Sebastian H. <seb### [at] webde> wrote:
> _Windows_:
> Box                           79358745         9334253     11.76
> Cone/Cylinder                 78379572         6515873      8.31

> _Linux_:
> Box                           77632067         9442332     12.16
> Cone/Cylinder                 76120049         6536461      8.59

  Are you completely and absolutely 100% sure that you are using the exact
same benchmark scene and the exact same ini file settings (and I mean *all*
settings)?
  If everything was exactly identical, I don't see any reason for those
numbers to be different.

-- 
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

On 30 Jul 2002 11:41:19 -0400, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>  If everything was exactly identical, I don't see any reason for those
> numbers to be different.

Jitter for AA ?

ABX

Post a reply to this message

Sebastian H. wrote:

> I just compared the rendering speed of the official windows and linux
> version of POV3.5 and got the very strage result that the linux version
> takes the double amount of time (2.11x) the windows version needs to
> render the benchmark scene (scenes/advanced).

Maybe you should make sure that the general POV-Ray configuration files are 
the same for both OS. What about copying povray.ini to $HOME/.povrayrc ?

Also note that they aren't compiled by the same compiler. The windows 
version may be much more optimized than the linux version. When sources are 
available you can compile your own version with gcc -O3 and some system or 
processor specific optimizations.

-- 
light_source{0#macro L(K,H,W)sphere{H.5}sphere{K.5}sphere{W.5}cylinder{
H,K.5}cylinder{H,W.5}#end 3}union{L(0v*-2<2,-2>)L(y*-3z-v*5z*3-y)L(-y*3
0u*3)L(y*-3v*-5-z,z*-3-y)rotate-v*clock pigment{rgb.5}translate<0,2,9>}
// +KFF200 +KF720 +W120 +H90 -F -A -GA -P

Post a reply to this message

Warp schrieb:
> Sebastian H. <seb### [at] webde> wrote:
> 
>>_Windows_:
>>Box                           79358745         9334253     11.76
>>Cone/Cylinder                 78379572         6515873      8.31
> 
> 
>>_Linux_:
>>Box                           77632067         9442332     12.16
>>Cone/Cylinder                 76120049         6536461      8.59
> 
> 
>   Are you completely and absolutely 100% sure that you are using the exact
> same benchmark scene and the exact same ini file settings (and I mean *all*
> settings)?

It was definitly the same .pov file I copied it into a seperate 
directory as the .ini file.
The differences you mentioned above made me wonder too but the deviation 
here wasn't very high.
A real huge difference is in "Priority queue insert:"
2226874 (Windows)
  724352 (Linux)
But what does that mean ?:-)

The other stuff of the POV output of both renderings were quite similar 
but I'am not sure about jitter (to ABX) (But since it was the same .ini 
file...).

>   If everything was exactly identical, I don't see any reason for those
> numbers to be different.

Yup this it what makes me wonder too.

A friend of mine who has a bit more knowledge about computer stuff in 
general (whatever that means)
said that an optimization that gives you half rendering time would be 
_very_ good (to Felix).

I don't know much about this stuff but I like linux and would prefer to 
play with POV here (Dualboot sucks if you can't share data without 
bending everything to fat).

I'll comapare it again take care of the parameters (hopefully a fault of 
mine :-) ), we'll see...

Thanks for comments
Sebastian H.

Post a reply to this message

Woops! Should have gone as a reply to Warp (Using Mozilla is so 
difficult :-) ).

Sebastian H.

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 30 Jul 2002 12:58:49 -0400, Felix Wiemann wrote:

> Sebastian H. wrote:
> 
>> I just compared the rendering speed of the official windows and linux
>> version of POV3.5 and got the very strage result that the linux version
>> takes the double amount of time (2.11x) the windows version needs to
>> render the benchmark scene (scenes/advanced).
> 
> Maybe you should make sure that the general POV-Ray configuration files
> are the same for both OS. What about copying povray.ini to
> $HOME/.povrayrc ?

Yes, default run-time settings are different between Windows and
Linux.  Maybe I should change that.

> Also note that they aren't compiled by the same compiler. The windows
> version may be much more optimized than the linux version. When sources
> are available you can compile your own version with gcc -O3 and some
> system or processor specific optimizations.
 
This binary was built with gcc.  I may release a binary built with the
Intel compiler at some point.

-Mark Gordon

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 30 Jul 2002 11:10:36 -0400, Sebastian H. quoth:

> Hi there
> 
> I just compared the rendering speed of the official windows and linux
> version of POV3.5 and got the very strage result that the linux version
> takes the double amount of time (2.11x) the windows version needs to
> render the benchmark scene (scenes/advanced).

> I use an Athlon900Mhz with 312M Ram
> Windows 98SE
> SuSE Linux 8.0 (Kernel 2.4.18 is this important???)

> My question
> Does anyone has similar problems so it is in the binaries or is it just
> me and my sytem?

Yes, it's a very real effect.  I got 10 seconds to render Skyvase under
Windows, and 24 seconds under Linux.  The reason for this is the
different compilers used: in the Windows version, the compiler produced
several versions of parts of the code, each version optimized for a
different CPU.  This gives a larger but faster binary than the Linux
compiler, which appears to have optimized for a generic x86 processor.

-- 
Mark

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 30 Jul 2002 23:51:18 +0200, "Sebastian H." <seb### [at] webde> wrote:
> The other stuff of the POV output of both renderings were quite similar 
> but I'am not sure about jitter (to ABX) (But since it was the same .ini 
> file...).

From documentation: "Note: the jittering noise is random and non-repeatable"
From benchmark.pov: Jitter_Amount=1 Jitter=On

ABX

Post a reply to this message

> 
> Yes, it's a very real effect.  I got 10 seconds to render Skyvase under
> Windows, and 24 seconds under Linux.  The reason for this is the
> different compilers used: in the Windows version, the compiler produced
> several versions of parts of the code, each version optimized for a
> different CPU.  This gives a larger but faster binary than the Linux
> compiler, which appears to have optimized for a generic x86 processor.
> 

Nice and not nice to know...
Would a for the specific (linux) system optimized compilation gain the 
speed of the windows bins?

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 31 Jul 2002 07:06:26 -0400, Sebastian H. wrote:


>> Yes, it's a very real effect.  I got 10 seconds to render Skyvase under
>> Windows, and 24 seconds under Linux.  The reason for this is the
>> different compilers used: in the Windows version, the compiler produced
>> several versions of parts of the code, each version optimized for a
>> different CPU.  This gives a larger but faster binary than the Linux
>> compiler, which appears to have optimized for a generic x86 processor.
>> 
>> 
> Nice and not nice to know...
> Would a for the specific (linux) system optimized compilation gain the
> speed of the windows bins?
 
Maybe with the Intel compiler, but probably not with gcc.  Speed is no
longer a reason to use the Unix version, and it hasn't been for quite some time.

-Mark Gordon

Post a reply to this message