[ivox3]

i'd have killed You if Your rendering really had taken 45 seconds ...

Nah .... you would of killed yourself. LOL ...

...very nice point Mihai.

@ Fran ... I remember.

[tom]

I mentioned inconsistancies with the maxwell clock a year ago. Nobody cared.

I guess it's here and this was about RC5 and once it was fixed.
http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... hp?t=11438
According to ivox's report it's obviously failing w/ 1.1 again.
Thanks for pointing this out, it's now on the queue.

[Frances]

I mentioned inconsistancies with the maxwell clock a year ago. Nobody cared.

I guess it's here and this was about RC5 and once it was fixed.
http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... hp?t=11438
According to ivox's report it's obviously failing w/ 1.1 again.
Thanks for pointing this out, it's now on the queue.

No, it's here:
http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... ight=clock

And it was still broken in V1.0. Looks like it was never fixed.

[tom]

OK, now it's listed as a bug report. I cannot reproduce the problem with 1.0, 1.1 or with the current testing build but that could be due to different hardware. I launch a scene setting 60 min and Time Passed + Time Left always sums up to 60 min. I tried setting higher priorities and then it updated the Time Passed value with delays but when it's updated the sum was still consistent. Something surely weird and we will check it.
-edit: Oops, after some more time it started to lose consistency. I confirm 1.0 and 1.1 are failing about accuracy of passed time according to my latest test when I change CPU priority to something above "Normal".

[ivox3]

Hi ivox3,

I really hope the 17 minutes are not a bug related to Maxwell's time measuring!

Would you mind doing also the latest Cinebench on your machine? Would be great!

Here is the link:

http://www.maxon.net/pages/download/cinebench_e.html


Thanks!

Processor : 8 core
MHz : 2.33Ghz
Number of CPUs : 8
Operating System : xp 64 bit

Graphics Card : 7950 GT
Resolution : <fill this out>
Color Depth : <fill this out>

****************************************************

Rendering (Single CPU): 396 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 1872 CB-CPU

Multiprocessor Speedup: 4.73

Shading (CINEMA 4D) : 462 CB-GFX
Shading (OpenGL Software Lighting) : 1460 CB-GFX
Shading (OpenGL Hardware Lighting) : 3672 CB-GFX

OpenGL Speedup: 7.95

[glypticmax]

Processor : 8 core
Multiprocessor Speedup: 4.73


Hi Chris,
I'm a little curious about the multiprocessor speedup.
With my diddly dual core I got 1.85. Two cores, something less than a speed up of 2. Siimple math suggests an 8 core should see something between a 6 to 7+ speedup.
But 4.73?
Does that seem low to you?
"Below expectations" as I would say to my students.

Edit: I'm still a bit envious of your system.

[ivox3]

Yes it's a low figure. I think because we're not dealing with true quad cores, ..but rather 2 Conroes packaged on a single die -- we're not seeing the logical scaling that one would logically expect.

When Intel releases the next generataion quad's, the chip to chip communication via the FSB will be eliminated ... at least that's how I understand it. ...that may be overly simplified.

...but still, ...the new quad's ought to have a different story ending.

...until then.

[glypticmax]

How about the next generation AMD's?

[ivox3]

You mean the Barcelona's ?

[glypticmax]

Yeah, or something like that. Those guys change names of the development projects too often for me to keep up.
I just remember reading in several places that AMD's architecture is going to be more efficient re communication between each of the cores in their quad cores. Intel was first to introduce their quad, but they did it by using dated architecture. Or so I read.
Intel and AMD are going to be leap frogging eachother for quite some time. I'm excited to see what the AMD/ATI mix is going to yield.
In the mean time I need to go shovel some snow.

[ivox3]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/01/26 ... eon_claim/


http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/01/17 ... ut_penryn/

[glypticmax]

Yep, that's the kind of stuff I've been reading.
I think I'm going to set up a consultancy to help these guys get the names straight. How could they not use "Galapogos" or "Pimpernel"?
Oh, wait, that might take time away from my responsibilities as Senior Cat Toy Designer around here.
Oh, well, another opportunity I must let pass.

[ivox3]

...Senior Cat Toy Designer around here.

..you too?

[glypticmax]

Yep, my promotion came when I took in TomTom, an 18 lb one year old kitten. The other three cats have outgrown my silliness.
I think there is some monofilament in my future.........

[Prowler]

Hi ivox,

thanks a lot for your Cinebench figures. I somehow hoped that the multiprocessor speedup would be better on your machine. But it also looks to me that Cinema 4D is not scaling very good from 4 to 8 cores.

Nevertheless you would be numer one at this list:

http://www.3dfluff.com/mash/cinebench/top.php