 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I am currently using an Intel Celeron 2.93GHz XP home edition PC with 500MB
RAM and rendering times are on average one hour for the most basic types of
scenes involving a dozen objects, especially when transparent surfaces are
used. I know there are a number of parameters I can play with to improve
this but am planning to upgrade.
Is there a significant improvement in rendering time by switching to Linux
from XP?
Has anyone used vmware to install both xp and linux?
Is there a preferred hardware/CPU configuration to consider in the upgrade?
The answer to any of these would be appreciated, and is ok if you just
tackle one.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Edee <rah### [at] yahoo com> wrote:
> Is there a significant improvement in rendering time by switching to Linux
> from XP?
No, not really. POV-Ray doesn't do much that would require an efficient OS
(even the new 3.7, which requires SMP support from the OS, should run ok in
both systems).
> Is there a preferred hardware/CPU configuration to consider in the upgrade?
Faster CPU/FPU with faster/more cache -> faster renders.
If you are running out of memory (which doesn't seem to be the case, though)
then more memory, of course.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Has anyone used vmware to install both xp and linux?
I wouldn't recommend using VMware with POV-Ray. The overhead may not be
that much but it is non-negligible, and you want as little overhead as
you can manage.
--
"It is inconsistent with the most rudimentary notions of fairness to
blindfold a man and then impose a standard which only the sighted could
hope to meet." -- Lord Bingham of Cornhill -+- http://surreal.istic.org/
www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldjudgmt/jd051208/aand-1.htm
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
See the POV-Ray speed guide for a discussion on how hardware influences
rendering speed (and other possibilities to improve render performance):
http://povray.tirnalong.com/ow.asp?SpeedGuide
HTH,
Florian
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <43a90e97@news.povray.org>, war### [at] tagpovrayorg says...
> Edee <rah### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> > Is there a significant improvement in rendering time by switching to Linux
> > from XP?
>
> No, not really. POV-Ray doesn't do much that would require an efficient OS
> (even the new 3.7, which requires SMP support from the OS, should run ok in
> both systems).
>
That may not be 100% true with Dual Core systems though. I just read
this:
http://blogs.pcworld.com/tipsandtweaks/archives/001073.html
Seems if your dumb enough to install SP2, it produces what MS calls,
"Unexpected Behaviour", on such systems, which can only be partially
fixed with one of their useless and not 100% publicly available patches
(you have to ask them for it, so 99% of the people who have to problem
will never know an incomplete patch for their sudden fucked up
performance even exists...).
Not an issue for the guy your replying to, but at least some people here
are bound to run into it and its going to make serious attempts to test
POV-Ray's speed on dual cores real interesting once optimizations start
to be made. This makes for a heads up. The OS *might* mess it up badly
enough that an optimization that works for user A will see thing actually
go down hill for user B, just because of which lame ass patches are
installed. And since the patch for SP2 to restore *some* lost function
doesn't fix "all" of it, we are looking at what may as well be six
different configurations:
1. Non-Duel core without SP2.
2. Non-Duel core with SP2.
3. Non-Duel core with SP2, incorrently patched.
4. Duel core/processor without SP2.
5. Duel core/processor with SP2.
6. Duel core/processor with SP2, patched with the hotfix.
And that is just now, never mind later when they come up with yet another
buggy, but maybe in some ways slightly more effective, patch to fix the
issue. And all of them may screw up benchmarking in a way that makes
clear determinations based on processor speeds problematic to say the
least.
Starting to wonder who I know that I can get a copy of VM Ware through,
so I can use the damn OS when I need to, but not rely on it for
anything... lol
--
void main () {
call functional_code()
else
call crash_windows();
}
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Edee" <rah### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> I am currently using an Intel Celeron 2.93GHz XP home edition PC with 500MB
> RAM and rendering times are on average one hour for the most basic types of
> scenes involving a dozen objects, especially when transparent surfaces are
> used. I know there are a number of parameters I can play with to improve
> this but am planning to upgrade.
>
Your hardware sounds pretty good so I doubt that you need to upgrade unless
you plan on doing something fairly advanced. It sounds strange that simple
renders are taking as much as an hour although there are many factors that
affect rendering speed.
If you can provide an example of a simple scene that is taking an unusually
long time to render perhaps someone may be able to spot a problem in the
scene.
Remember that media, anti-aliasing, and even the type of lighting that you
are using will make a big difference. The render-priority setting will
also make a huge difference.
> Is there a significant improvement in rendering time by switching to Linux
> from XP?
>
My suggestion would be to install a Linux distro that allows you to dual
boot. Render your scenes under both Xp and Linux and compare the results.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
FrogRay <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> My suggestion would be to install a Linux distro that allows you to dual
> boot.
You mean there are distros that don't?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott <sha### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> 1. Non-Duel core without SP2.
> 2. Non-Duel core with SP2.
> 3. Non-Duel core with SP2, incorrently patched.
> 4. Duel core/processor without SP2.
> 5. Duel core/processor with SP2.
> 6. Duel core/processor with SP2, patched with the hotfix.
What the heck is a duel core?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> What the heck is a duel core?
It's where you have one package containing two processors, which fight
it out for the honour of executing your instructions.
--
"MacArthur Park is melting thro' the dark All the sweet green icing
flowing down. Someone left the cake out in the rain:- I don't think that
I can take it 'Cause it took so long to bake it, And I'll never have
that recipe again. Oh no." -- Jimmy Webb http://surreal.istic.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2005-12-22 03:01:
> Patrick Elliott <sha### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>
>>1. Non-Duel core without SP2.
>>2. Non-Duel core with SP2.
>>3. Non-Duel core with SP2, incorrently patched.
>>4. Duel core/processor without SP2.
>>5. Duel core/processor with SP2.
>>6. Duel core/processor with SP2, patched with the hotfix.
>
>
> What the heck is a duel core?
>
He means "DUAL core".
I've seen that mistake all over the web and in real life. Peoples don't lisen, then
propagate the
missunderstanded word.
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
Documentation; The worst part of programming.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
