 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
OK, so I'm pretty new to all this Linux jazz - but why is my newly-compiled
X-POV so very much slower than POV-Win? I compiled it with the
optimisations appropriate for my machine, what can I do to make it faster?
(Machine: Pentium-Pro 200MHz, 32Mb ram, RedHat Linux 6.0)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Edward Coffey wrote:
> OK, so I'm pretty new to all this Linux jazz - but why is my newly-compiled
> X-POV so very much slower than POV-Win? I compiled it with the
> optimisations appropriate for my machine, what can I do to make it faster?
> (Machine: Pentium-Pro 200MHz, 32Mb ram, RedHat Linux 6.0)
Strange. I haven't a clue. But just to let you know, I built the Linux version
from source and it was running on par with my windows version. I'm just a
happy ol' Linux user. You might need some feedback from gurus. Could be
memory, file system, libraries, etc. For example, my computer has a
Proimise-66 ultra DMA controller, but the drivers I'm running on under Linux
are only tweaked for ultra-33 performance.
Once you get a few hints from the gurus out there, I'll try them myself. :-)
--
"My new computer's got the clocks, it rocks
But it was obsolete before I opened the box" - W.A.Y.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Edward Coffey wrote:
>
> OK, so I'm pretty new to all this Linux jazz - but why is my newly-compiled
> X-POV so very much slower than POV-Win? I compiled it with the
> optimisations appropriate for my machine, what can I do to make it faster?
> (Machine: Pentium-Pro 200MHz, 32Mb ram, RedHat Linux 6.0)
I remember I read somewhere here that the Windows compiler had some
extra optimizations for the Pentium II that the current LINUX compilers
don't have. These differences are not true for my Pentium 90.
Marc
--
Marc Schimmler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 26 Sep 1999 12:33:09 +1000, "Edward Coffey"
<e.c### [at] ugrad unimelbeduau> wrote:
>OK, so I'm pretty new to all this Linux jazz - but why is my newly-compiled
>X-POV so very much slower than POV-Win? I compiled it with the
>optimisations appropriate for my machine, what can I do to make it faster?
>(Machine: Pentium-Pro 200MHz, 32Mb ram, RedHat Linux 6.0)
My brother is responsible for keeping the Linux box at home in shape,
I only use it from time to time (for renders with a long parse time),
so this might seem a stupid question, but still -- have you stopped
all unnecessary processes and servers? From what I know the default
RedHat installations (which most new users prefer) sets up a lot of
services that you might not need on a rendering box. Might be worth
checking out.
Peter Popov
ICQ: 15002700
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Edward Coffey wrote:
>
> OK, so I'm pretty new to all this Linux jazz - but why is my newly-compiled
> X-POV so very much slower than POV-Win? I compiled it with the
> optimisations appropriate for my machine, what can I do to make it faster?
> (Machine: Pentium-Pro 200MHz, 32Mb ram, RedHat Linux 6.0)
I've made the same observation. My guess is that gcc doesn't optimize
for Pentium II as well as MSVC++ does. POV-Win experienced a big
performance jump in moving from Watcom to MSVC++.
-Mark Gordon
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jon A. Cruz wrote:
...snip...
>... For example, my computer has a Proimise-66 ultra DMA controller, but the drivers
I'm running on under Linux are only tweaked for ultra-33 performance.
...snip...
I was under the impression that Linux didn't support the ultra-66
standard. Is it working because of the way you have your drives
configured or what?
Ken Matassa
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mark Gordon wrote:
>
> Edward Coffey wrote:
> >
> > OK, so I'm pretty new to all this Linux jazz - but why is my newly-compiled
> > X-POV so very much slower than POV-Win? I compiled it with the
> > optimisations appropriate for my machine, what can I do to make it faster?
> > (Machine: Pentium-Pro 200MHz, 32Mb ram, RedHat Linux 6.0)
>
> I've made the same observation. My guess is that gcc doesn't optimize
> for Pentium II as well as MSVC++ does. POV-Win experienced a big
> performance jump in moving from Watcom to MSVC++.
>
> -Mark Gordon
For what it's worth, I can render the skyvase.pov benchmark in 1
min 43 seconds under Windows 98 and 1 min 30 under X-window
(WindowMaker, kernel 2.0.36 from an installation by Redhat 5.2). Now
there's no need for swapping here (128 Mbytes RAM).
There's a real neat little program named "top" on my computer that
can be called from any console or x-term : it will tell you
everything you need to know about the action going on at your
system. It's on mine from birth but probably exist in some RPM
depot. Try it : do "h" to list the option. "P" (capitalized) sort
the processes by % of cpu usage.
Good luck.
Jean M.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jean Montambeault wrote:
>
> For what it's worth, I can render the skyvase.pov benchmark in 1
> min 43 seconds under Windows 98 and 1 min 30 under X-window
> (WindowMaker, kernel 2.0.36 from an installation by Redhat 5.2). Now
> there's no need for swapping here (128 Mbytes RAM).
> There's a real neat little program named "top" on my computer that
> can be called from any console or x-term : it will tell you
> everything you need to know about the action going on at your
> system. It's on mine from birth but probably exist in some RPM
> depot. Try it : do "h" to list the option. "P" (capitalized) sort
> the processes by % of cpu usage.
Yes, I'm quite familiar with top.
-Mark Gordon
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mark Gordon wrote:
>
> Edward Coffey wrote:
> >
> > OK, so I'm pretty new to all this Linux jazz - but why is my newly-compiled
> > X-POV so very much slower than POV-Win? I compiled it with the
> > optimisations appropriate for my machine, what can I do to make it faster?
> > (Machine: Pentium-Pro 200MHz, 32Mb ram, RedHat Linux 6.0)
>
> I've made the same observation. My guess is that gcc doesn't optimize
> for Pentium II as well as MSVC++ does. POV-Win experienced a big
> performance jump in moving from Watcom to MSVC++.
>
> -Mark Gordon
POV-Win experienced a performance increase between the two but I wouldn't
call it a "big" jump. Version differences in POV-Ray itself had a greater
impact than the compiler did. See my report in povray-FAQ group :)
--
Ken Tyler
1100+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote:
>
> POV-Win experienced a performance increase between the two but I wouldn't
> call it a "big" jump. Version differences in POV-Ray itself had a greater
> impact than the compiler did. See my report in povray-FAQ group :)
It was big enough to allow POV-Win to leapfrog over povray on Linux on
identical Pentium-II hardware. I rendered skyvase.pov (I forget the
exact settings) with 3.1d on WinNT in 349 seconds and povray 3.1e on
Linux in 388 seconds. I don't have figures for how 3.02 performed.
-Mark Gordon
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
