 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
MEGAPOV1.0 now has many features useful for optical designers. But should I
be surprised that a 640x480 SkyVase requires 9sec in POV3.5 but takes
13sec. in MEGAPOV1.0.?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 1 Jun 2003 18:27:07 EDT, "anidon" <ani### [at] ntlworld com> wrote:
> MEGAPOV1.0 now has many features useful for optical designers. But should I
> be surprised that a 640x480 SkyVase requires 9sec in POV3.5 but takes
> 13sec. in MEGAPOV1.0.?
Hard to answer if you did not delivered much informations about your
environment. First of all comparing 9 secs to 13 secs is useles because there
could be a lot of short operations made by OS which could influence this
measurement. Second, different compiler was probably used (ie. using compilers
from Borland I get execution twice slower than 3.5). Third, more features cause
more memory for structures which cause different handling by memory caches in
processors (MP1.1 has some helpers for it). Fourth, different frontent could be
used (as for Macs).
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> should I be surprised
Probably not, as the source to MegaPOV is compiled with another compiler
than POV3.5.. I haven't noticed a speed difference, but according to the
MegaPOV team, it IS slower depending on the content of the scene. This may
change sooner or later.
Regards,
Hugo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I don't follow the computer speak...I'm just a user..but it is the standard
benchmark running on an Athlon1800/1GB DDR RAM/Windows2000 PC with the same
pov.ini
Hugo Asm wrote:
>> should I be surprised
>
>Probably not, as the source to MegaPOV is compiled with another compiler
>than POV3.5.. I haven't noticed a speed difference, but according to the
>MegaPOV team, it IS slower depending on the content of the scene. This may
>change sooner or later.
>
>Regards,
>Hugo
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Warp
Subject: Re: Relative speed of MEGAPOV 1.0 and POVRAY 3.5
Date: 2 Jun 2003 17:06:36
Message: <3edbbc5c@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
anidon <ani### [at] ntlworldcom> wrote:
> I don't follow the computer speak...I'm just a user..but it is the standard
> benchmark running on an Athlon1800/1GB DDR RAM/Windows2000 PC with the same
> pov.ini
skyvase.pov is in no way a standard benchmark. There's a standard
benchmark in POV-Ray 3.5, but it has nothing to do with skyvase.
There's even a menu entry in the Windows version for running the benchmark.
--
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in news:3edbbc5c@news.povray.org:
>
> skyvase.pov is in no way a standard benchmark.
Well it was for at least half a dozen years. It will take a while for that
to fade from the collective memory. Google gives 184 hits
http://www.google.com/search?q=povray+benchmark+skyvase
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Stefan Persson
Subject: Re: Relative speed of MEGAPOV 1.0 and POVRAY 3.5
Date: 6 Jun 2003 14:17:46
Message: <3ee0daca$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Agree.. I remember tweaking and sending the
results to www.haveland.co.uk (or where it was).
Much fun at the time.. hehe
Yes, the skyvase scene was the one to use.
/Stefan
"Tom Galvin" <tom### [at] imporg> wrote in message
news:Xns### [at] 204213191226...
> Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in news:3edbbc5c@news.povray.org:
>
> >
> > skyvase.pov is in no way a standard benchmark.
>
> Well it was for at least half a dozen years. It will take a while for
that
> to fade from the collective memory. Google gives 184 hits
>
> http://www.google.com/search?q=povray+benchmark+skyvase
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
