| Author |
Message |
|
Geti
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 9:57 am
Posts: 4886
Location: some compy
|
 Re: Performance Survey Need new ones using the tester grif made, duh.
|
| Thu Apr 01, 2010 2:44 am |
 
|
|
|
Duh102
happy carebear mom
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 1:40 am
Posts: 7096
Location: b8bbd5
|
Re: Performance Survey Oh, he added ppm and all that. Redone.
|
| Thu Apr 01, 2010 2:55 am |
|
|
|
whitty
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 2:31 am
Posts: 2982
Location: Texas
|
Re: Performance Survey Code: CC PERFORMANCE TESTER V0.2
COPYRIGHT 2010 GRIFFITH INDUSTRIES
OS: Windows 7 64-bit
PROCESSOR: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9400 2.66Ghz (OC@3.00Ghz), *4
RAM: 6 GB
RESX: 640
RESY: 480
PPM: 20
POSTPROCESSING: true
MOD COUNT: 54
TIMESCALE: 1
DELTATIME: 0.016666699200869
TEST RESULT 1 : 17.58
TEST RESULT 2 : 35.92
TEST RESULT 3 : 63.08
|
| Thu Apr 01, 2010 3:45 am |
|
|
|
Geti
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 9:57 am
Posts: 4886
Location: some compy
|
Re: Performance Survey HOLY HELL. So, uh, I decided to boot up CC on my new linux laptop, running it through wine. Not too bad. Doesn't like large scenes. Anyway, ran tester, got results Code: CC PERFORMANCE TESTER V0.2
COPYRIGHT 2010 GRIFFITH INDUSTRIES
OS: Arch Linux (Emulated WinXP/98 w/ wine)
PROCESSOR: Pentium M 1.86 GHz
RAM: 1.5GB
RESX: 640
RESY: 480
PPM: 20
POSTPROCESSING: true
MOD COUNT: 11
TIMESCALE: 1
DELTATIME: 0.016666699200869
TEST RESULT 1 : 27.37
TEST RESULT 2 : 55.67
TEST RESULT 3 : 129.35 Not actually too shabby, probably because of no system bloat (but I've heard wine performance sucks, so I don't know If i should count them or not  do you think i should or not?), but seriously, it's a freaking Pentium M. Anyway, my processor temp hit 65-70 while doing this, and sat at 100%. Oddly enough, it wasn't all CC's doing. X was taking 30-50% of the CPU, CC was taking the rest. Any guesses as to why? I am confuse. Still have to do this on my actual box. Also still need results, come on people.
|
| Tue Apr 06, 2010 1:31 pm |
|
|
|
WonderCody
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 4:09 am
Posts: 6
|
Re: Performance Survey Code: CC PERFORMANCE TESTER V0.2
COPYRIGHT 2010 GRIFFITH INDUSTRIES
OS: Windows Vista 64-bit
PROCESSOR: Core 2 Duo E8500 3.16GHz *2
RAM: 4.0GB
RESX: 640
RESY: 480
PPM: 20
POSTPROCESSING: true
MOD COUNT: 11
TIMESCALE: 1
DELTATIME: 0.016666699200869
TEST RESULT 1 : 17.53
TEST RESULT 2 : 35.34
TEST RESULT 3 : 62.37
|
| Fri Apr 09, 2010 6:34 am |
|
|
|
Geti
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 9:57 am
Posts: 4886
Location: some compy
|
Re: Performance Survey latest graph  From this we can see that the sempron is a bad idea for playing serious CC, that any of the core series processors will generally hold their own (the newer iX models being better by a hair, but if you have the time (like witty) to overclock your quad core and get 6 gigs of ram you'll get comparable performance ) and that having more cores (2 vs 1) is definitely better, though the actual core clock doesnt do very much once you've got more cores until you get to the high strain areas. Need more AMD results in general, and OSX and Vista (hahah good joke) results overall. might do an OS inspecific graph later. Oh yeah, Having more ram helps, but not much once you get past 2 gig apparently. tl;dr don't get old AMD processors for CC, newer ones are fine apparently. tell me if i missed anyone. edit: whoops forgot spreadsheet
Attachments:
File comment: here you go
CCdata.xls [12 KiB]
Downloaded 238 times
|
| Fri Apr 09, 2010 7:50 am |
|
|
|
LowestFormOfWit
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 2:04 am
Posts: 1559
|
Re: Performance Survey Code: CC PERFORMANCE TESTER V0.2
COPYRIGHT 2010 GRIFFITH INDUSTRIES
OS: Windows XP Home (SP3)
PROCESSOR: AMD Athlon 64 Processor 3500+ 2.21 Ghz
RAM: 1.5 GB
RESX: 640
RESY: 480
PPM: 20
POSTPROCESSING: true
MOD COUNT: 11
TIMESCALE: 1
DELTATIME: 0.016666699200869
TEST RESULT 1 : 21.68
TEST RESULT 2 : 39.72
TEST RESULT 3 : 111.76 I'm happy with how CC performs on my 7-ish year old box.
|
| Fri Apr 09, 2010 8:28 am |
|
|
|
keptin
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 2:55 am
Posts: 5
|
Re: Performance Survey Code: CC PERFORMANCE TESTER V0.2
COPYRIGHT 2010 GRIFFITH INDUSTRIES
OS: Windows 7
PROCESSOR: 2x Intel Xeon E5520 @ 2.5Ghz, *8
RAM: 12 GB
RESX: 640
RESY: 480
PPM: 20
POSTPROCESSING: true
MOD COUNT: 39
TIMESCALE: 1
DELTATIME: 0.016666699200869
TEST RESULT 1 : 17.13
TEST RESULT 2 : 34.37
TEST RESULT 3 : 63.67 Running on a workstation. Judging by the results of others, CC isn't scaling spectacularly across 16 threads. Pity.
|
| Sun Apr 11, 2010 3:15 am |
|
|
|
TorrentHKU
Loose Canon
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 11:07 pm
Posts: 2992
Location: --------------->
|
Re: Performance Survey Code: CC PERFORMANCE TESTER V0.2
COPYRIGHT 2010 GRIFFITH INDUSTRIES
OS: Windows Vista Ultimate
PROCESSOR: Intel Core2 Quad Q6600 2.40 Ghz
RAM: 4.00 GB
RESX: 640
RESY: 480
PPM: 20
POSTPROCESSING: true
MOD COUNT: 11
TIMESCALE: 1
DELTATIME: 0.016666699200869
TEST RESULT 1 : 17.35
TEST RESULT 2 : 36.04
TEST RESULT 3 : 70.53 Am I the first Vista user to do this?
|
| Sun Apr 25, 2010 6:55 pm |
|
|
|
Petethegoat
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 4:02 pm
Posts: 905
|
Re: Performance Survey Code: CC PERFORMANCE TESTER V0.2
COPYRIGHT 2010 GRIFFITH INDUSTRIES
OS: Windows XP Professional (SP3)
PROCESSOR: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 3.00 Ghz
RAM: 3 GB
RESX: 640
RESY: 480
PPM: 20
POSTPROCESSING: true
MOD COUNT: 12
TIMESCALE: 1
DELTATIME: 0.016666699200869
TEST RESULT 1 : 17.37
TEST RESULT 2 : 36.55
TEST RESULT 3 : 67.08
|
| Sun Apr 25, 2010 7:56 pm |
|
|
|
FoiL
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 4:02 pm
Posts: 1434
|
Re: Performance Survey Code: CC PERFORMANCE TESTER V0.2
COPYRIGHT 2010 GRIFFITH INDUSTRIES
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate 32bits
PROCESSOR: Core2Duo P8400 @ 2.27Ghz
RAM: 3Gb
RESX: 640
RESY: 480
PPM: 20
POSTPROCESSING: true
MOD COUNT: 11
TIMESCALE: 1
DELTATIME: 0.016666699200869
TEST RESULT 1 : 17.39
TEST RESULT 2 : 34.38
TEST RESULT 3 : 69.41 My little 2 year old lappy is par with quads. Cool.
|
| Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:50 pm |
|
|
|
Wollnashorn
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 11:25 pm
Posts: 1
|
Re: Performance Survey Code: CC PERFORMANCE TESTER V0.2
COPYRIGHT 2010 GRIFFITH INDUSTRIES
OS: Microsoft Windows 7 64bit
PROCESSOR: AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition, 3,41GHz * 4
RAM: 4GB
RESX: 640
RESY: 480
PPM: 20
POSTPROCESSING: true
MOD COUNT: 11
TIMESCALE: 1
DELTATIME: 0.016666699200869
TEST RESULT 1 : 17.33
TEST RESULT 2 : 34.91
TEST RESULT 3 : 58.64
|
| Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:34 pm |
|
|
|
Geti
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 9:57 am
Posts: 4886
Location: some compy
|
Re: Performance Survey Graphs are getting a bit unreadable.  Still not enough info for a vista graph...
Attachments:
File comment: Newest updated set
CCdata.xls [14 KiB]
Downloaded 213 times
|
| Mon Apr 26, 2010 11:56 am |
|
|
|
unwoundpath
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 7:19 am
Posts: 1279
Location: Places. And things.
|
Re: Performance Survey - WE NEED VISTA AND OLDER CPU RESULTS i have vista, i'll test it after im back from school.
|
| Mon Apr 26, 2010 12:10 pm |
|
|
|
TorrentHKU
Loose Canon
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 11:07 pm
Posts: 2992
Location: --------------->
|
Re: Performance Survey - WE NEED VISTA AND OLDER CPU RESULTS Lower numbers are better, right?
|
| Mon Apr 26, 2010 5:08 pm |
|
|
|
