#Particle FX
13 messages in this thread
Michael,
A month ago or so you offered to render some test files on your P90, if you
could be so kind as to render the clam.cho file that comes with A:M, and let me
know the timings, that would help me alot! Since everyone has this file, it is
really the only fair way to compare. I have timings on my PMac, my Compudyne
486 and a compaq 486. Comparing to a P90 would help me with my next purchase
decision!
You can stop the rendering after it gives you a time for frame 1. If you could
render at 640 x 480 w/photo and anti-alias
I have timings for five possible combinations:
1. Windows at 640 x 480, photo, anti-alias
2. Windows at 640 x 480, photo, motion blur (which is 16-pass)
3. DOS render24 at 640 x 480, photo, anti-alias
4. DOS render24 at 640 x 480, photo, motion blur (-a1)
5. DOS render24 at 640 x 480, photo, motion blur (-a3)
All of these were saved as 24-bit targa and not showing the screen.
My timings are:
Compaq 486 Anti-alias Mblur (-a1) Mblur (-a3)
windows 4:22 9:07 n/a
DOS 3:29 8:06 15:48
Compudyne486
Windows 5:25 15:04 n/a
DOS skipped these (lazy)
PowerMac 8100/80
2:19 7:20 10:33
Thanks alot for your time and effort!
JIm Jonah
Jim,
I will also test those files… My Pentium is partially up and running, so I
could at least do the windows tests… I've been too bussy to fix all the
little quirks that showed up, like not being able to load WW3.11 when I turn on
the 32 bit disk access (out of memory message with 32 megs installed)… Also
the DOS renderer sort of "hangs" when I run it — it does do the job, but
doesn't display the progress while rendering and dosen't return to the prompt
after it is done… so you don't really know when the job is finished (Looking
at the HD light or listening to it is the only way to know). Do you (or
anybody) know how to fix any of those problems?
Pawel
Jim,
What is the configuration of your equipment, RAM, SPEED, VIDEO Board/BUS,
etc.?
This would help me with my next purchase decision.
Thanks
– Robb Canfield, Written 21-Dec-1994 @ 18:17:59
Using: Windows NavCIS PRO 1.25
Robb,
>>What is the configuration of your equipment, RAM, SPEED, VIDEO Board/BUS,
etc.?
This would help me with my next purchase decision.<<
If this in reference to the timings I posted earlier:
Compaq 486 DX2/66 32 megs ram, Compaqs QVision video board, probably 1 meg
VRAM. This computer was provided by my day job, so I don't know alot about it.
IDE and local bus, fairly quick machine.
Compudyne 486 25/sx with overdrive chip DX2/50 24 megs ram, Mach ?? video card
(slow) IDE everything, slow. Purchased 3 years ago before I new alot about DOS
machines, just needed it for a c++ class.
PowerMac 8100/80 40 megs RAM (24 megs was assigned to the A:M render to be
fair) Apple High performance video card w/4 megs VRAM. The screen redraw is
extremely responsive on this computer, it takes a LARGE complicated wireframe
to phase it, much faster than the Compaq.
I'm mainly a Mac guy so the Mac has 1 250 hard drive internal, 1 gig external,
the VideoVisionStudio video capture board, FWB Jackhammer SCSI-II card w/8 gig
disk array. And most of the major Mac programs, Quark XPress, Premiere,
Photoshop, illustrator, etc….
For me, the Mac will stay my main machine, there are simply less compatibility
problems, the software seems (to me) to be integrated better, troubleshooting
is quicker (for me). A quick contrast, Autocad took four hours to install (DOS
r12) and create the necessary batch files to get around the conflicts in the
autoexec.bat/config.sys setup (because of Novel) counting almost two hours long
distance to tech support. On the Mac, 15 minutes after I opened the box for the
VideoVisionStudio board, I was capturing video! For me, the DOS work seems to
be full of landmines. BUT, as the timings tell, for now the P90 does render A:M
files a little faster. Photoshop timings are the other way around (ziff-davis).
I'm sure the new PowerMac 8100/90, /100, and /110 will push the PMac over the
edge, till the P100, etc…
Hope this helps without trying to start any kind of OS war! For me, none of
them are fast enough!
Jim Jonah
>>Photoshop timings are the other way around (ziff-davis)
Just out of curiousity, Jim, are these for the new Photoshop (3.0)? Just
curious, because from what I understand, 2.5 was a real kludge under Windows,
and that problem has been corrected (or so I've been told). A friend in tech.
pubs. said his experience showed the new Windows ver. was at least twice as
fast, with some things being 4-8 times faster (no times given, so these may be
'it seems to be this much faster' type of improvements). Again, just trying to
find out the real info; don't want an OS war either, but I'm really in the dark
on this one.
>>For me, none of them are fast enough!
AMEN!!! :^).
John Stetzer
JWS
John,
The review of PS on different platforms was for version 2.5. Don't forget that
the PowerMac version 2.5 was running in emulation. V3.0 is also much faster,
FWIW.
All that really means is I now am working with larger files, files for video
resolution are very fast to work on, but 8.5 x 11 cmyk for print still slows
down when I get a number of layers going! I can't wait for the Multi-processor
PMacs with the 620 chip! Until then everything is "about a minute!".
Happy Holidays!
Jim
>>I can't wait for the Multi-processor PMacs with the 620 chip!
Is PMac going multiprocessor? I've thought this was out of the question…
Pawel
>>Don't forget that the PowerMac version 2.5 was running in emulation.
Was unaware of that; was only aware of the fact that the Windows ver. of 2.5
was a real kludge. Guess I'll have to wait a couple o' months for some sort of
comparison in one of the mags.
>>V3.0 is also much faster, FWIW.
That's what my friend in tech pubs tells me; maybe I'll get to take a trip down
there and see for myself one of these days.
>>Happy Holidays!
Back atcha!! :^).
John Stetzer
JWS
>> Multi procesorr Power Macs will be available with System 8.0
Pentiums 90 and 100 can already run in pairs or quartets, I think that Intel is
producing its own PCI motherboards with this facility
Dejan
Thanks for the specifications. I am currently running a 486 66 DX2 with 16M and
MACH-64 VLB board (4M). I increased the speed of the 486 to 40mhz (providing
80MHZ processor). So I have forstalled a pentium purchase for awhile. At least
until I see performance on ALPHA chip and new PPC. For me it is important that
my scenes render overnight (an average of 30 frames at 640*480). So that is my
next benchmark. I work all day modeling, my computer works all night rendering.
Now if I could only get it to model as well…
Robb
– Robb Canfield, Written 23-Dec-1994 @ 11:34:28
Using: Windows NavCIS PRO 1.25