 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degroot org> wrote:
> On 5-2-2014 1:20, [GDS|Entropy] wrote:
> > The two S.E. Day SSLT texture derivations take little time to render [on the
> > order of 1-2 hours], but the one on the far right took over 11 days on the
> > machine listed at the end, with the programs running below that.
> >
>
> Pheeww...! The far right is by far the best but a bit impractical in
> terms of render time :-)
>
> Thomas
Back in my day, processors only had 1 core, and it took months to render
anything decent. And we liked it! In fact, I still have an old Pentium 4 that's
been rendering an awesome image for the past 12 years (since 2002). It's
currently at 93%. It'll finish this year or next...
For the record, we also walked uphill both ways to school knee-deep in snow all
year round.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le_Forgeron <jgr### [at] freefr> wrote:
> Le 08/02/2014 05:56, Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann nous fit lire :
> > Hi(gh)!
> >
> > On 05.02.2014 01:20, [GDS|Entropy] wrote:
> >
> >> All I know is my next machine will have a second x5660 and another
> >> 24gb in this:
> >> http://www.evga.com/articles/00537/
>
> Nice. Better buy both xeon at the same time (or be prepared to have to
> replace the old one with a fresh one when adding the second:
> availability of identical & compatible xeon is not warranted).
> btw, xeon are not cheap (but pretty nice) when compared to i3/i5/i7.
>
> > And, of course, the CPU should be an AMD K10 hexadeka-core running at 5
> > GHz (currently a K10 hexa-core at 3.853 GHz)...
>
> But K10 is not compatible with xeon-socket, and it's old technology
> (Bulldozer / Piledriver continue the serie)
> some opteron 6200 (8 modules, 16 "cores")... but they top at 3.6GHz in
> turbo mode... full load is less than 3 GHz.
>
> while dreaming... Abu-Dhabi opteron 16 cores (2x4 modules) are
> quad-processor ok. (Interlagos too)
> Just need a naughty motherboard with 4 sockets... and a damn budget for
> the cooling and the power supply (at 140W per cpu, you can sell on ebay
> your old heater!)
>
> --
> Only have 24GB ram, and 6HT/12 cores... It's small, but it was affordable.
Unfortunately, the performance of current AMD processors don't compare well to
Intel's. Povray performance on 8-module Interlagos is worse than a 6-core Sandy
Bridge, i7 3930K.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 09/02/2014 6:34 PM, jhu wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>>
>> Pheeww...! The far right is by far the best but a bit impractical in
>> terms of render time :-)
>>
>> Thomas
>
> Back in my day, processors only had 1 core, and it took months to render
> anything decent. And we liked it! In fact, I still have an old Pentium 4 that's
> been rendering an awesome image for the past 12 years (since 2002). It's
> currently at 93%. It'll finish this year or next...
>
> For the record, we also walked uphill both ways to school knee-deep in snow all
> year round.
>
>
:-D
Tell that to the kids of today and do they believe you?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 09/02/14 18:34, jhu wrote:
>
> Back in my day, processors only had 1 core, and it took months to render
> anything decent. And we liked it! In fact, I still have an old Pentium 4 that's
> been rendering an awesome image for the past 12 years (since 2002). It's
> currently at 93%. It'll finish this year or next...
>
> For the record, we also walked uphill both ways to school knee-deep in snow all
> year round.
>
>
You were lucky! In my day ..... :-D
John
--
Protect the Earth
It was not given to you by your parents
You hold it in trust for your children
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9-2-2014 19:34, jhu wrote:
> Back in my day, processors only had 1 core, and it took months to render
> anything decent. And we liked it! In fact, I still have an old Pentium 4 that's
> been rendering an awesome image for the past 12 years (since 2002). It's
> currently at 93%. It'll finish this year or next...
Back in my days, we had no processors at all, sir. We did it all by
hand. With charcoal. On a rock face. In a cave. ;-)
>
> For the record, we also walked uphill both ways to school knee-deep in snow all
> year round.
We had no school but we had mammoths... :-)
Thomas
Btw, that is an interesting record for the Guinness Book.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 09/02/2014 19:34, jhu nous fit lire :
> For the record, we also walked uphill both ways to school knee-deep in snow all
> year round.
yep, but to be accurate, your knee was far lower than they are now.
It's never flat when tired, it's always uphill.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann
Subject: Re: Ice/Slush/Snow texture samples, 3 of N
Date: 15 Feb 2014 11:16:24
Message: <52ff92d8@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi(gh)!
On 09.02.2014 19:34, jhu wrote:
> Back in my day, processors only had 1 core, and it took months to render
> anything decent. And we liked it! In fact, I still have an old Pentium 4 that's
> been rendering an awesome image for the past 12 years (since 2002). It's
> currently at 93%. It'll finish this year or next...
>
> For the record, we also walked uphill both ways to school knee-deep in snow all
> year round.
...barefoot, at 35 degrees below zero! With only one piece of mouldy
bread per week to eat... and not to forget the bomber attacks, the
constant threat of wolves and Bolshevist partisans in the forests! I,
for example, know of people having grown up in the Hungereifel, the
highlands south-west of Cologne, where World War II only in the 1980s
slowly dissipated, where blood feuds continue up to this very day, in
villages where the local priest was the only literate person (and many
people, due to the almost non-existing nourishment, even never learned
to speak!)...
Yes, that praised-be-what-makes-us-hard-nostalgia is really annoying...
See you in Khyberspace!
Yadgar
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> Back in my days, we had no processors at all, sir. We did it all by
> hand. With charcoal. On a rock face. In a cave. ;-)
Wow, I must be younger than you. In /my/ day, we had one piece of grid paper for
plotting, and another for working out the calculations. I was slightly behind
the rest of the students, averaging 5 ppd at a max_trace level of 3. :P
Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 15/02/2014 6:26 PM, Samuel Benge wrote:
> I was slightly behind
> the rest of the students, averaging 5 ppd at a max_trace level of 3. :P
>
You know that you have been raytracing too long when... See above. ;-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> On 5-2-2014 1:20, [GDS|Entropy] wrote:
> > The two S.E. Day SSLT texture derivations take little time to render [on the
> > order of 1-2 hours], but the one on the far right took over 11 days on the
> > machine listed at the end, with the programs running below that.
> >
>
> Pheeww...! The far right is by far the best but a bit impractical in
> terms of render time :-)
>
> Thomas
Yeah no doubt, and 11 days seems to be the norm for combination SSLT/clear + IOR
textures unfortunately. I'm still waiting for 2 of the other textures to render
fully. There is one checker square left in a dirty ice one [been there for 6
days], and then most of the image left for a bright snow + clean ice one. Going
on 7.5 days now lol!
Such a shame that it takes such time. :|
Ian
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
