CompuServe Thread

#3D Stuio + Pentium???

3 messages in this thread
#49954From: Marion K. MarksJul 17, 1993 12:19 PM
The important thing to keep in mind about 3DS and the Pentium is that the general-computing magazines are talking mainly about INTEGER speeds, since that's what's important for general-purpose computing. 3DS renders, however, are largely FLOATING-POINT bound. The Pentium is only about twice as fast as a 486DX at the same clock speed for integer operations (three to four times for programs specifically compiled for the Pentium), but is from five to ten times faster than the 486DX at pure floating-point ops. The reason is that the on-board FPU ("80587"?) is MUCH more efficient than the equivilant "80487" FPU built-into the 486DX. No program can be 100% FPU (integer-based operations are needed for the communication between the CPU and FPU), but 3DS2 rendering comes pretty darn close. The benchmarks posted in various threads here show that 3DS2 renders roughly four times faster on a Pentium/60 than on a 486 DX2/66. Bottom line: don't believe the magazines when they say the Pentium won't be as much help as Intel would like you to believe. That's true when you're talking about word processors and databases and the like (which is what most of their readers use computers for), but NOT when talking about 3-D rendering and other FPU-bound tasks! THOSE types of applications are sped up CONSIDERABLY, by at least a FACTOR of three! That said, the PowerPC looks even more promising, being faster, cooler, and cheaper than the Pentium. Unfortunately, it only runs DOS programs via emulation, which would negate much of the performance advantage. But if 3DSr3 comes out in a Windows NT version, it should run QUITE fast on the PowerPC. The currently-available PowerPC 601 chip at 66MHz (same as the best current Pentium chip) runs over 80 SPECfp92, vs. 56.9 SPECfp92 for the Pentium. It's worst case power usage is only 8.5 watts, vs. 16 for the Pentium, which translates into less heat generated. The die size is 120 square mm, vs. 262 for the Pentium, which means a physically smaller chip (10.9 mm on a side vs. 16.2 mm) which in turn means smaller motherboards. Forthcoming PowerPC models include the low-power 603 for laptops and other low-power applications, the higher-performance 605, and the VERY high-performance 620. It runs Macintosh, DOS (via emulation), OS/2-Win, Windows NT, UNIX, and many other operating systems. The 601 is the first tangible result of the Apple/IBM/Motorolla alliance. Yost, PLEASE consider making a 3DSr3 for Windows NT, with a version specially compiled for the PowerPC!
#50000From: John HinkleyJul 18, 1993 2:24 AM
Marion, I agree with your assertions about floating point vs. integer performance on a Pentium relative to a 486. I looked around here for some 3DS benchmarks (I don't run 3DS but I was curious to see how an existing program that I assumed used a lot of floating point ran) but didn't see any. Maybe they scrolled off before I started looking… MM> The currently-available PowerPC 601 chip at 66MHz … runs over MM> 80 SPECfp92, vs. 56.9 SPECfp92 for the Pentium. Are you saying the PowerPC 601 is running 80 SPECfp92 when emulating a 80×86+80×87? That WOULD be impressive. What I'm saying is: 1) Now, 3DS won't even run under a DOS box from Windows or OS2 and probably won't work under DOS emulation under NT on any other platform. Even if it does run, I expect it will run much slower than on a Pentium unless the host processor has an FPU that is instruction set compatible with the Pentium. If I'm right about this, there's no point in getting a PowerPC now to run 3DS now. 2) I would guess that 5 to 10 percent of 3DS is coded in assembler for speed and that the rest of the code was not written with portability in mind. I wouldn't expect to see a Pentium NT port in less than a year. An NT port to another processor probably won't be around for a year and a half or so. I agree that once a native PowerPC NT version of 3DS is available, that it will, in all likelyhood, run much faster than the Pentium version. Of course, by then we'll be running Hexiums or Septiums or something, but I expect the RISC machines will be able to keep their performance edge since the Pentium decendents will have to maintain 8086 compatibility. I don't know if anyone really cares about power comsumption or footprint in a rendering engine. All my PC's (2) are in tower cases with 300 watt power supplies. You're talking a few cents a day more to run a Pentium than a PowerPC, and maybe a few dollars in fiberglass for the motherboard. Portables are another thing entirely… And Pentium systems will cost a little more since the chip itself is more expensive. I suspect that most people will accept the extra cost for full DOS compatibility though. John.
#50205From: Martin KunertJul 19, 1993 9:49 PM
John, While comparing Pentium's to PowerPC's, it's interesting to note that Intel has plans to release the 686 in one year and a 786 in two. My guess is that the Pentium is last x86 compatible chip from Intel. Beyond that, x86 will be software emulation only. Freed from 80's era shakle, I'd wager that Intel expertise, _deep_ pockets, and experience will produce chips that will burn past Alpha's and MIPS in low-cost and speed. Intel has no hesitancy towards predatory practices.