 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Running POV which windows based system is the fastest (AMD or P4)?
Using optimised code for both sysytems is the difference still the
same?
How many memory is recommended?
Is the HD-speed (5400 or 7200) an important factor?
Greetings
Roland
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Roland Vansteenkiste wrote:
>
> Running POV which windows based system is the fastest (AMD or P4)?
The consensus seems to favor the AMD by a good margin.
> Using optimised code for both sysytems is the difference still the
> same?
From what I have heard, yes.
> How many memory is recommended?
256 megs is good but 500 megs is better.
> Is the HD-speed (5400 or 7200) an important factor?
Only if you are reading in extremely large files. Otherwise it
really doesn't matter much if at all.
--
Ken Tyler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 23 Dec 2001 20:56:19 -0800, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbell net> wrote:
>Only if you are reading in extremely large files. Otherwise it
>really doesn't matter much if at all.
Or if your scene is so huge it has to swap heavily.
Mahy I recommend a Maxtor HDD? They're really, really quiet (even the
fan of my video board is louder) and therefore great for overnight
renders. The rest of their parameters (capacity, speed, price) are
comparable to most other vendors.
Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] vipbg
TAG e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Roland Vansteenkiste wrote:
>
> Running POV which windows based system is the fastest (AMD or P4)?
Depends on the clock speed. A 1.7GHz P4 is comparable to a 1.2GHz
Athlon.
See www.tabsnet.com for benchmarks.
> Using optimised code for both sysytems is the difference still the
> same?
I don't think I have seen a specific Athlon optimised compile, but since
the Athlon thrives fine on PIII optimised code, the difference is still
there. Again see www.tabsnet.com
> How many memory is recommended?
As much as your scenes need. Not more than 2GB, as that is the max that
POV can address.
> Is the HD-speed (5400 or 7200) an important factor?
In most cases: no. If your scenes takes a long time to parse, uses a lot
more memory, than you have RAM, but renders very fast, then it may be a
factor.
In my experience, having to use disk swapping has more impact on the
parse time, than on the render time. I have a dual processor system, and
I once rendered a scene (Railway Station), that used 200 MB memory. I
wanted to render on both processors, and since I, at the time, only had
256 MB RAM, disk swapping was necessary. If I started the two renders at
the same time, the parse time increased dramatically. If I waited for
the first render to finish parsing, before I started the second, neither
parse time nor render time increased much, as compared to a solo render.
(This is under Win NT 4.0)
/Ib
-------------------------------
Gallery: http://www.ibras.dk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> > Running POV which windows based system is the fastest (AMD or P4)?
>
> The consensus seems to favor the AMD by a good margin.
however, with AMD your whole system rests on the VIA chipset - world renown
for being flaky
--
Rick
Kitty5 WebDesign - http://Kitty5.com
POV-Ray News & Resources - http://Povray.co.uk
TEL : +44 (01270) 501101 - FAX : +44 (01270) 251105 - ICQ : 15776037
PGP Public Key
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Rick [Kitty5]" wrote:
>
> > > Running POV which windows based system is the fastest (AMD or P4)?
> >
> > The consensus seems to favor the AMD by a good margin.
>
> however, with AMD your whole system rests on the VIA chipset - world renown
> for being flaky
Yeah, but so is Windows, and that doesn't stop 90% of computer users
from running it - including me.
I have an Athlon system based on the Alimagick chipset, which is
supposed to be much worse than the VIA, and the only problem I have had,
is the occasional wrong temperature reading on the CPU.
/Ib
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ib Rasmussen <ib### [at] ibrasdk> wrote:
: Depends on the clock speed. A 1.7GHz P4 is comparable to a 1.2GHz
: Athlon.
It depends on the application as well. With certain applications a
900MHz Athlon can clearly beat the 1.7GHz P4.
The most important thing is price: How much does a 1.7GHz P4 cost? And
a 1.2GHz Athlon?
--
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
>
> Ib Rasmussen <ib### [at] ibrasdk> wrote:
> : Depends on the clock speed. A 1.7GHz P4 is comparable to a 1.2GHz
> : Athlon.
>
> It depends on the application as well. With certain applications a
> 900MHz Athlon can clearly beat the 1.7GHz P4.
The question was, how do they perform with POV.
/Ib
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ib Rasmussen <ib### [at] ibrasdk> wrote:
: The question was, how do they perform with POV.
I doubt he will be using the computer exclusively for povraying.
--
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
>
> Ib Rasmussen <ib### [at] ibrasdk> wrote:
> : The question was, how do they perform with POV.
>
> I doubt he will be using the computer exclusively for povraying.
WHAT ELSE IS THERE????
--
Ken Tyler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
