LW7.5c G5 Render test

[jnjcre8]

We installed lightwave 7.5c on one of the floor models in the apple store.

here are the specs
1.8Ghz 512 mg ram
nvidi FX 5200
osx 10.2.7

We ran the raytracetest.lws file
well here is the result:
11.5 sec at 320x240

After running the test we got kicked out the apple store for installing lightwave on there machine.

I must say that's 2x faster than my dual 800 machine at home.

[Beamtracer]

Hi jnjcre8. The "raytracetest.lws" scene you used is a different one to the usual "Raytrace.lws" that is used for benchmarking.

[js33]

Why did the people at the Apple store get so upset with you?
Did you ask them ahead of time if you could install Lightwave or did you do it while they weren't looking. :p

Cheers,
JS

[nawDsign]

:D Yea we did it without them knowing. The sales dude wouldn't leave us alone, ok we know it's a great computer already, just let us play with it!!! hehehe. From what I've seen playing with it, seems hella fast, but need hard numbers. Where can we get the actual .lws to test we'll repost again. Thanks.

[js33]

It comes on the LW cd in the benchmarks folder. There are several of them. Try the raytrace and radiosity scenes. Remember to not change any settings. Just load them and hit the F9 key.

Cheers,
JS

[OnePerson]

I can test on a 1.6GHz G5. We have one at our shop and I would be willing to run some tests for those interested. I have been doing some tests between the G5 1.6 and a Dual 1.42 using the DancingTeapot scene. But I'm not sure that scene is a good representation.

Let me know which file to use and I will perform some benchmarks.

Regards

One

[Darth Mole]

That scene takes 25.2 secs on my little 12" laptop (single processor 867MHz), running on battery power with 256Mb RAM.

11.5 sec seems about right - just over twice as fast. (Actually, it comes out a second faster than you'd predict by simply scaling the MHz value.)

However, that means your dual 800 score is WAY off...

[Ge4-ce]

Maybe he did it single treaded on his dual 800 machine?

On my Powerbook 1Ghz ti. this particular scene takes 20.6 seconds, Your Dual 800 should perform better.. try multi treads! you should be able to outperform my 1 Ghz TiBook

[Darth Mole]

Don't tread on your PowerBook - you'll break it!

[grundgedanke]

Sorry for posting a pc bench here, but i was thinking about a g5 mac, casue i love macs for some kind of stuff.

Notebook
Intel P4 at 2.4 MhZ
768MB Ram
Windows XP
ATI Radeon 9000 Mobility

and the test took me 10.2 secs. i think it is ok if the 1.8 took about a sec. more. yeah, seems as if apple makes it. would like to know the benchs for the 2 proz machine :D

[Ge4-ce]

Originally posted by Darth Mole
Don't tread on your PowerBook - you'll break it!

Yep I noticed.. The more treads I use, the slower it performs.. typical Single processor..

I meant that with a dual 800 machine you should activate multi treading..

as for the PC laptop with the pentium 4.. maybe the initial speeds are good.. but I heard that many laptops at that speed get so hot that when rendering a movie, they automatically slow down processorspeed to save energie, and prevent melting... I even noticed once on a friends laptop.. who also claimed that his laptop was fast in videorendering.. it was initially, but after 5 or 10 minutes.. it suddenly went a lot slower! and the fans were working so hard I thought the bloody thing would lift off..

not to mention use of battery..

[Lightwolf]

Ge4-ce:
Well, the el-cheaop PC laptops do use the desktop P4, which is a no no for mobile use. The P-M (Centrino) should be the mobile CPU of choice here. Pretty fast too...

[Jimzip]

Hmm. 1min 47sec.. Raytrace scene, what in the world am I doing wrong lol.

Dual 1.25Ghz G4
1.5GB RAM
ATi 64MB something something..

Jimzip :D

edit: Oh, right, 640X480..

[Ge4-ce]

Originally posted by Jimzip
Hmm. 1min 47sec.. Raytrace scene, what in the world am I doing wrong lol.

Dual 1.25Ghz G4
1.5GB RAM
ATi 64MB something something..

Jimzip :D

edit: Oh, right, 640X480..

I think you just picked the wrong scene.. I was panicing as well in the start.. there's another scene in a different folder in your content-folder.. called "raytracescene.lws"

do a search for it.. it's not the one with the 3 balls.. it's one with a teapot and some other stuff.

[nawDsign]

----
Hmm. 1min 47sec.. Raytrace scene, what in the world am I doing wrong lol.

Dual 1.25Ghz G4
1.5GB RAM
ATi 64MB something something..

Jimzip

----

Wow! jim. I have a dual 1.25 with 256Mb ram ATi 9000 64MB and that scene rendered in 3 minutes! What do I need more RAM?

Nor

[grundgedanke]

Originally posted by Ge4-ce
Yep I noticed.. The more treads I use, the slower it performs.. typical Single processor..

I meant that with a dual 800 machine you should activate multi treading..

as for the PC laptop with the pentium 4.. maybe the initial speeds are good.. but I heard that many laptops at that speed get so hot that when rendering a movie, they automatically slow down processorspeed to save energie, and prevent melting... I even noticed once on a friends laptop.. who also claimed that his laptop was fast in videorendering.. it was initially, but after 5 or 10 minutes.. it suddenly went a lot slower! and the fans were working so hard I thought the bloody thing would lift off..

not to mention use of battery..

well, for that case there is a desktop pc at my office :-)

[mlinde]

Originally posted by nawDsign
----
Hmm. 1min 47sec.. Raytrace scene, what in the world am I doing wrong lol.

Dual 1.25Ghz G4
1.5GB RAM
ATi 64MB something something..

Jimzip

----

Wow! jim. I have a dual 1.25 with 256Mb ram ATi 9000 64MB and that scene rendered in 3 minutes! What do I need more RAM?

Nor

If you only have 256 MB of RAM in that machine, you are basically crippling it. You can load up to 1.5 GB (or maybe 2 GB) into it. With 256, you barely have enough RAM to run the basic system without any other applications and avoid using the HD as a scratch disk. This will SERIOUSLY speed up your machine, and cheaply:
Quality, 3rd party, RAM (http://www.crucial.com/store/listparts.asp?Mfr%2BProductline=Apple%2BPower+Mac&mfr=Apple&cat=RAM&model=Power+Mac+G4+%28Dual+1.25GHz+DDR%29&submit=Go)

Oh, and get the CL=3 RAM, it's faster and better.

[Lynx3d]

*lol* people keep talking about treads...

Don't tread on your PowerBook - you'll break it!

If you don't get it, go into the render options and look up how it's spelled correctly :D

Oh, and get the CL=3 RAM, it's faster and better.

Hm, what should i say about that other than that's complete b...s...
The LOWER the CAS Latency the FASTER the ram, so CL2 would be preferable. But anyway, with DDR-RAM the effect is a lot smaller than it was with SDRAM...

Hm, doesn't still anyone own a G5?

[Lynx3d]

darn...wrong button :D

[NigelH]

18.8 seconds on my DP533mhz G4
1.5Gb Ram
8 threads

... if anyone's still counting.

[js33]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh, and get the CL=3 RAM, it's faster and better.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Lynx3d
Hm, what should i say about that other than that's complete b...s...
The LOWER the CAS Latency the FASTER the ram, so CL2 would be preferable. But anyway, with DDR-RAM the effect is a lot smaller than it was with SDRAM...

Hm, doesn't still anyone own a G5?

No actually he's right. I thought it was wrong at first too until I looked it up.
an explanation of CL3 and CL2 (http://www.oempcworld.com/generic.jhtml?pid=17)

Cheers,
JS

[Lynx3d]

Oh...a typical Mac weirdness?

Computer that assume things are always evil :D
Besides that, i totally overlooked that the CL3 one can run higher frequency (PC3200 = 200MHz and PC2700 = 166MHz)
On the PC-Side CL and memory frequency is usually independant, but if the Mac "overclocks" PC100 to 125MHz when using CL3 instad of CL2...but then you still need to buy the CL2 RAM and run it at CL3, running CL3 at CL3 still gets you 100MHz according to that article, which would again be slower than CL2 at 100MHz CL2
The new firmware just stops RAM clocked at 125MHz CL3 although it does not offer this timing in its SPD EEPROM.

[Jimzip]

nawDsign
Wow! jim. I have a dual 1.25 with 256Mb ram ATi 9000 64MB and that scene rendered in 3 minutes! What do I need more RAM?

Nor

Heh heh, yeah, I grabbed myself a 512MB stick at a swapmeet for $90.. (That's Australian $).

Oh boy does it ever help..

Jimzip :D

P.S, from reading the thread to pressing 'reply to post' there were seven more posts... Cripes.

[Ade]

Jimzip Digiworld in Lonsdale St have the cheapest mac friendly ram I have found...

[TOXIC-3D]

How'dee...


Hey I have a question... Earlier in this posting "JS33" mentioned just opening up the "RAYTRACE.lws" file and just hitting the F9 key and letting it render as is... My question concerns the fact that everyone here is saying that the render ends up with a res of "380 x 240"... yet when I "Just open" up the file and hit the F9, it gets rendered at a res of "640 x 480" with "Low Antialiasing" and "Raytrace/Shadows,Reflection,Refraction,& Optimization" all checked...

Is this what everyone is attempting this render at..? Or are you all infact lowering the res from the "640 x 480" that my file opens up at, down to "380 x 240"...?



Thanks all...


:cool:

[drmcdonald]

raytracetest.lws rendered in 6.6 seconds on my dual 2 GHz G5 / 2.5 GB / 4 "treads"

[jahn]

it took 1m 16seconds
with a dual 1.8 G5 Processor
1.5GB Ram
640x480 as they are default settings
8 threads

raytrace.lws

[dranos]

My Dual 1.8 G5 took 9 secs. This scene doesn't have antialiasing enabled though.