The open rendering performance test technique in 3ds
max can be considered the introductory word for this review. That
is why we will only explain the testbed configuration.
Testbeds
-
CPUs:
-
AMD Athlon 64 FX-51
-
AMD Athlon 64 3400+
-
AMD Athlon XP 3200+
-
Intel Pentium 4 3.4 GHz (Northwood)
-
Intel Pentium 4 3.2 GHz eXtreme Edition
-
Intel Pentium 4 3.2E GHz (Prescott)
-
Mainboards:
-
RAM:
-
2x512 MB PC3200 DDR SDRAM DIMM TwinMOS (timings: 2-2-2-5)
-
2x512 MB PC3200 Registered DDR SDRAM DIMM Corsair (timings: 2-2-2-5)
-
Graphics card: Manli ATI Radeon 9800Pro 256 MB
-
Hard drive: Western Digital WD360 (SATA), 10,000 rpm
This review is divided into three parts because of a great number of tests
and diagrams. The first part will demonstrate the rendering rate in Brazil
r/s and with 3ds max 5 renderer (Scanline), the second part will cover
the subtests for Final Render Stage-1 SP2 and draw a conclusion about the
single-processor systems, and the third one will be devoted to multi-processor
configurations and the effect from the Hyper-Threading technology.
Benchmarking
Tests in Brazil r/s
Brazil_Caustic
Here are three pure groups: the first one is the leading Pentium 4 3.2
eXtreme Edition, the second one consists of two other Pentium 4 CPUs (their
performance can be considered equal). AMD's solutions go last. Pentium
4 3.2E comes very close to Pentium 4 3.4 in spite of its lower clock speeds
either because the further clock growth in Northwood makes no effect, or
the Prescott core is "closer" to SplutterFish renderer in operation with
this function, or it's caused by the cache size. The last option is also
proved by the breakaway of Pentium 4 eXtreme Edition.
Brazil_DOF
The same three groups, though some CPUs gradually moved from one group
to another. Thus, Pentium 4 eXtreme Edition now goes along with Pentium
4 3.2E (Prescott), and the Northwood of the highest clock rate takes the
leading position in AMD's group! Athlon XP 3200+ loses to everyone. The
assumption about the effect from the L2 cache size is not topical anymore
as Northwood has the smallest one among all Athlon 64 CPUs.
Brazil_GI
Pentium 4 3.2E becomes a leader though it can't boast either of its
clock speed (Pentium 4 3.4 Northwood has a 200MHz higher one) or of its
cache (Pentium 4 eXtreme Edition has the largest one - 2 MB L2). It must
have a certain architectural advantage but the gap is too narrow to make
any conclusions.
Brazil_Final
The picture is similar to Brazil_DOF, but this is just a coincidence
as this effect is not used in the final scene. However it can be, the Pentium
4 platform remains a leader. But we can't single out a leader within this
platform. The dated 32bit AMD platform is a loser. AMD64 CPUs look better,
though there's hardly any difference between Athlon 64 FX-51 and Athlon
64 3400+.
Brazil_Preview
This "fast" scene hasn't changed the layout, only Athlon XP performs
even worse. However, there's a leader within the Intel NetBurst platform
- it's Pentium 4 eXtreme Edition.
Tests in Scanline
Scanline_Light_Tracer
This test demonstrates a well-made optimization. It doesn't make sense
to discuss whether the optimization for AMD is poor or the guys at Discreet
developed a perfect code for Pentium 4 (there's actually no difference).
The results of Pentium 4 3.2E (Prescott) point to the optimization: as
they worked very hard on it, the new architecture now doesn't match
the code well adjusted for Northwood. Northwood and Gallatin (alias Xeon,
alias Pentium 4 eXtreme Edition) differ only in the big L3 cache. That
is why their scores must be similar if it's only the core architecture
that makes an effect. And we do witness it.
Scanline_Radiosity
The AMD64 platform improves its scores, Pentium 4 eXtreme Edition goes
far ahead... but on the whole, the picture remains the same.
Scanline_Volume_Light
Northwood (Pentium 4 3.4) sweeps the floor again. The eXtreme Edition
loses because of its lower clock speeds. Prescott (Pentium 4 3.2E) loses
even more because of peculiarities of the architectural optimizations of
the software/CPU tandem because the 200MHz gap can't result in such performance
gap. The AMD64 platforms looks pretty pale though it runs faster than Athlon
XP.
Scanline_Final
If the Scanline rendering speed is what we are interested in the main
competitors are Pentium 4 3.4 Northwood and Pentium 4 3.2 eXtreme Edition.
Pentium 4 3.2E Prescott takes the third place in the Scanline group. You
can decide yourselves how to consider it - as one of the processors
of the leading platform or the worst processor among Pentium 4 models.
Athlon 64 (both versions) is not the best choice.
Scanline_Preview
This subtest doesn't change the layout.
Intermediate summary
The CPUs do change their places depending on the scene type, that is why our
work wasn't useless. At the moment (note that the Final Render results
will be published in the next article) the Pentium 4 platform leads,
with the eXtreme Edition looking really good. Although this solution
seemed to throw dust in eyes, we are glad it scores such excellent
results. The AMD64 doesn't look impressive, but we haven't tested
it in Final Render Stage-1 yet. Also remember that we use only one
application, and the scores obtained must be mostly interested to
those who use it in their real work.
Write a comment below. No registration needed!
