Tue, Dec 24, 12:11 PM CST

Renderosity Forums / Poser - OFFICIAL



Welcome to the Poser - OFFICIAL Forum

Forum Coordinators: RedPhantom

Poser - OFFICIAL F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2024 Dec 23 7:38 pm)



Subject: 400 mhz fsb VS 533 mhz fsb = big difference in Poser 5?????


SimonWM ( ) posted Tue, 27 August 2002 at 12:31 PM · edited Tue, 24 December 2024 at 12:02 PM

I'm looking at buying a new system for Poser 5, I would like to know what things I should consider when buying one?


JOE LE GECKO ( ) posted Tue, 27 August 2002 at 12:50 PM

400 mhz, 533 mhz FSB ??! :)


SimonWM ( ) posted Tue, 27 August 2002 at 12:58 PM

400 mhz front side bus 500 mhz front side bus


mheldt ( ) posted Tue, 27 August 2002 at 1:19 PM

frontside bus is the speed that the computer accesses the memory. If the processor needs something not in the cache, then all the extra cycles within the CPU are worthless until the external clock beats again. Doubling the speed of the fsb has more weight than doubling the CPU speed.


Turtle ( ) posted Tue, 27 August 2002 at 1:41 PM

Talk to Dwayne at Tri Stars. My new computer kicks butt. I use it only as a work station. It is not connect to the internet.

Love is Grandchildren.


SimonWM ( ) posted Tue, 27 August 2002 at 2:52 PM

As far as accelerating the Poser document window or viewport, since Poser can't use 3D acceleration will it make a big diference a computer with 400 mhz front side bus VS one with 533 mhz front side bus?


ryamka ( ) posted Tue, 27 August 2002 at 3:52 PM

Increased memory bandwidth ALWAYS helps out, especially when moving large memory items around - such as high quality textures, etc. There would be noticable increases in speed for certain usages, but the actual rendering would not show a noticeable increase in rendering time. Getting the information to the CPU for processing, YES, the speed will be noticable, but the ACTAUL RENDERING will not be increased. - Ray


mheldt ( ) posted Tue, 27 August 2002 at 8:08 PM

I noticed an extreme difference going from 133 to 533. Could not compare to a jump from 400 to 533. But, before I was going 16 internal clock cycles for each external cycle. I doubt that more than 50% of my clock cycles were being used. Using Poser 4, I've noticed that a render of 19 objects 7 of which were hi-rez textured Vicky 2's each with hair took just a few minutes. Wouldn't have tried that before. Extraneous factors that were involved: Doubled the system RAM to 1GB. Greatly reduced the swap time. While swapping the computer is over 1000 times slower than accessing RAM. I believe that increasing the RAM was more important than the FSB. But if you have the chance, go to 533. It will probably be considered lame in two years but 400 will be an absolute dinosaur.


herr67 ( ) posted Tue, 27 August 2002 at 11:17 PM

Doubled the system RAM to 1GB. Greatly reduced the swap time. >While swapping the computer is over 1000 times slower than >accessing RAM I totaly agree, go with more memory. By the way you NEVER want to swap memory, besides slowing down it also makes your system unstable, many crashes can be solved by adding more memory.


mheldt ( ) posted Wed, 28 August 2002 at 12:25 AM

I only stopped at 1 gig because I read that poser 4 can't handle more. I am ready for more once my copy of P5 arrives.


FishNose ( ) posted Wed, 28 August 2002 at 3:15 AM

Poser has no idea how much memory it has access to - such things are controlled by Windows. When Poser runs out of memory, Windows automatically kicks in with swap - which is catastrophic in terms of performance. Coffee break. 400 vs 533 - in light of the fact that Poser5 tragically doesn't have 3D graphics support, just like P4, (not even general OpenGL), such things as RAM size & type, processor speed and FSB speed are completely decisive - Get the fastest you can, the most you can. And use Windows XP or W2K, nothing else. This applies to real time speed in preview and also for render times, both


EricofSD ( ) posted Wed, 28 August 2002 at 11:04 PM

Overall computer speed is a funny thing. An ATA33 hard drive in a screaming system will bottle neck it to death on functions that require the HD to respond, just as an example. The newest and fastest is usually that, the newest and fastest, but its also costly. I use a formula that looks at a point of diminishing returns because cost is important to me. If x dollars gets me a fast system, but x times 10 shaves of a half nanosecond, I'm not going to buy the honcho deal. Here's some examples... AMD has the 2.6 gig chip out. Its several hundred dollars, but a 2.2 is only about $150. is the double price worth 400mhz? HELL NO! Not for me. I have a 266 fsb. 400 is an improvement, but that means repurchasing ram. What is the cost difference between 533fsb/pc3600 ram (or whatever the chip is) compared to 400fsb/pcxxxx ram? If its significant, then its not getting my bucks. Also, I buy only when needed. Do I need the new chip today or can I wait a few months? I looked at the 2.2 chips when they came out for $400 a pop, that was only a few months ago. I did ok wihtout it. Now that its cheaper, I just might get it. So, point of diminishing returns / buy only when needed are two rules that will keep you happy cuz you'll have money left over to buy more toys.


Privacy Notice

This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.