[Left Side]

Hi,

Following on from my previous post I have carried out further testing to compare speed between Maxwell 1.1, Maxwell 1.5 32bit and Maxwell 1.5 64 bit.

The test was run on the same machine a dual quad core Dell with 4mb memory running Windows server 2003 x64

The same MXS file was used in each case and set to render to level 18.

The results were:-

Maxwell 1.5 32 bit rendered in 1h42m08s Benchmark 420.36
Maxwell 1.1 rendered in 2h02m17s Benchmark 351.10
Maxwell 1.5 64 bit rendered in 2h35m46s Benchmark 275.62


To me this shows that the 64bit version has a problem.

Anyone else have the same problem with the 64bit version?, is there a special procedure for installing the 64bit version that I have missed?.

Thanks in advance for any help.

Rob







[/img]

[tanguy]

OMFG !!!
That really frustrate !
Could you send me your test scene ?
We will make the same here on our blades in 1.5 32 and 64 to compare.
tanguy@pixus.fr

[Left Side]

Tanguy,

Thanks for the offer to test. I have sent the file to you.

Let me know how you get on.

Best Regards

Rob

[inigomontoya]

You're doing better than I did.

Quad core q6600 @ 2.4ghz 2GB Ram

w/ the Speedtest 1.1

64 bit Benchmark: 60
32 bit Benchmark: 157

I thought maybe it was because I only have 2GB Ram, but it doesn't seem to be using anywhere near that amount.

[Rickyx]

I had some test on Win32 compared to Linux64:
Benchmark is better on 32...

Why?

[Rickyx]

I had some test on Win32 compared to Linux64:
Benchmark is better on 32...

Why?

[ivox3]

Confirmed here...


X64 | actual stop watch times | 8 cores @ 2.33 | no 32 bit 1.1 or 1.5 tested for comparison

[Maxer]

No I don't beleave it , why would 1.5 be slower than 1.1 I didn't think they even touched the core in this update.

[inigomontoya]

1.5 and 1.1 benchmark pretty close if you compare 32 bit versions. I'm only seeing issues with 64 bit.

[dilbert]

Maxwell 1.5 32 bit rendered in 1h42m08s Benchmark 420.36
Maxwell 1.1 rendered in 2h02m17s Benchmark 351.10

Please clarify your test results. From what I see from your results, 1.5 is significantly faster than 1.1 when comparing the two 32 bit versions.

[dilbert]

Sorry, double post.

[shen.de]

No I don't beleave it , why would 1.5 be slower than 1.1 I didn't think they even touched the core in this update.

sure u can! I have a studio setup with a single chair as a test scene...

on 1.5 it reached SL7 after 10minutes

on 1.1 same scene reached SL 10


thats absolutly anoying!

[renbry]

for whatever it's worth i did tests on realflow 32bit vs 64bit and 64bit came out slower....i assumed it was using a higher precision solver rather then using the extra bits for speed...

maybe Maxwell is using a similar methodology?

matt

[tom]

Ivox3, except the difference in speed, I see a serious gamma difference in your comparison. Do you have any idea?

[Left Side]

Hi,

Dilbert, to clarify:-

Maxwell 1.5 32bit is faster than Maxwell 1.1

but

Maxwell 1.5 64bit is slower than Maxwell 1.1

I would have expected there to be a further speed gain in using the 64bit version of 1.5. But for the time being I will use the 32bit.

Should we post something a 1.5 bug thread?

Thanks for eveyones help.

Rob