CompuServe Thread

#3DS Rel 3 Performance

11 messages in this thread
#67499From: Edward J. CARTERNov 21, 1993 11:05 AM
I have heard it said that while Rel. 3 offers some useful new features, it can be up to 50% slower than Rel. 2, when rendering GIF images. (I suppose it wouldn't matter what kind of image, come to think of it). Can anyone enlighten me on this point?
#67518From: Nov 21, 1993 3:11 PM
Edward: There is a difference in speed, but not quite what you were told. The new version of 3DS does not have the same type of rendering, and therefore not the same level of controls. Basically, in R3, the antialiasing is on or off, you don't have the low, medium or high settings that you had in R1 and R2. The result is that if you had used Phong High in R2, and Antialiasing ON in R3, no only would R3 be faster, but higher quality. However, if you were using R2 in Low or Medium, it would be faster than R3, but _much_ lower quality. Greg Pyros
#67638From: Yost GroupNov 22, 1993 11:14 AM
Actually, I believe that R3 in High is about the same speed as R2 in Medium. – J
#67678From: Brian Rudolph [Adesk]Nov 22, 1993 1:59 PM
The test between R2 and R3 were done with Antialiasing ON and Metal Shading in R3 vs. Antialiasing HIGH and Phong Shading in R2. I think. -Brian
#67992From: david W. mennenohNov 23, 1993 10:19 PM
>>Actually, I believe that R3 in High is about the same speed as R2 in Medium. R3 in high? R3 doesn't have high. You mean R3 with Anti aliasing on right?
#68075From: Yost GroupNov 24, 1993 10:18 AM
Right.
#68502From: david W. mennenohNov 27, 1993 10:22 AM
Left.
#67899From: Edward J. CARTERNov 23, 1993 3:15 PM
Thanks for your help. I had not realized that the anti-aliasing settings made all that much difference. Courtesy of a couple of friends, I was able to make a direct comparison between R2 and R3. Test was run with 20 objects, 1667 vertices, 2714 faces, default material, Phong shading, and one omni light. Results: R2 – none: 0:25 25% – low : 0:46 46% – med : 1:10 70% – high : 1:41 100% R3 – off : 0:28 28% – on : 1:12 72% So comparing R2 'low' with R3 'on' looks like a performance degradation – but that's apples and oranges – like you said! EJC
#67942From: Yost GroupNov 23, 1993 6:14 PM
Try it with a few transparent materials on overlapping objects. – J
#67576From: Don LandisNov 22, 1993 2:19 AM
You heard wrong, Maybe release 3 is 20-30% faster!
#67603From: Ted BoardmanNov 22, 1993 8:04 AM
Edward 3DSr3 can be slower when rendering FLC files if you don't use the custom palette option. FLC's must be converted from the internal 48 bit color space to 8 bit and this takes a few seconds per frame. TedB