Dec 6 2004, 08:05 AM
I am thinking of buying a new PC but I wanted to know how much faster my new PC would be. The place I want to get one from won't let me do a test on one of their machines, so I thought I'd ask you lovely lot if some of you wouldn't mind and then posting the times for me. I am specifically looking at what Athlon XP 3000 CPUs can produce running XP Home.
OK, if you open the Toys project and render frames 97 and 98 with the settings set to DV format, final quality, shadows on and reflections set to 2 - that's all.
Dec 6 2004, 01:34 PM
The specs of my machine are slightly off,
it's a athlon 2800 XP running on Windows 2000, 1Gig ram:
frame 97: 54 sec.
frame 98: 48 sec.
Dec 6 2004, 02:43 PM
if someone can point me to the prj I would be glad to do that ,I am using a athlon 3 gig
Dec 6 2004, 03:00 PM
Thanks bobbesch - that's given me a very good idea of speed.
steve392, if you open AM then click to view the libraries. Look for the projects tab and you should then be presented with a selection of pre-made AM projects. The 'Toys' project should be there. If you don't see it you should find it in the AM data on your CD or hard drive if you chose to install it to your hard drive when you installed AM (just do a search for toys.prj). Look forward to your results m8
Dec 6 2004, 03:42 PM
Got it cheers Gazza
win xp home
1 gig ram
frame 97 53
frame 98 48
hope that helps ,you may aswell go for the 2.8 lol
sorry edited it done it on pal first time ,its right now
btw am running dual monitors ,if that makes a diferance
Dec 6 2004, 03:53 PM
Why didn't I get Athlon?
My P4 3 gig with 1 gig ram did frame 97 in 1:42 and 98 in 1:38
Dec 6 2004, 04:01 PM
Toshiba Satellite A70 Laptop
Windows XP Home SP2 plus lots of other stuff running including Outlook, D4, SymmTime, VNC, AVG Antivirus, Keypad Handler to name just a few
A:M v11.0t NET
Frame 97 - 1:06
Frame 98 - 0:59
A:M v11.1a NET
Frame 97 - 1:02
Frame 98 - 0:56
Dec 6 2004, 05:49 PM
Alright here are my specs
Athlon 2500 XP -M Overclocked to 2.34ghz (regualr is 1.8, 2.3 is actually higher than an XP 3200)
1 gig DDR333 ram
Windows XP pro SP2
97: 51 seconds
98: 46 seconds
Dec 7 2004, 01:04 AM
Well thanks you lot this is a great help. Basically I am thinking of getting a new machine and like the G5s but it seems their render times for the top range models are SLOWER than older Athlons…G5 dual 2.5ghz 2.5gb RAM
Frame 98: 01:18
Frame 99: 01:13Athlon 3 ghz 1gb RAM
Frame 97: 00:53
Frame 98: 00:48
Nearly half a minute! I suppose I could learn to be more patient, but I don't have the time
Dec 7 2004, 01:46 AM
Gazza maybe you could save some money on the machine and get netrender ,then use a couple of smaller machines to go with it ? just a thought .
ok Ill shutup now
Dec 7 2004, 02:28 AM
Pentium 4 (3.2 GHz), 1 Gb RAM, GeForce FX5600XT
frame 97 - 1:04
frame98 - 0:54
frame 97 - 0:53
frame 98 - 0:54
Can anyone run this test on a Xeon? I would be interested in the results as that is a possible upgrade route for by motherboard sometime in the distant future.
Good luck with your new pc, Gazza! Let us know what you settle on.
Dec 7 2004, 02:43 AM
|QUOTE (steve392 @ Dec 7 2004, 01:46 AM)|
| Gazza maybe you could save some money on the machine and get netrender ,then use a couple of smaller machines to go with it ? just a thought .|
ok Ill shutup now
I may be horribly wrong (seeing as how I don't have netrender yet), But I thought netrender split jobs across machines, but not pieces of individual frames.
So you could have three computers working on your project, but they would still each only be rendering frames as fast as they could on their own, not helping each other to finish a frame.
Dec 7 2004, 03:18 AM
Well yes and no. A couple of years ago there was a plugin or technique that allowed A:M to break a single frame up into smaller sections, render out each one, then splice it back together again. I remember I used it to render out a 3500x2500px image (or somewhere in the vicinity) for 3D World magazine - an 84mb image that took a couple of days to render out (in bits).
A:M (back then) couldn't handle the render as a single image.
I believe it was Brian Prince (then of Eggington Studios) who came up with the process.
Dec 7 2004, 08:03 AM
|A couple of years ago there was a plugin or technique that allowed A:M to break a single frame up into smaller sections, render out each one, then splice it back together again|EGGSLICE
plugin by Shimmyo
Dec 7 2004, 01:21 PM
|QUOTE (gazzamataz @ Dec 7 2004, 10:04 AM)|
|Basically I am thinking of getting a new machine and like the G5s but it seems their render times for the top range models are SLOWER than older Athlons…|
G5 dual 2.5ghz 2.5gb RAM
Frame 98: 01:18
Frame 99: 01:13
Hmm... I replied to this via the mailing list, but it doesn't appear to have shown up.
Anyway, I've just checked out what my dual 2.5GHz G5 /w 1GB RAM does using A:M OSX revision 8. Frame 99 took 1:06 when A:M was hidden and 1:02 when it wasn't. CPU load was about 105%.
Given that you've pointed so many other people to what I wrote about Using Dual Processors
, would it be rude of me to point it out to you too?
Dec 27 2004, 10:17 AM
Athlon (64bit) 3200+
fr 97: 0:46
fr 98: 0:41
fr 97: 0:42
fr 98: 0:41
DV Pal 720x576
fr 97: 0:46
fr 98: 0:47
fr 97: 0:46
fr 98: 0:46
Dec 29 2004, 10:53 AM
Well I got me new PC Just before Christmas but didn't have the chance to set it up until now…
It is an Athlon 3000+ 64-bit with a Foxconn 755A01 series logic board, XP Home, a nVidia 5200 128mb GPU, 1gb RAM. Not bad, with the opportunity to upgrade the CPU and GPU when I am ready
Then I ran the AM test… using the frames and settings we have all been using and here are the results:
Frame 97: 51 secs
Frame 98: 45 secs
Woooow!!! Then I played around with the knight character in the action window with a few actions plonked on him - he was going faster than I could (ain't hard).
So it looks like I made the right AM decision buy getting a new PC and not a Mac. I would have had to pay 2.5 times as much to get less performance.
Guess I got no excuse now not to start doing some serious animation - looking forward to it
Thanks for all your help Hashers!
Dec 29 2004, 11:15 AM
Just for kicks:
XP3200+ (not overclocked)
1 GB DDR 400
97: 47 seconds
98: 43 seconds
AM rendering while I cruised the web.
Dec 29 2004, 11:40 AM
Nice Render Times!
This is a little of topic for this thread but some folks were talking about Eggslice, does it work with version 11?Has anyone tried it?
Dec 30 2004, 02:14 AM
If I remember correctly Eggslice was developed by Dan Shimmyo and sold through Eggprops which was Eggington Productions online shop. It was originally developed for A:M 8.5 and I doubt very much that it works with versions 10.5 or 11
I visited Eggprops again and the site has changed, what was once bountiful in A:M models and materials is now a small collection of fruit
I searched for Eggslice but it wasn't available. I think I remember talk of Dan making a newer version of both Eggslice and Skylight but I think he is far too busy in his new job.
Trouble with A:M plugins is that unless you can sell a large number of them they just don't seem worth the effort due to the small market - unless you are very keen of course
Dec 30 2004, 07:07 AM
Actually Gary, I just found that EggSlice does work with version 10.x according to the documentation included in it's demo download. You can find it here: Dan Shimmyo's Personal Site
Quote from Documentation:
v. 1.05 : September 1, 2003
-- Added support for A:M v10.x
I haven't had time to test the demo and read through the help file and won't for a few days yet, if anyone has tried it in version 11 and knows if it works could you let us know? Thanks!
Dec 31 2004, 03:24 AM
Aggh! I didn't think to actually check Dan's website
But thanks Chris for pointing it out to me, that is great news that it is available for OSX 10.5 - both EggSlice and Skylight. I have them both I think I'll upgrade
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here