PDA

View Full Version : SIGGRAPH demos



Zach
08-19-2003, 03:59 PM
Hey,

Does anybody know what spec system they were using at SIGGRAPH to demo the LightWave content?

It seemed pretty fast and responsive for the IK/FK Character stuff.

cresshead
08-19-2003, 05:29 PM
well seeing as one of the sponsers was BoXX....i'd lay money on it that it was indeed a boxx system..and probably the best one available!...

steve g

SplineGod
08-19-2003, 07:46 PM
The Boxx machine I was demoing on was a dual opteron and was, shall we say, kickin it. :)

cresshead
08-19-2003, 08:14 PM
ohhhh....well that's definatly a quick beast...
i'm hoping that lightwave will be recompiled for it..and also for 64bit windows....

BTW loved your head modeling from a polygon at sigg.

steve g

mickeycoke
08-19-2003, 09:56 PM
Is there any performance increases in rendering speeds for dual cpu machines?

I have noticed no speed increase from single to dual cpu under windows XP Do others share this experience? Rendering specifically.

How is the performance of the mac G5 going to compair to a wintel dual CPU machine under Lightwave 8?

Thanks!

Zach
08-19-2003, 10:27 PM
Dual Opturon... really?

Lightwave seemed extremely responsive! I'm wondering, Larry, is 8 optimized to be faster than 7 (as far as oGL)?

Like is the ik and fk faster than previous versions?

js33
08-19-2003, 10:36 PM
Originally posted by mickeycoke
Is there any performance increases in rendering speeds for dual cpu machines?

I have noticed no speed increase from single to dual cpu under windows XP Do others share this experience? Rendering specifically.

How is the performance of the mac G5 going to compair to a wintel dual CPU machine under Lightwave 8?

Thanks!
If you render with Screamernet on each CPU you will get a 100% increase in render speed. Each CPU will render its own frame at the same time.

Cheers,
JS

Psyhke
08-19-2003, 11:22 PM
Originally posted by mickeycoke
Is there any performance increases in rendering speeds for dual cpu machines?

I have noticed no speed increase from single to dual cpu under windows XP Do others share this experience? Rendering specifically.

How is the performance of the mac G5 going to compair to a wintel dual CPU machine under Lightwave 8?

Thanks!

I really believe you should see a difference. In my experience it does. Are you setting the number of threads from 1 to, say, 4 or 8 with dual processors?

SplineGod
08-20-2003, 12:50 AM
Originally posted by Zach
Dual Opturon... really?

Lightwave seemed extremely responsive! I'm wondering, Larry, is 8 optimized to be faster than 7 (as far as oGL)?

Like is the ik and fk faster than previous versions?
Without going into details, I think so :)

WilliamVaughan
08-20-2003, 07:32 AM
We were running HP machines at the booth......We had BOXX systems at the Party.....and we were lucky enuff to be right next to the BOXX booth where they were running LW on their awesome machines!

mickeycoke
08-20-2003, 08:01 AM
I have tested and seen other benchmarks of lightwave with dual processors. My experience with Screamernet has been that you don't benefit with Dual CPU on XP based systems.

Running two sessions of Screamernet don't produce the same rendering times x 2. It could be the system that we are using or the fact that XP is not optimized for multiple CPU processing.

I know for a fact that this is not the same for Unix. Anything on Irix or Mac OS will deliver the equally across the processors. 2 processors = 2X the performance as one processor. Not so as my experience on XP.

However, Rendering times in general are faster on XP based systems. Is the rendering NOT optimized on the Mac OSX platform with comparable hardware? Is performance being optimized using the new G5 based architecture?

The best performance should be found on the g5 or the code needs to be changed by lightwave. Is there any plans for increased performance on the Mac for Lightwave 8?

js33
08-20-2003, 08:51 AM
Ed...is that you?
Have a look at the Mac forum it's all being argued over there.

I haven't had a dual machine running under XP yet but had several running under Win2000. If you run 2 instances of screamernet on the Dual XP machine you should see about double the speed of a single processor machine of the same speed.

Cheers,
JS

js33
08-20-2003, 08:53 AM
Originally posted by proton
We were running HP machines at the booth......We had BOXX systems at the Party.....and we were lucky enuff to be right next to the BOXX booth where they were running LW on their awesome machines!

Were they Xeon machines or Itanium 2 machines?

Cheers,
JS

WilliamVaughan
08-20-2003, 08:57 AM
I'll have to ask....I never know the specs of teh machines I work on at shows :)

mickeycoke
08-20-2003, 09:07 AM
I keep hearing said "you should receive this 2X performance", but i haven't seen it. is this a XP issue. Does there need to be something enabled? Another "version"?

Remember XP does not do full Multitasking. It does task swapping. Another issue how can two processes run efficiently without full multititasking.

Again, Unix doesn't have a problem with this. Mac OS is designed for full multitasking and so is Irix, Solarus and Linux.

Could someone reply with actual experience and some technical reasons for what i am experiencing.

Do commercial renderfarms utilize dual or single cpus - my guess would be single - because the bang isn't there.

I will be when Pixar starts using the G5 systems they will be using dual CPU configurations because the price per performance will be there.

Lightwolf
08-20-2003, 09:24 AM
Originally posted by mickeycoke
Running two sessions of Screamernet don't produce the same rendering times x 2. It could be the system that we are using or the fact that XP is not optimized for multiple CPU processing.
Erm, it does, at least over here (Running NT 4.0, W2K as well as XP, it even did under NT 3.51). May be not _exactly_ 2x the speed, but something like 1.975x the speed or so...
XP does symmetric multi-processing btw, NT did since its inception (and XP is based on NT, not win Win9x).

However, LWs renderer doesn'e take full advantage of multiple threads when rendering, but that is a software architecture issue and has nothing to do with the OS.

Cheers,
Mike

DaveW
08-20-2003, 12:16 PM
Originally posted by mickeycoke


Running two sessions of Screamernet don't produce the same rendering times x 2. It could be the system that we are using or the fact that XP is not optimized for multiple CPU processing.



If you're using screamernet you should see very close to 2x speed increase. Unless you don't have enough RAM to split between the two processors.



I know for a fact that this is not the same for Unix. Anything on Irix or Mac OS will deliver the equally across the processors. 2 processors = 2X the performance as one processor. Not so as my experience on XP.

That isn't true at all. It depends on how the app is programmed. LW on the Mac doesn't see any more performance increase than LW on XP. I have tested this myself, and similar results can be found at Chris Blanos's benchmark page. You don't get a 2x performance increase with two processors on OSX.



The best performance should be found on the g5 or the code needs to be changed by lightwave. Is there any plans for increased performance on the Mac for Lightwave 8?

Why should the best performance be found on the G5? The best performance would be found on the fastest computer, regardless of platform.

mickeycoke
08-21-2003, 08:58 AM
Thanks for all your posts!

dwburman
08-21-2003, 01:54 PM
Is there a difference between XP Home and XP Pro as far as multiprocessor support?

You need to set "Multithreading" to something more than 1 in the render panel in order to make use of the second CPU. (as far as I know)

I think LW should be as optimized as possible for whatever CPU it's running on. SSE2 for P4 and Opturons and Velocity Engine for G4 and G5.

I for one would like to see G5 performance compared to an Opteron system. Actually, It'll be nice to see real world performance of the G5.