#Memory Management
3 messages in this thread
> For optimal rendering speed on a 486, we recommend the use > of an
extended memory manager. We have found that some > 486 computers will
render at almost twice the speed when an > extended memory manager is
being used. The need for a > memory manager for faster rendering speed is
only required > for some 486 computers. Some 486 computers have an >
extended memory manager built into the hardware.
What I'd like to know is how likely it is that a memory manager would
improve my 486/50 from Zeos — it has a built-in hardware 128K cache, but
no extended memory manager as far as I know (and HOW would I know? I'm not
even sure what question to ask Zeos tech support). How about if I post a
rendered time from one of the examples, would that give someone a better
idea?
I'm not looking for promises here, but just an estimate. I mean, if it's a
fifty-fifty chance that a memory manager would improve my rendering times,
I'll buy one tommorrow. On the other hand, if there's only a slim chance,
then it ain't worth it to me (because, other than 3DS, all I run is
Windows, and I have no problems with the memory I have). You see, I don't
quite understand HOW a memory manager would help (doesn't Phar Lap use ALL
my 32Meg memory? — on second thought, maybe I don't want to know all the
messy technical details).
And finally (will he NEVER stop?), if I SHOULD buy one, which one? Is QEMM
the general consensus?
Mike:
If you want to use Windows, for example, plus Autodesk products then QEMM
is the painless way to go… you don't have to keep separate config.sys
files since QEMM will create extended or expanded memory upon demand.
I did a test and noticed no appreciable difference on my machine using a
memory manager… and someone else, I think, verified those results. It
depends upon the BIOS you are running, I believe… I'm guessing that the
memory manager improvement that Autodesk is experiencing is due to the fact
that the upper memory area is being better managed on the machines that
they are using and traffic between the disk, memory, and the graphics
display is greatly improved in their case.
C#
Craig's assessment is very accurate. It apparently depends upon the bios
your system is using. With many systems, it doesn't matter if you use a
memory manager, but with some, the performance is greatly increased. I've
got a 486/50 here, and if you want to compare your speed to mine, give me a
timing on the oldcity.3ds file at 320×200 rendered to the NULL device. My
time on that with 2.01 (Phong/High/Camera View) is 28 seconds.
If you want to fool around with one of the memory managers, QEMM is
definitely the recommended one.
– G