Alain <ele### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> The main problemwith that comparison is that every samples where done on
> different machines with wildly varying specifications: pentium III and IV,
> athlon, single, dual processors, maount of RAM, CPU speed,...
>
> WinOSI: P4 1.7GHz
> Whire Frame, OpenGL, BMRT, Perceptuum, Radiance: CPU and GPU not precised.
> POV-Ray 3.5: 1.4GHZ AMD.
> Virtualight: P II 233 MHz.
> Autodesk VIZ 4:P III 800MHz.
> KRay: Athlon XP 1700+.
> Lightwave: Athlon 1400 MHz.
> VRay: DUAL Athlon MP 1800+.
> JaTrac: Athlon 1GHz.
> Realsoft 3D: Athlon 1400 MHz.
> Yafray: P 4 3GHz.
> Art of Illusion 2.0: Athlon 3000+.
> Redqueen: P 4 2GHz.
> Cinema4D: Athlon XP 1800+.
> Strata 3D Pro: dual P III 800MHz.
>
> This make any speed comparison absolutely futil. To be able to do a speed
> comparison, you need to render with every programms on the same machine, or
> machines with the same caracteristics.
True, but a number of those apparently cost in the hundreds of $ or eurs, so
not something everybody can pull off. It looks like the Winosi site relies on
external input.

There's a list of renderers (not just raytracers from the look of it) at
http://www.pointzero.nl/renderers/, but it doesn't make any comparison. It
looks like a number of raytracers that used to be free have "evolved" into
commercial packages. :-(

> --
> Alain
> -------------------------------------------------
>    I knew a girl so ugly that she was known as a two-bagger. That's When you put
> a bag over your head in case the bag over her head comes Off.
>  Rodney Dangerfield

Post a reply to this message