Chris Cason <del### [at] deletethistoopovrayorg> wrote:
> SharkD wrote:
> > I'm coming straight from v3.6.1 and have noticed that all the images rendered
> > about twice as slow. Is there a comparable increase in image quality that
> > accompanies the performance drop?
>
> I think you need to be a bit more specific than this. While performance is
> still an issue in some places, it's certainly not halved across all images.
>
> If you can give some hard examples (scene name, rendering paramaters,
> render statistics including rays shot, bounds hit, etc etc) on both the
> beta and 3.6, as run on your system, then it may be possible to give you
> some more feedback.
>
> regards,
>
> -- Chris

I made a false assumption. I must gotten confused when rendering the image and
didn't notice I was rendering another file. Also, the new block rendering
method (may be an .ini option which is behaves differently now) /seemed/ to
take twice as long.

However, there was an actual *real* speed decrease with the file I rendered. It
took 149.33 seconds in v3.6 and 176.75 seconds in v3.7. There was also an error
in the image that wasn't present when rendered in the old version.

I will post the file and messages in the scene-files group. All the dependancies
except for the image maps can be found in the Object Collection. The image maps
are 4096x4096 32bit PNG images with simple black text and symbols taking up
about 1% of the space. The remainder of each image is fully transparent.

I'll post the image with the error in it in the binaries group.

-Mike

Post a reply to this message