del82

I made a little comparison and few things are still not clear to me, althou I love them.
I tested the old PIV on 3GHZ against C2D E4400 OC to 2,66GHz. Same scene, same resolution, same OS Windows XP...
Im talking here about RT only.

The old PIV at 3GHz took 3:57 min, (task manager showed 100% CPU usage)
C2D on 2,66GHz took 2:05 min ( task manager showed only 50% CPU usage)
now finaly I used eScape from seismograph and activated dualprocessing option, time was 1:05 min ( 100% CPU usage)!!!

Now, I understood the 2:05 vs. 3:57 result, since if youmade the sum of all CPU power 2x2,66 vs. 3,00, you get prety much the same ratio.
But this 1:05 I dont get
Looking at CPU usage I can see that 2:05 only used 50%, but thats pretty much the timeing you would expect when comparing GHz.

Also when using eScape with dualprocessing mode, is there a way that the program will merge the pictures because you get left and right side

I attached the picture of the scene so you can see thats its pretty demanding, you have glossy reflection over 50% of the screen and the resolution is 1104x856, AA on 6...for 1:05 min I would say its very fast!
Using quad with this and with some much smaller resolution (800x600) for animation would give, what, 10 sec per frame

Thanx!

__________________
Beeeee!

del82

Forgot the picture...

__________________
Beeeee!

AJLynn

That's easy. Core2 and P4 have different microarchitectures. P4 has a pipeline that's extremely inefficient but able to go up to rather high clock speeds (GHz) which is good for marketing. Core2 does away with such silliness. So to translate the effective speed of one core of a Core2 to P4 equivalents, double the GHz, more or less. Task Manager was correct - you were maxing out one of two cores, which was almost twice as fast as your old CPU.

Then you went to a multithreaded program to use both CPUs, got 100% utilization and it was a bit less than 4x as fast as the P4.

del82

What would happen if I had quadcore?
If LS only uses one core, or 2 cores with eScape, other 2 wouldnt work at all.
Am I right?

p.s. anyone knows the solution for eScape split pictures?

__________________
Beeeee!

AJLynn

I don't know eScape but if it's limited to using 2 cores you wouldn't get an advantage from a quad core. OTOH you would still have those 2 cores not in use - you could run something else on them at the same time.

del82

Yes, they could be easily used for animations.
But I would want to know if we can expect something new from seismograph, maybe a quadcore option...

__________________
Beeeee!

seismograph

hi all!

i'm a bit off from renderjobs and lightscape, but i will have a look at the code. Maybe i can offer more then two or four cores for renderings.

I only have a problem with the #sharp code for automatic stitching the different parts to one image after rendering.

__________________
[see.]

okmijun

If you push LS to work under XP x64 you would be the Hero

del82

Christian, LSnet automaticly joins the two image parts after rendering. Maybe you could find some material there to get you going.
By the way, how did you merge the two images? Photoshop or...?

p.s. thanx for dropping by ;-)

__________________
Beeeee!

seismograph

yep .. i used photoshop... you know, i'm talking about images with more then 4000x4000 px

I'm thinking about adding the freeimage library to the project. Sadly it's an additional 1mb download, but maybe i just haven't found the "easy code" to do that copy past thing with net.

At the moment i also think about a good way to manage rendering with multicores:
When you have 4cores you could use 4 slices to render one image, but you waste some renderpower if one slice is rendering slower then to others. So i'm thinking about using 8 or 16 slices to relax the whole render job.
btw, animation with multicores can be done very easy, because i just have to redefine the frames to render for each core.
At the moment i'm busy, so i can't promise any date to be release a new version.


@okmijun:
hehe ..a good one
But to be serious: Why not try vmware or any other virtualizing app?

__________________
[see.]