 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
As you can probably guess, it was good for the first month only, now I'm
settled in once again. Got it early October and gave up the old clunker to
the folks. Just didn't want to rave about it much since afterall it is a
middle of the road machine anyway.
Got a stubborn render (or parse) though? Go ahead and let me know, see if
this thing can do it.
Bob
"Mike" <pov### [at] aol com> wrote in message news:386AD3DC.E77A8282@aol.com...
>
> Damn Bob, when did you get that sweet machine!? If I'm ever pressed for
> time on a render I'll know who to call. :)
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Just read through this thread.
Interesting discussion to what I thought
was an interesting and inventive proposition.
I did run the scene with fairly typical
results and then ran it on my old 'puter.
I would now hereby like to make a public
apology to Ken Tyler for ever scoffing
or questioning his notion that Povray
could only be properly used on a
128MBram system.)
Peter Warren
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Peter Warren wrote:
>
> Just read through this thread.
> Interesting discussion to what I thought
> was an interesting and inventive proposition.
>
> I did run the scene with fairly typical
> results and then ran it on my old 'puter.
>
> I would now hereby like to make a public
> apology to Ken Tyler for ever scoffing
> or questioning his notion that Povray
> could only be properly used on a
> 128MBram system.)
>
> Peter Warren
Well I never really said you can't use a machine equiped with less memory
but is sure seems like it is becoming more difficult to do so. I would be
very happy to have a machine equipped with about 512 megs of memory and
would consider it my dream machine.
--
Ken Tyler - 1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote:
>
> Well I never really said you can't use a machine equiped with less memory
> but is sure seems like it is becoming more difficult to do so. I would be
> very happy to have a machine equipped with about 512 megs of memory and
> would consider it my dream machine.
>
Well why not 1024 megs? What would you like to do with it?
I have, as you might know, access to a machine with one GB RAM. It
doesn't change the world too much. I found the 48 megs of my PC at home
in 90% of the cases sufficient. Sometimes it makes me even more creative
when I develop something that can be rendered on my PC.
Marc
--
Marc Schimmler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Marc Schimmler" <sch### [at] icauni-stuttgartde> wrote in message
news:38734EFA.2E4DB1E3@ica.uni-stuttgart.de...
> Ken wrote:
> >
> > Well I never really said you can't use a machine equiped with less
memory
> > but is sure seems like it is becoming more difficult to do so. I would
be
> > very happy to have a machine equipped with about 512 megs of memory and
> > would consider it my dream machine.
> >
>
> Well why not 1024 megs? What would you like to do with it?
> I have, as you might know, access to a machine with one GB RAM. It
> doesn't change the world too much. I found the 48 megs of my PC at home
> in 90% of the cases sufficient. Sometimes it makes me even more creative
> when I develop something that can be rendered on my PC.
>
> Marc
>
> --
> Marc Schimmler
Right, and I never need anymore than 128MBytes for nearly ever file I ever
rendered with the exception of one or two. That's just overkill to have
more than 256MB for me anyway. Although obviously you could get pretty
limited with super massive (well, I'd call them super massive) scenes
calling upon millions of objects for certain uses (loops, meshes, etc.) with
only that much memory regardless of the disk space available to thrash
around in.
Some people are just going to use a large amount. But I notice that 32MB
would do fine for most of my renders.
Bob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote in message <38734B98.1D083C3F@pacbell.net>...
>Well I never really said you can't use a machine equiped with less >memory
Sorry, Ken. I did not intend to misrepresent what you said.
It struck me a interesting what Matt said about trends in
pov scenes. There has been an iso patch for years but I
only used it for a few specific thing. Now I don't think
twice about using MegaPov.
I wonder what will be next.
Peter Warren
war### [at] hotmailcom
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Marc Schimmler wrote:
> Well why not 1024 megs? What would you like to do with it?
> I have, as you might know, access to a machine with one GB RAM. It
> doesn't change the world too much. I found the 48 megs of my PC at home
> in 90% of the cases sufficient. Sometimes it makes me even more creative
> when I develop something that can be rendered on my PC.
In the best of all possible Windows on the world, as long as there is
enough RAM to avoid disk swaps, more is superfluous. Of course this includes
any other tasks that are running.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
