mcpu=cortex-a9 -march=armv7 -mthumb
    -mfpu=neon -funsafe-math-optimizations
  Parse Time:    0 hours  0 minutes  4 seconds (4 seconds)
  Photon Time:   0 hours  1 minutes 30 seconds (90 seconds)
  Render Time:   1 hours 20 minutes 38 seconds (4838 seconds)
  Total Time:    1 hours 22 minutes 12 seconds (4932 seconds)

  Debian 6.0 (armel), gcc 4.4, -mfloat-abi=softfp -mcpu=cortex-a9
  Parse Time:    0 hours  0 minutes  4 seconds (4 seconds)
  Photon Time:   0 hours  1 minutes 43 seconds (103 seconds)
  Render Time:   1 hours 49 minutes 59 seconds (6599 seconds)
  Total Time:    1 hours 51 minutes 46 seconds (6706 seconds)

Here are some results compared to other processors:
Ordered by pps:
Core i5 2400S (2.5 GHz): 235.177 pps ; 94.07 pps/GHz
Athlon II x4 (2.8 GHz):   179.82 pps ; 64.22 pps/GHz
Celeron 220 (1.2 GHz):     81.15 pps ; 67.62 pps/GHz
Pentium 4m (1.5 GHz):      36.24 pps ; 24.16 pps/GHz
Exynos 4210 (1.2 GHz):     29.90 pps ; 24.91 pps/GHz (-mfloat-abi=hard)
Atom N270 (1.6 GHz):       28.96 pps ; 18.10 pps/GHz
Exynos 4210 (1.2 GHz):     21.99 pps ; 18.32 pps/GHz (-mfloat-abi=softfp)
PowerPC 750 (700 MHz):     20.47 pps ; 29.25 pps/GHz
Pentium !!! (450 MHz):     12.43 pps ; 27.62 pps/GHz

Ordered by pps/GHz:
Core i5 2400S (2.5 GHz): 235.177 pps ; 94.07 pps/GHz
Celeron 220 (1.2 GHz):     81.15 pps ; 67.62 pps/GHz
Athlon II x4 (2.8 GHz):   179.82 pps ; 64.22 pps/GHz
PowerPC 750 (700 MHz):     20.47 pps ; 29.25 pps/GHz
Pentium !!! (450 MHz):     12.43 pps ; 27.62 pps/GHz
Exynos 4210 (1.2 GHz):     29.90 pps ; 24.91 pps/GHz (-mfloat-abi=hard)
Pentium 4m (1.5 GHz):      36.24 pps ; 24.16 pps/GHz
Exynos 4210 (1.2 GHz):     21.99 pps ; 18.32 pps/GHz (-mfloat-abi=softfp)
Atom N270 (1.6 GHz):       28.96 pps ; 18.10 pps/GHz

Post a reply to this message

Here's the link to the binary image:

http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.misc/thread/%3Cweb.4fd80b36cd0c5bfdd19b0ec40%40news.povray.org%3E/

Post a reply to this message

"jhu" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Here's the link to the binary image:
>
>
http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.misc/thread/%3Cweb.4fd80b36cd0c5bfdd19b0ec40%40news.povray.org%3E/

Ooops! That's the old one with softfp. Here's the new one:

http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.misc/thread/%3Cweb.50326f0c5931bb41d19b0ec40%40news.povray.org%3E/

Post a reply to this message

On 8/20/2012 11:26 AM, jhu wrote:
> I installed Debian 7 (armhf) on my phone within a chroot jail. So I decided to
> test out the CPU with Povray 3.6 (so far I'm having issues compiling Povray
> 3.7). I also compiled a softfp version for comparison.

You didn't mention what image you rendered.

I compiled 3.7 for my Raspberry PI. It runs with some issues:
http://news.povray.org/povray.beta-test/thread/%3C502e8d58%40news.povray.org%3E/

Post a reply to this message

Dave <use### [at] iamdaveATglidefreecom> wrote:
> On 8/20/2012 11:26 AM, jhu wrote:
> > I installed Debian 7 (armhf) on my phone within a chroot jail. So I decided to
> > test out the CPU with Povray 3.6 (so far I'm having issues compiling Povray
> > 3.7). I also compiled a softfp version for comparison.
>
> You didn't mention what image you rendered.
>
> I compiled 3.7 for my Raspberry PI. It runs with some issues:
> http://news.povray.org/povray.beta-test/thread/%3C502e8d58%40news.povray.org%3E/

povray --benchmark

Post a reply to this message

On 08/20/2012 01:49 PM, Dave wrote:
>
> You didn't mention what image you rendered.

He said he used "povray --benchmark".

Post a reply to this message