 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I was wondering if the 64-bit version of POV-Ray is optimized for AMD 64-bit
processors, or does it go at full speed on Intel's 64-bit processors too?
If not, is there a way to implement this in the source-code?
just curious?
PS: what about HyperThreading DualCore CPU's
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
iceqb wrote:
> I was wondering if the 64-bit version of POV-Ray is optimized for AMD 64-bit
> processors, or does it go at full speed on Intel's 64-bit processors too?
To get a qualified answer you will have to clarify what you mean with:
- "64-bit version of POV-Ray"
- "full speed"
- "Intel's 64-bit processors"
> If not, is there a way to implement this in the source-code?
Implement what?
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Landscape of the week:
http://www.imagico.de/ (Last updated 31 Oct. 2005)
MegaPOV with mechanics simulation: http://megapov.inetart.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
iceqb <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> I was wondering if the 64-bit version of POV-Ray is optimized for AMD 64-bit
> processors, or does it go at full speed on Intel's 64-bit processors too?
Which Intel 64-bit processor? They have more than one (incompatible).
> PS: what about HyperThreading DualCore CPU's
Ever heard of POV-Ray 3.7 beta?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmx de> wrote:
> To get a qualified answer you will have to clarify what you mean with:
>
> - "64-bit version of POV-Ray"
The POV-version that runs on WinXP Pro 64-bit edition?
> - "full speed"
I recently (well recently) read some article somewhere comparing Intel's
64-bit CPU's to AMD's, they used POV-Ray as benchmark. The render-rate (in
PPS) were visibly less for Intel. They explained it like this: "the program
is optimized for AMD's 64-bit instructions"
> - "Intel's 64-bit processors"
Intel Pentium D & XTreme Edition, I guess, at least the ones with EM64T, or
am I so wrong.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
iceqb wrote:
> I recently (well recently) read some article somewhere comparing Intel's
> 64-bit CPU's to AMD's, they used POV-Ray as benchmark.
Interesting, do you recall where you read that?
Thorsten
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich <tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
> Interesting, do you recall where you read that?
>
> Thorsten
It was in a Dutch magazine, I think CHIP (www.chip.be) or PC-Magazine
(www.pcmagazine.be). If I had a scanner I'd scan it, but I don't. Btw I
don't even have it here.
I only know that besides some games and PCMark2004, there was POV-Ray, both
32-bit and 64-bit edition.
Once I get it, i'll post the data.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
iceqb wrote:
>
> Intel Pentium D & XTreme Edition, I guess, at least the ones with EM64T, or
> am I so wrong.
Apart from this you did not really answer my questions but i try to
answer yours none the less:
The official 64bit binary version for Windows will run on the Intel CPUs
you mentioned. AFAIK it is not built with special optimizations.
Whether a certain Intel CPU renders a certain scene faster or slower
than a certain AMD CPU depends on a lot of factors like CPU design and
the used scene.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Landscape of the week:
http://www.imagico.de/ (Last updated 31 Oct. 2005)
MegaPOV with mechanics simulation: http://megapov.inetart.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde> wrote:
>
> Apart from this you did not really answer my questions but i try to
> answer yours none the less:
>
> The official 64bit binary version for Windows will run on the Intel CPUs
> you mentioned. AFAIK it is not built with special optimizations.
Sorry, didn't know that.
> Whether a certain Intel CPU renders a certain scene faster or slower
> than a certain AMD CPU depends on a lot of factors like CPU design and
> the used scene.
If you use the official benchmark and a reference computer-system. I suppose
these magazines at least use some sort of standard system to test. I know
you can't standardize the motherboard (sockets and all) but most of the
other components like RAM, harddrive and software can be uniform.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich <tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
> iceqb wrote:
> > I recently (well recently) read some article somewhere comparing Intel's
> > 64-bit CPU's to AMD's, they used POV-Ray as benchmark.
>
> Interesting, do you recall where you read that?
>
> Thorsten
Here's one, although it may not be the one iceqb refers to.
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/amd64_3400/8.html
I very recently bought an AMD 64 machine (an emachines T6412), so I'm also
curious about this "optimization" question.
From all I've read so far, an AMD-based machine is faster at POV rendering
than an Intel P4 equivalent. Good news for me!
Ken
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 10:41:00 +0100, Kenneth <kdw### [at] earthlinknet>
wrote:
> Here's one, although it may not be the one iceqb refers to.
>
> http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/amd64_3400/8.html
>
> I very recently bought an AMD 64 machine (an emachines T6412), so I'm
> also curious about this "optimization" question.
>
> From all I've read so far, an AMD-based machine is faster at POV
> rendering than an Intel P4 equivalent. Good news for me!
Yet the very article you linked to shows exactly the opposite.
"The Athlon 64 falls behind even the XP while the both the P4s lead the
pack."
The scores in the diagram are in pixels/s, not seconds.
--
FE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
