|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> In article <40ca2d06@news.povray.org> , "Ross" <rli### [at] everestkcnet>
> wrote:
>
>
>>chalk it up to whatever you want (new compiler?, cleaned code?, ...?) but
>>the official 3.6 binary shaved 19 minutes off of benchmark.pov using the
>>benchmark.ini settings, compared to the official 3.5 binary with the same
>>official benchmark.pov/benchmark.ini. i never benchmarked pov before, so i
>>thought i'd do it before I installed 3.6.
>
>
> This was mentioned bfeore: You *cannot* compare the 3.5 and the 3.6
> becnhmark results due to anti-aliasing changes in POV-Ray 3.6!
>
> Thorsten
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Thorsten Froehlich
> e-mail: mac### [at] povrayorg
>
> I am a member of the POV-Ray Team.
> Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Where was mentionned changes in AA with pov 3.6, I didn't saw them in
"Changes between pov 3.5 & 3.6" on the povray download page !
I'm prbably too idiot to see them... can you explain the changes and why
this AA 'trace' quicker ?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I hardly use AA nowadays. I use focal blur instead! And photons are MUCH
faster :D
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trfde> wrote in message
news:40caa57d$1@news.povray.org...
> In article <40ca2d06@news.povray.org> , "Ross" <rli### [at] everestkcnet>
> wrote:
>
> > chalk it up to whatever you want (new compiler?, cleaned code?, ...?)
but
> > the official 3.6 binary shaved 19 minutes off of benchmark.pov using the
> > benchmark.ini settings, compared to the official 3.5 binary with the
same
> > official benchmark.pov/benchmark.ini. i never benchmarked pov before, so
i
> > thought i'd do it before I installed 3.6.
>
> This was mentioned bfeore: You *cannot* compare the 3.5 and the 3.6
> becnhmark results due to anti-aliasing changes in POV-Ray 3.6!
>
> Thorsten
I can compare the time it used to take for me to render a scene to the time
it takes now to render a scene. i'm not trying to dig too deeply, i'm just
saying I experience a rather noticeable speed gain.
what the hell are benchmarks for if not to compare and old something to a
new something?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Ross" <rli### [at] everestkcnet> wrote in message
news:40cdacbb$1@news.povray.org...
>
> I can compare the time it used to take for me to render a scene to the
time
> it takes now to render a scene. i'm not trying to dig too deeply, i'm just
> saying I experience a rather noticeable speed gain.
>
> what the hell are benchmarks for if not to compare and old something to a
> new something?
>
>
>
bah. it's early.
ignore my grumbling, thorsten.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <40cdacbb$1@news.povray.org> , "Ross" <rli### [at] everestkcnet>
wrote:
> what the hell are benchmarks for if not to compare and old something to a
> new something?
You are supposed to use the benchmark to compare computer systems, not to
compare POV-Ray with itself! :-)
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich <tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
> You are supposed to use the benchmark to compare computer systems, not to
> compare POV-Ray with itself! :-)
Comparing the newer version of POV-Ray with the older version is feasible.
If both give approximately the same image but the newer version does so
noticeably faster, that's something positive to notice.
The newer version being faster than the older version *is* something
to brag about.
In this case the speedup is mainly due to photons, isn't it? It's
interesting to see in practice how much they have been improved... :)
--
plane{-x+y,-1pigment{bozo color_map{[0rgb x][1rgb x+y]}turbulence 1}}
sphere{0,2pigment{rgbt 1}interior{media{emission 1density{spherical
density_map{[0rgb 0][.5rgb<1,.5>][1rgb 1]}turbulence.9}}}scale
<1,1,3>hollow}text{ttf"timrom""Warp".1,0translate<-1,-.1,2>}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> In article <40cdacbb$1@news.povray.org> , "Ross" <rli### [at] everestkcnet>
> wrote:
>
>
>>what the hell are benchmarks for if not to compare and old something to a
>>new something?
>
>
> You are supposed to use the benchmark to compare computer systems, not to
> compare POV-Ray with itself! :-)
>
> Thorsten
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
> e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
>
> Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
this reminds me of my pure maths teacher at school
if you have something like
prove sin^3 (x) + 3 cos^2 (x) = 5sin(x)cos(x)
i used reduce lhs to 1 and then reduce rhs to 1 or some other term
and then i'd have to write lhs derivation followed by the rhs derivation
in reverse to make him happy
the system and scene source are constant, therefore running to me at
least, povray 3.5 versus povray 3.6 with i assume same arguments, is a
valid performance indication
unless someone can explain and convince me differently ?
stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Ross" <rli### [at] everestkcnet> wrote in message news:40cdacbb$1@news.povray.org...
> I can compare the time it used to take for me to render a scene to the time
> it takes now to render a scene. i'm not trying to dig too deeply, i'm just
> saying I experience a rather noticeable speed gain.
which is a good thing. please accept my apologies for Thorsten's rather abrupt
reply.
-- Chris
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Chris Cason" <new### [at] deletethispovrayorg> wrote in message
news:40ce3e01@news.povray.org...
>
> "Ross" <rli### [at] everestkcnet> wrote in message
news:40cdacbb$1@news.povray.org...
> > I can compare the time it used to take for me to render a scene to the
time
> > it takes now to render a scene. i'm not trying to dig too deeply, i'm
just
> > saying I experience a rather noticeable speed gain.
>
> which is a good thing. please accept my apologies for Thorsten's rather
abrupt
> reply.
>
> -- Chris
>
>
accepted of course, but wholey unnecesary :) Thorsten always brings up good
points
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <40ce087d@news.povray.org> , Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> In this case the speedup is mainly due to photons, isn't it? It's
It is about 50/50 I would say. It is very hardy to measure without having
some intermediate versions around that only enables one of the two.
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |