YOUR ACCOUNT

Fernanda Pires
Fpires
Posts: 35
Filters: 17
Currently testing my PBR Scratched Metal filter:

https://filterforge.com/filters/13778.html

Default Filter settings, 1024x1024 resolution.

CPU: i5-3570k @ 3.40 Ghz
Memory: 16 GB as 2x8 GB from the same model.
OS: Windows 10 Home

FF5 version: 5.009 Professional Edition
FF6 version: 6.001

Both FF5 and FF6 are set to use all CPUs available and maximum of 90% RAM usage. Both running under similar conditions (highlighted window, nothing running on the background, etc). Both are installed in the same drive (Samsung SSD 830).

I did three test renders, these are the times:

FF6 x64 Test #1: 2 min 25s
FF6 x64 Test #2: 2 min 25s
FF6 x64 Test #3: 2 min 23s

FF5 x32 Test #1: 1 min 13s
FF5 x32 Test #2: 1 min 13s
FF5 x32 Test #3: 1 min 11s

Aside the oddity of the third test always returning 2 seconds earlier, the FF5 render is literally done in half the time as the FF6 x64. Not sure if it being almost exactly 50% is a coincidence or not.

Doing a fourth test and checking under the Task Manager, both seem to cap at 93% CPU usage and float around 80%, nothing unusual. FF6 idles at 201 RAM consumption and peaks at 244 while FF5 idles at 158 and peaks at 201 - both use the same amount of Memory (43 MB) and apparently use the same processing power, so I'm not sure what's causing the 50% difference.
  Details E-Mail
GMM
Moderator
Filter Forge, Inc
Posts: 3491
Thanks for the report. Before I assign it to our testers, could you please also compare the FF6 x32 performance? You can run the 32-bit version from the
c:\Program Files\Filter Forge 6\Bin\ folder.
  Details E-Mail
Fernanda Pires
Fpires
Posts: 35
Filters: 17
GMM sure thing, will do.

In the meanwhile, just finished tests at 2048x2048:

FF6 x64: 10 min 31s
FF5 x32: 4 min 40s (44.4%)
  Details E-Mail
Fernanda Pires
Fpires
Posts: 35
Filters: 17
Tests with FF6 x32 at 1024x1024:

FF6 x32 Test #1: 1 min 14s
FF6 x32 Test #2: 1 min 15s
FF6 x32 Test #3: 1 min 16s

A few seconds slower than FF5 but well within the margin of error compared to the x64 version. Seems like the big problem comes from the x64 client.
  Details E-Mail
Fernanda Pires
Fpires
Posts: 35
Filters: 17
Lastly, test with FF6 x32 at 2048x2048 yielded 4 min 24s which is a bit faster than FF5 x32.
  Details E-Mail
Fernanda Pires
Fpires
Posts: 35
Filters: 17
Battery of tests with the built-in Noise Distortion filter by Vladimir Golovin:

2048x2048:
FF6 x64 Test #1: 42s
FF6 x64 Test #2: 40s
FF6 x64 Test #3: 41s

FF6 x32 Test #1: 23s
FF6 x32 Test #2: 22s
FF6 x32 Test #3: 22s

FF5 x32 Test #1: 21s
FF5 x32 Test #2: 20s
FF5 x32 Test #3: 21s

Again, rendered in almost exactly half the time as FF6 x64, even though it's a completely different and much more straightforward filter.

4096x4096:

FF6 x64 Test #1: 2 min 30s

FF5 x32 Test #1: 1 min 11s

Only one test, but rendered in around 47% of the time as FF6.
  Details E-Mail
GMM
Moderator
Filter Forge, Inc
Posts: 3491
Elentor, thanks for the tests. It turns out certain x64 optimization was accidentally switched off while building the project, so it should be easy to fix. Please check the beta again later today.

You receive a bug point according to the bug hunting campaign terms.
  Details E-Mail
Fernanda Pires
Fpires
Posts: 35
Filters: 17
Thank you very much for letting me know, I'll be sure to check it out.
  Details E-Mail
CipheredDesigns
Posts: 6
Hi,


I downloaded and installed filter forge 6, 64 bit trial a few hours ago and tested some of my filters I created in filter forge 5.
Version 6 is only a bit faster than version 5 when rendering basic filters. If I try to render complex filters which took about 10 to 15 minutes to render in version 5,
in the beta 6 its almost 3 times slower.
The next thing is, ff 6 does only use about 5% of my RAM
  Details E-Mail
GMM
Moderator
Filter Forge, Inc
Posts: 3491
CipheredDesigns, what FF6 build do you use, what filters are you rendering and what memory usage limit have you set ?
  Details E-Mail
CipheredDesigns
Posts: 6
1. Build 6.001.39915.45954
2. Same results with ANY complex filter, my own and filters fr om your website as well, output resolution is 2500x3500px
3. Memory usage lim it is set to 60% but I tried out 90% as well, nothing changed.

My workstation specs are:
Dual-Xeon E5-2670
64GB DDR4-2133
NVIDIA Quadro M5000
Windows 10 pro 64bit
  Details E-Mail
SpaceRay
SpaceRay

Posts: 12298
Filters: 35
i hope and wish that this is really a very big bug, because if the 64 bit is much slower than the 32 bit, then it is not any good
  Details E-Mail
GMM
Moderator
Filter Forge, Inc
Posts: 3491
CipheredDesigns, the latest beta build available on the website is 6.001.39915.45346.

I don't know how your number appeared to be larger than the latest build but please reinstall the beta from the beta page.

Also, "ANY complex filter" doesn't tell anything specific. Is this filter complex? Please provide your speed observations in a format similar to Elentor's posts in this thread.
  Details E-Mail
CipheredDesigns
Posts: 6
I downloaded FF6 several times, the build that I get is the following:
Downloaded from https://www.filterforge.com/download/beta6/index.html

  Details E-Mail
GMM
Moderator
Filter Forge, Inc
Posts: 3491
Oops, sorry for having confused you. I have a 32-bit OS, thus the discrepancy between the build numbers. I could never imagine that a 32-bit and a 64-bit versions would show different builds smile:)
  Details E-Mail

Join Our Community!

Filter Forge has a thriving, vibrant, knowledgeable user community. Feel free to join us and have fun!

33,711 Registered Users
+18 new in 30 days!

153,533 Posts
+38 new in 30 days!

15,348 Topics
+73 new in year!

Create an Account

Online Users Last minute:

16 unregistered users.