to buy Vue 5. But before I do, I would like to hear from any of you who are running it on a machine with specs similar to the following: 1.7ghz P-IV, 1 Gig Ram, Windows XP Pro, Nvidia GEForce 2 MX 200. I've had this computer for awhile. It runs Vue 4 and Bryce 5 great and Poser 5 as well as anything can run Poser 5 :) But there is very little upgrading that I can do any more. The next upgrade will be a new computer. Which brings me to another question: I'm told Poser 5 has difficulty running on the new multi-processor computers. How is Vue 5 where that's concerned? P.S. I know I could try the demo, but don't want to go through the hassle of downloading, installing, etc., if the software is likely to perform a lot more slowly than Vue 4 does.

Message edited on: 11/07/2004 21:06

I am not sure to understand the question. If you ask an advice about Vue 5 on a single-processor system that has similar specs to those you described, I can tell you that it runs smoothly with regards to OpenGL and it renders faster than 4 provided that you compare modes that are similar, for instance, a GI render runs faster, for me, (not to mention much better) than the tipical Ultra mode of Vue 4. So the quality renders are faster and better. The final mode of Vue 5 is comparable in render time to that of Vue 4 (some say slightly slower, not for me though), but the quality of Final mode in Vue 5 appear to be better (to me) than that of Vue 4 final. If you instead are asking how Vue 5 works with a double-processor computer, I can not answer.

that system will do just fine, atleast as smooth as vue4 is doing for you but with in my eyes a faster render as long as you are using comparable settings like orio said.

The only possibel issue you =may= have is the Geforce 2 MX; I don't know if they implemented the correct OpenGL standards fully in that card. If they did, you're set (and Vue 5 has a better implementation anyway, so this may be moot). P5's issues haven't been with dual processors as much as it has been with hyperthreading....and the fact that the P4 has an ungodly long processor pipeline.

Is an Athlon better in this regard?

Message edited on: 11/08/2004 13:18

Well, having become an Athlon 64 "convert" about 5 months ago- I'd certainly have to say YES! A week or so ago this question came up and nearly everyone said "GO ATHLON 64" if you are buying a new computer. They are roaring-fast with Vue renders using a good ATI Radeon or nVidia Geforce graphics card. My "64" has the 256MB Geforce and it is FAST! Also keep in mind- Windows 64 Bit OS will be showing up SOON,- maybe even around the time Vue 5 Pro ships- and having a 64 Bit processor will REALLY make Vue RIP through those renders...

Thanks for the feedback :) I may buy myself Vue 5 for Christmas afterall and give it a try. Apparently some of you have similar specs to mine and find that it works as well as Vue 4. Veritas77: Thanks for that tip as well. I've toyed with the idea of going Athlon for some time. There's a business in Mankato that custom makes computers to your needs(which is the only way to go)and specializes in the Athlon. A 256 MB Geforce is hard to even imagine :) We'll have to see how the pocket book holds up before going the new computer route.

yep amd64 is the way to go for the moment and throughout 2005 when buying a brand new computer. better performance for the same amount or less then a new p4 based computer would go for + a better upgrade path due to amd64 being able to use both 32 and 64 bit software, not to mention that vue performs better with a amd64 cpu then the p4. and once the dual core versions are out im expecting amd64 to perform even better compared to intel, but well know more about that next year :)

My computers have all been purchased from another firm who also special builds, but focuses primarily on business computers. I think the PIV is still the most popular with businesses. I know the AMD is cheaper, but out performs the P-IV in a number of benchmarks. What's a "dual core"?

sandoppe; Just what it says. Chips are bumping up against things like thermal limits, so new ways to speed things have to be found. What AMD did when it designed the Athlon 64, is design it with the foundation that would allow a second core chip to be placed on a single socket substrate. Sometime next year, they will be releasing the dual core Athlon 64; unlike the P4's hyperthreading, which is a hardware trick to use parts of the processor that aren't being used in parallel with the main pipe, the Athlon 642 will be almost a genuine 2 processor on one socket solution. I say almost, as a genuine dual processor motherboard has memory sockets that are dedicated to each processor. The new A-64's will only have the one memory bank, and the dual core will share that. Otherwise, they each can do their own thing, each has its own L1 and L2 cache, the crossbar controller is already a part of the Athlon 64Opteron chips, and the cores will talk to each other over hypertransport links, which have a gigabit speed capability. The really neat thing is that you don't have to fork out for a special motherboard. Just get one with socket 939, and a lot of memory slots. That way you can use the current Athlon 64s or Athlon FX's, and pick up a dual core chip later. According to AMD, all it will take is a BIOS flash to enable the dual detection. Win2k Pro should work like blazes with this, and XP has no excuse not to. And as XP-64 is going to be the pro version, it will see the dual cores as well. And yes, I've found the Athlon to be much better behaved...particularly for the money. And I wouldn't trade my nice little Athlon 64-3000 for anything...except a -faster- one. I'm such a toy slut.... :D On a related note, I got an e-mail from e-on tech support today. They've identified an issue in the 5.02 beta that prevents the RenderCow from being upgraded. Once that is fixed, we -should- have distributed rendering again.

Thanks Dale :) I'm not sure I totally understand all of this, but I've copied and pasted it to notepad so that if I do decide to get a new computer this year, I can act like I know what I'm talking about.....an Athlon 64 with a motherboard that has socket 939 so I can add the dual core chip later, and plenty of memory expansion capability :) I think :) What size power supply and what kind of fans should I be sure is in this thing? Thanks for patiently answering all my "dummy questions" by the way :)

No prob; every geek has had to start somewhere, y'know. And that is pretty much it. I would guesstimate that a 500 watt power supply would not be overkill. You won't need that immediately, but it will give you the extra power needed if your video card is one of the new ones that =has= to have a power connection other than the motherboard. Also, having a large supply like that will ensure that you can add things like extra hard drives an not have to worry about the system getting flakey due to momentary drops in current levels.

When I got my current machine, I had them add "real fans" (vs the little plastic ones that go south about once a year) and the largest and best power supply they had.....450 watt I think?? Anyway....I've never had a days worth of problems with this computer and the same fans have been running for close to three years. Spending a little more on the front end, saves a crapload of problems on the back end. Thanks again for your and everyone's help :)

i second that, the more juice in your power suply the better. im also one of those that would recomend you to get a sli capable motherboard when you you buy a new amd64 computer. Sure it does cost alittle more, but the difference wont be that big, and it will allow you to add a second graphics card when you feel you need more power and get 30 to 80% more performance out of your computer depending on the task. Some claim its to pricy, but i dont see it like that, buying one graphics card "now" and one more card of the same model in lets say 12 month will for sure not cost you that much, it would for sure be alot cheaper then buying a new high end graphics card after 12 month, and give you a real good performance increase, so in my mind that investment will save you money in due time and hey, im sure now that weve transitioned to pci.x that sli will stick around, so once you run out of power in your 2 sli cards, get a new pair :) and yeah sandope p4 is still the biggest cpu brand out there but that is today thanks to oem firms like dell. If we look @ enthusiast like me and dale amd is actually outselling intel now, but of course most ppl buys their computers through firms like dell, just pointing out that the ppl that builds their own computers or just goes for performance and not premade rigs from dell do favour amd64, and for a good reason, atleast for 2004 and 2005.

And probably into 2006; Chipzilla still hasn't fielded a working, fully operative 64 bit chip, even on paper, for X86 code. The Nocona CPU they've been babbling about is a pseudo 64 bit puppy (it only has a 40 bit bus). And right now, Dell is the only system builder that is still Intel exclusive. IBM, Gateway, HP-Compaq, all have gotten the hint in one way or another. If it wasn't for it's -past- reputation, Dell would be either going or gone, because they are nowhere near their past levels of quality and service. If you want an SLI capable card, go for it, but there really isn't anything on paper that could require it (SLI is scanline interleaving; Nvidia bought out the IP of 3DFX. Remember the good old Voodoo 2, and its ability to have you plug in a second one, and connect them together, allowing for them to tag team in rendering frames? This is being resurrected due to the newest bus structure being fielded). SLI is a gamer's toy, not a production feature....unless someone codes a real time renderer for Vue. PCI-Express is the new bus, and it is supposed to be what PCI was when it first came out. Feed the masses, raise the dead, rape the sheep, etc. I'd do some personal research into it before even considering it at this time. The -very- few cards available have price tags that start at 'ouch!' and very quickly climb into 'OMFG!!!' territory. There's no backwards compatibility with anything, AGP isn't a part of the PCI-E specification. A few companies are working on bastard boards, with both PCI-AGP and PCI-E slots....but if you aren't building a gaming box, it isn't a feature that has enough support at the moment to bother with. That will have changed in 6-9 months (if it hasn't, then there's a problem), but right now, there are maybe 4 video cards that can be found in PCI-E format, and all of them have a steep $$$. Think about the good old ISA bus; it's only in the last year or so that motherboards with at least one card slot for it completely disappeared, a decade after being declared 'dead'. It will take years to kill off the good ol' PCI bus, and if that does the job, then that is a cost you aren't paying...

I can afford a bit more pricey, but the "ouch" and "OMFG" type pricey is out of my league most likely :) I'm not a gamer. I will run whatever flavor of Vue, Bryce 5, Poser 5, DAZ Studio and maybe Shade on this. I use this computer strictly for graphics stuff. I've never done Dell. There are a number of small businesses in this area who custom build based on your wants and needs. A lot of people buy their computers through Best Buy :) I use one of those hummers ( a compaq presario) for my job which is strictly word processing and email useage. They are pretty much useless for anything else. Even though newer and with more processing power (3 ghz), the response rate is slower than my 1.7ghz P-IV. I'm told the presario's, celerons, etc. are processing units that didn't pass the intel benchmarks to qualify for the P-IV label. Sort of like the "seconds" :)