| POVRay - Come to Fish Together | page 1 2 3 4 5
|
|---|
|
|---|
| | 
Renaud Schweingruber
(Apollo Team Member)
Posts 381
23 Jun 2018 17:18
| 
Vampire FPGA 80k LE with big fat cache, x13 speed
Ran with those parameters :
povray31fpu +A +W720 +H486 +Ipovray31:scenes/advanced/fish13/fish13.pov +Lpovray31:scenes/advanced/fish13 +Oram:test.tga
Anyone can run it with other Moto's CPUs ?
| |
| | 
Gunnar von Boehn
(Apollo Team Member)
Posts 6263
24 Jun 2018 18:42
| Tuko very nice result!
I took the freedom to remove your emulation score and would propose that we focus on comparing real 68K CPUs.
| |
| | 
Anderson Santos
Posts 1
26 Jun 2018 15:41
|
Results for Blizzard 1260 50MHz, using a povray31 060 version :
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pixels: 350640 Samples: 841040 Smpls/Pxl: 2.40
Rays: 1906080 Saved: 4 Max Level: 5/5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ray->Shape Intersection Tests Succeeded Percentage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Box 3858829 2021269 52.38
Cone/Cylinder 146871 19321 13.16
CSG Intersection 2641040 363189 13.75
CSG Union 1301867 274165 21.06
Plane 2056369 1286824 62.58
Quadric 3834218 1046256 27.29
Sphere 35901752 8462559 23.57
Clipping Object 229128 217392 94.88
Bounding Box 34884678 19654541 56.34
Light Buffer 54814093 31929341 58.25
Vista Buffer 15593114 11463479 73.52
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calls to Noise: 799182 Calls to DNoise: 2735506
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shadow Ray Tests: 6262714 Succeeded: 963540
Reflected Rays: 1049312 Total Internal: 66
Refracted Rays: 15557
Transmitted Rays: 171
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time For Parse: 0 hours 0 minutes 3.0 seconds (3 seconds)
Time For Trace: 1 hours 18 minutes 6.0 seconds (4686 seconds)
Total Time: 1 hours 18 minutes 9.0 seconds (4689 seconds)
| |
| | 
Andy Hearn
Posts 374
26 Jun 2018 17:00
| nice one.
I doubt there'd be much in it difference in time wise if I did a run with my machine, but the more I think about it, the more I want to - just to see ;)
If I get a free bit of evening time, i'll see if I can do.
| |
| | 
Mallagan Bellator
Posts 393
26 Jun 2018 17:14
| I might do this one too
| |
| |
Andy Hearn
Posts 374
27 Jun 2018 09:17
| Results for A3k+CyberstormMk3 060@50MHz, using the fpu version of Povray off Coffin R51 with the same command line
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pixels: 350640 Samples: 841040 Smpls/Pxl: 2.40
Rays: 1906080 Saved: 4 Max Level: 5/5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ray->Shape Intersection Tests Succeeded Percentage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Box 3858829 2021269 52.38
Cone/Cylinder 146871 19321 13.16
CSG Intersection 2641040 363189 13.75
CSG Union 1301867 274165 21.06
Plane 2056369 1286824 62.58
Quadric 3834218 1046256 27.29
Sphere 35901752 8461842 23.57
Clipping Object 229128 217392 94.88
Bounding Box 34988796 19656929 56.18
Light Buffer 55348401 31877029 57.59
Vista Buffer 15621145 11460670 73.37
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calls to Noise: 799182 Calls to DNoise: 2735506
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shadow Ray Tests: 6262714 Succeeded: 963540
Reflected Rays: 1049312 Total Internal: 66
Refracted Rays: 15557
Transmitted Rays: 171
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time For Parse: 0 hours 0 minutes 3.0 seconds (3 seconds)
Time For Trace: 1 hours 8 minutes 30.0 seconds (4110 seconds)
Total Time: 1 hours 8 minutes 33.0 seconds (4113 seconds)
for a bit there, I really thought I was going to crack the hour at up to about two thirds to three quarters done - I guess those water calcs really take it up a notch. puzzeled over the diff with the blizz card though.
| |
| | 
Vojin Vidanovic
(Needs Verification)
Posts 1916/ 1
27 Jun 2018 10:05
| Renaud Schweingruber wrote:
|
Vampire FPGA 80k LE with big fat cache, x13 speed
|
Is this v4 test case? Its nice to see 90Mhz 080 has 2-3x diff to 060 50Mhz CPUs ...
| |
| | 
Gregthe Canuck
Posts 274
27 Jun 2018 10:39
| It has to be V4. There aren't 80K LE on the V2. :)
| |
| | 
Stefano Briccolani
Posts 586
27 Jun 2018 12:31
| But some versions of cyclone3 have more logic elements than the cyclones put in v2. So it isn't clear if this is the performance of v4 or something else..
| |
| |
Andy Hearn
Posts 374
27 Jun 2018 14:09
| hmmm. so an 080@92Mhz takes 32 minutes, an 060@50Mhz take 68 minutes. not quite twice as fast (clock speed) for just under half as long (time).
so looking at these basic numbers there seems to be a slight advantage for the vampire on calcs per cycle - maybe 10% or so, the main advantage the vampire has is the cycle execution clock speed.
I recon an 060 running at 100Mhz with some really fast ram would bring the fight back to "real hardware". but lets face it, how long are you going to want to run your machine at that level with potential associated power supply/cooling/"20+yr old hardware" issues. and even then probably not beat an FPGA. and that's with non-AMMX optimized code.
will see if can nail together an 040 machine tonight and run another povray bench
| |
| | 
Saladriel Amrael
Posts 166
27 Jun 2018 16:20
| Andy Hearn wrote:
|
[...]
I recon an 060 running at 100Mhz with some really fast ram would bring the fight back to "real hardware". but lets face it, how long are you going to want to run your machine at that level with potential associated power supply/cooling/"20+yr old hardware" issues. and even then probably not beat an FPGA. and that's with non-AMMX optimized code.
will see if can nail together an 040 machine tonight and run another povray bench
|
Exactly, listening to Gunnar's words, a version specifically optimized for 080FPU would be much faster even without using AMMX
| |
| |
Andy Hearn
Posts 374
28 Jun 2018 21:28
| Results for A3k+A3640 040@25MHz, again using the fpu version of Povray off Coffin R51 with the same command line
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Edit - snipped as all the same as before)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time For Parse: 0 hours 0 minutes 18.0 seconds (18 seconds)
Time For Trace: 4 hours 52 minutes 57.0 seconds (17577 seconds)
Total Time: 4 hours 53 minutes 15.0 seconds (17595 seconds)
over 4 times slower than an 060? wth? i'm re-running this (overnight) on the on board 030+882@25 to see. I guess an 040 really wants some local ram
| |
| |
Saladriel Amrael
Posts 166
29 Jun 2018 13:52
| AFAIK 060 FPU is per clock faster than 040, that does not surprise me
| |
| |
Andy Hearn
Posts 374
29 Jun 2018 21:07
| Results for A3000 stock 030+882@25MHz, fpu Povray Coffin R51 same args
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Edit - snipped as blah blah blah)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time For Parse: 0 hours 0 minutes 19.0 seconds (19 seconds)
Time For Trace: 10 hours 34 minutes 2.0 seconds (38042 seconds)
Total Time: 10 hours 34 minutes 21.0 seconds (38061 seconds)
yeah ok, so that was the 040 not the 030 then. 030's still not too shabby at only double the time at the same clock.
| |
| |
Andy Hearn
Posts 374
03 Jul 2018 09:57
| Results for A1200 Blizz040@40 running the 3.9 install taken from my A3k060 before I put a new R51 imaged CF card in the A3k, Povray copied off the r51 setup to the OS3.9 CF card
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time For Parse: 0 hours 0 minutes 11.0 seconds (11 seconds)
Time For Trace: 5 hours 28 minutes 33.0 seconds (19713 seconds)
Total Time: 5 hours 28 minutes 44.0 seconds (19724 seconds)
ok, clearly something wrong there. I think I screwed up. wrong FPU libraries or something... might explain the A3640 results as well
| |
| |
Saladriel Amrael
Posts 166
03 Jul 2018 13:28
| Surely a 040@40 slower than a 040@25 is strange.
Are you sure the A3640 is 25Mhz and not 50Mhz? Your result seems to be in line with a 50Mhz 040, looking at all the others
| |
| |
Andy Hearn
Posts 374
03 Jul 2018 13:37
| absolutely :D
that's why I think the installation for the A1200 has some 060 librarys or something that is causing problems.First i'm going to make a fresh build OS3.9 install. no 060 librarys. and see what that does. then maybe i'll try to duplicate the Coffin R51 system drive on the A3000 onto a compact flash for the A1200. I tried to do directly plug in the R51 Compact flash the A3000 runs from into the A1200, but it just kept stalling with a software failure at setpatch. hence trying anything else that would boot. mainly because i'm lazy, but also I wanted to replicate the same software environments to generate good bench marks. I also need to get my PPC card to boot as that has a 25Mhz 040 on it. I got the insert floppy screen, but nothing much beyond that last night.
| |
| |
Andy Hearn
Posts 374
04 Jul 2018 11:08
| A1200 rev1d4, 3.1roms Blizzard1240 @40Mhz, 128meg single 72pin stick.
built a fresh OS3.1 install on a 4gig CF card, upgraded to 3.9. no additional boingbags. copied Povray directory from the coffin OS povray straight to the fresh CF card, and ran the bench.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time For Parse: 0 hours 0 minutes 8.0 seconds (8 seconds)
Time For Trace: 5 hours 28 minutes 32.0 seconds (19712 seconds)
Total Time: 5 hours 28 minutes 40.0 seconds (19720 seconds)
3 seconds faster for the Parse, which made sense, but 1 second faster for trace? that's within an margin of error - so at least the hardware is consistent with the two software environments/librarys etc.
What i'm having trouble with, is I don't believe that a blizzard1240@40 is half an hour slower than an A3640@25. i'm going to have to pull my A3k apart again if I can't get the PPC to run a bench @25... #HeadInHands
| |
| |
Gunnar von Boehn
(Apollo Team Member)
Posts 6263
03 Aug 2018 18:56
| APOLLO CORE got faster. The new GOLD 2.11 release candidate fishes much faster 
| |
| | 
Andrew Miller
Posts 352
03 Aug 2018 22:35
| An around 20%+ increase in speed, nice :)
| |
|
Performance and Benchmark Results!