 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi folks
I'll soon (or sometime) have my hands on a new super-computer (compared to
mine ;) at work. It's a dual athlon 1.7 ghz I think..
Well, the question is, how do I optimize it for POV-Ray? Some guy told me I
should run the dual processors as a cluster, but I don't have any clue how..
(:
It would really speed up my renders I guess.. the biggest problem is: can it
ever be satisfying to use my PII 450mhz to render again? :-/
Regards
--
Peter
http://hertel.no/peter
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I'll soon (or sometime) have my hands on a new super-computer (compared to
> mine ;) at work. It's a dual athlon 1.7 ghz I think..
> Well, the question is, how do I optimize it for POV-Ray? Some guy told me
I
> should run the dual processors as a cluster, but I don't have any clue
how..
> (:
If you in windows land, you will be stuck rendering with 1 CPU, the only
advantage being that you will be able to give pov the highest priortity and
still be able to use the PC as normal.
Otherwise PVM pov might be worth a look, but its based on 3.1 (i think)
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Maybe you would like to see:
http://www.wozzeck.net/images/pmp/
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~wrooney/
I never tried, but have the links from www.povray.org
Regards,
Hugo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
use 1 processor for you own pov things and the other one for the "Internet
Movie Project". The project is all about povray render farming and creating
funky animations with it. Check their website at http://www.imp.org/. I'm
running their client all the time at low priority so that when I'm not
rendering something or doing something 'important', the IMP client gets the
spare cpu power!
--
Apache
http://geitenkaas.dns2go.com/experiments/
apa### [at] yahoo com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thanks for your response folks!
Just heard the new super-comp. did biscuit.pov @1280x1024 aa0.3 in 2 minutes
:) some speed compared to my computer.
Regards
--
Peter
http://hertel.no/peter
"Hugo" <hua### [at] post3teledk> skrev i melding
news:3ca96e1e$1@news.povray.org...
> Maybe you would like to see:
>
> http://www.wozzeck.net/images/pmp/
> http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~wrooney/
>
> I never tried, but have the links from www.povray.org
>
>
> Regards,
> Hugo
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I hope it actually only took 1:45 seconds - the correct time for a 1.7Ghz to
complete because 2 minutes is almost exactly a 1.5Ghz Athlon based on my
time of 2:15 with a 1.333 Ghz Athlon.
> Just heard the new super-comp. did biscuit.pov @1280x1024 aa0.3 in 2
minutes
> :) some speed compared to my computer.
N Shomber
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3cacedb7$1@news.povray.org>,
"N Shomber" <nsh### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> I hope it actually only took 1:45 seconds - the correct time for a 1.7Ghz to
> complete because 2 minutes is almost exactly a 1.5Ghz Athlon based on my
> time of 2:15 with a 1.333 Ghz Athlon.
You make the assumption that the rendering time decreases linearly as
processor speed increases, it doesn't. There are many other factors:
design differences in the 1.7GHz chip compared to your 1.33GHz, cache,
system bus, RAM, OS, CPU use by other processes...
--
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <chr### [at] netplexaussieorg>,
chr### [at] maccom says...
> You make the assumption that the rendering time decreases linearly as
> processor speed increases, it doesn't. There are many other factors:
> design differences in the 1.7GHz chip compared to your 1.33GHz, cache,
> system bus, RAM, OS, CPU use by other processes...
However on my System (XP 1700 : 1466 MHz) it really renders in 2min01s.
So a 1700 Mhz should be able do it faster than 2 min.
However I guess he DID mean an XP 1700, not a system with true 1700 Mhz.
Lutz-Peter
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I don't know the exactl time, since I didn't watch the render :) But I
belive the guy who did, said below 2 minutes..
The speed is OS dependant too, right? We run Win2k
--
Peter
http://hertel.no/peter
>
> > You make the assumption that the rendering time decreases linearly as
> > processor speed increases, it doesn't. There are many other factors:
> > design differences in the 1.7GHz chip compared to your 1.33GHz, cache,
> > system bus, RAM, OS, CPU use by other processes...
>
> However on my System (XP 1700 : 1466 MHz) it really renders in 2min01s.
> So a 1700 Mhz should be able do it faster than 2 min.
>
> However I guess he DID mean an XP 1700, not a system with true 1700 Mhz.
>
> Lutz-Peter
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
