 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <40b217d1$1@news.povray.org> , Nicolas Calimet
<pov### [at] free fr> wrote:
> "Thanks for teaching" (private joke) :-)
Wasn't that "lecturing"? ;-)
(Someone who knows what this joke was about.)
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann wrote:
> No, i am pretty sure when you get such results you have not made a
> serious comparison. When you come up with such numbers it would be
> adequate to back them up with some benchmark results and offer the used
> executables for others to verify.
>
> Christoph
I have downloaded the official binary for linux and ran the benchmark.
Official : 45 minutes 08 seconds ( 2708 seconds )
gcc pentium4 optimized : 36 minutes 43 seconds ( 2203 seconds )
ICC pentium4 optimized : 33 minutes 01 seconds ( 1981 seconds )
ratios (official / optimized) :
Official : 1
gcc pentium4 optimized : 1.229
icc pentium4 optimized : 1.367
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <40b229f2@news.povray.org> , gRRosminet <pov### [at] les-charlesnet>
wrote:
> I have downloaded the official binary for linux and ran the benchmark.
>
> Official : 45 minutes 08 seconds ( 2708 seconds )
> gcc pentium4 optimized : 36 minutes 43 seconds ( 2203 seconds )
> ICC pentium4 optimized : 33 minutes 01 seconds ( 1981 seconds )
And the gcc and Intel C++ compiler versions happen to be?
I suppose they were more recent versions of the compiler used for the
official version two years ago? If so, your statement about optimisations
happens to have no validity at all...
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 wrote:
> In article <40b229f2@news.povray.org> , gRRosminet <pov### [at] les-charlesnet>
> wrote:
>
>
>>I have downloaded the official binary for linux and ran the benchmark.
>>
>>Official : 45 minutes 08 seconds ( 2708 seconds )
>>gcc pentium4 optimized : 36 minutes 43 seconds ( 2203 seconds )
>>ICC pentium4 optimized : 33 minutes 01 seconds ( 1981 seconds )
>
>
> And the gcc and Intel C++ compiler versions happen to be?
>
> I suppose they were more recent versions of the compiler used for the
> official version two years ago? If so, your statement about optimisations
> happens to have no validity at all...
I unsubscribe povray.unix.
I should have done it way before, just as I has already done for most
official ngs. Nobody in the community needs this kind of permanent
aggressivity. Please try to get a life.
--
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
<woz### [at] club-internetfr> wrote:
>>>I have downloaded the official binary for linux and ran the benchmark.
>>>
>>>Official : 45 minutes 08 seconds ( 2708 seconds )
>>>gcc pentium4 optimized : 36 minutes 43 seconds ( 2203 seconds )
>>>ICC pentium4 optimized : 33 minutes 01 seconds ( 1981 seconds )
>>
>>
>> And the gcc and Intel C++ compiler versions happen to be?
>>
>> I suppose they were more recent versions of the compiler used for the
>> official version two years ago? If so, your statement about optimisations
>> happens to have no validity at all...
>
> I unsubscribe povray.unix.
>
> I should have done it way before, just as I has already done for most
> official ngs. Nobody in the community needs this kind of permanent
> aggressivity. Please try to get a life.
There is not a single aggressive word in my statement at all. Yet, you
start a personal insult out of thin air. If you don't want to read simple
questions and plain statements about obvious facts, I suppose to unsubscribe
is indeed the only way to go.
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Official : 45 minutes 08 seconds ( 2708 seconds )
> gcc pentium4 optimized : 36 minutes 43 seconds ( 2203 seconds )
> ICC pentium4 optimized : 33 minutes 01 seconds ( 1981 seconds )
As was implied by Thorsten's answer, to make a reliable comparison
you cannot simply use the two-years-old official binary, which was probably
compiled at best with gcc-3.1.x. You should take the source and recompile
them with the gcc you are using to produce your pentium4-optimized version.
Also please report the gcc and icc versions as well as the details
of processor and OS on which you run the benchmarks. Also be sure to render
the benchmark.ini file (and its accompagnying benchmark.pov scene) available
on povray.org at http://www.povray.org/download/benchmark.php
Please note there is no agressivity at all in this suggestion:
I'm actually quite interested in seeing such results -- when benchmarks
are made properly.
- NC
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Calimet wrote:
>> Official : 45 minutes 08 seconds ( 2708 seconds )
>> gcc pentium4 optimized : 36 minutes 43 seconds ( 2203 seconds )
>> ICC pentium4 optimized : 33 minutes 01 seconds ( 1981 seconds )
>
>
> As was implied by Thorsten's answer, to make a reliable comparison
> you cannot simply use the two-years-old official binary, which was probably
> compiled at best with gcc-3.1.x. You should take the source and recompile
> them with the gcc you are using to produce your pentium4-optimized version.
Pentium 1 (i586) is about 8 years old, so I don't think it still is in
developpement, but I'll recompile it to get better comparison data.
> Also please report the gcc and icc versions as well as the details
> of processor and OS on which you run the benchmarks.
gcc is :
gcc (GCC) 3.2.2 (Mandrake Linux 9.1 3.2.2-3mdk)
Copyright (C) 2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
and ICC is v8.0
> Also be sure to
> render
> the benchmark.ini file (and its accompagnying benchmark.pov scene)
> available
> on povray.org at http://www.povray.org/download/benchmark.php
Of course it is ! that's the first thing I have done !
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Also be sure to render
>> the benchmark.ini file (and its accompagnying benchmark.pov scene)
>> available
>> on povray.org at http://www.povray.org/download/benchmark.php
>
> Of course it is ! that's the first thing I have done !
It was not so obvious from my point since benchmark.ini is not
distributed with the povray-3.50c source code (only benchmark.pov).
Thanks for doing the benchs.
- NC
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trfde> wrote in message >
> And the gcc and Intel C++ compiler versions happen to be?
>
> I suppose they were more recent versions of the compiler used for the
> official version two years ago? If so, your statement about optimisations
> happens to have no validity at all...
>
> Thorsten
>
They might have no validity from a true benchmarking perspective. However
they illustrate that compiling the source with a recent compiler can improve
performance when compared to using the official binary distribution. While
it is helpfull to understand where exactly the performance gain is comming
from, to me that is secondary to the fact that there is a performance gain.
I can understand how you want to make sure benchmarks are really comparing
apples to apples.
-ross
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Calimet wrote:
>>> Also be sure to render
>>> the benchmark.ini file (and its accompagnying benchmark.pov scene)
>>> available
>>> on povray.org at http://www.povray.org/download/benchmark.php
>>
>>
>> Of course it is ! that's the first thing I have done !
>
>
> It was not so obvious from my point since benchmark.ini is not
> distributed with the povray-3.50c source code (only benchmark.pov).
>
> Thanks for doing the benchs.
>
> - NC
>
In fact, I didn't know how to run the benchmark and that's why I have
look for this immediately
The test with povray compiled without optimisations on my pc has just
ended : 45 minutes 13.0 seconds (2713 seconds)
3 seconds longer : this is not signifiant.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
