Indigo 2.2.12 Mac 32/64 bits

[fused]

After days and days of struggeling and doubting my sanity I managed to make the first fat Mac build (x86 and x64) of Indigo.

http://www.indigorenderer.com/dist/expo ... -slave.zip

Since we dont have a 64 bit Mac I could only test the 32 bit version, so please test it and let me know if it works.
(the material editor will follow later, for now I just want to know if the x64 build is working or not)

Cheers!

(yes this means frequent mac builds can be expected from now on )

edit: added the material editor
edit: and network slave

[juan_irender]

Many thanks Fused! I´ll try the 64 bits version, I´ll tell you about.

[juan_irender]

At the moment, Indigo 2.2.12 64 bits seems to work pretty well, I´ll do a more extensive testing. This is very good news, I´ve recently purchased a new Mac for the purpose to serve as main render machine.

[gagar]

Cool.

the first Universal Mac build (x86 and x64) of Indigo.

Actually, in Apple linguo "Universal" means PowerPC + Intel. x86 + x64 is just a type of "fat" binary (which is less sexy for sure ;) )

[fused]

Actually, in Apple linguo "Universal" means PowerPC + Intel. x86 + x64 is just a type of "fat" binary (which is less sexy for sure )

haha, ok!

[FakeShamus]

64-bit version works, but it seems somewhat slower than the 64-bit Indigo 2.2.1 on some scenes I tested - roughly only 82% of the samples per pixel over a 5-minute test period. simple scenes like the cornell box seem to render about equal, but one of my tests scenes with the stanford bunny is definitely slower.

[fused]

64-bit version works, but it seems somewhat slower than the 64-bit Indigo 2.2.1 on some scenes I tested - roughly only 82% of the samples per pixel over a 5-minute test period. simple scenes like the cornell box seem to render about equal, but one of my tests scenes with the stanford bunny is definitely slower.

Thank you for the report, I'll investigate

[fused]

added the material editor.

[fused]

uploading a version that contains the renderslave as well, will take a while tho (aprox. 50 minutes).

when its done you can get it here: http://www.indigorenderer.com/dist/expo ... -slave.zip

[juan_irender]

Well, I´m doing some test, with the scenes packed with Indigo.
I´m obtaining very interesting stuff. Rendering time, 5 minutes.
Pintest scene:
Indigo 2.2.8 32 bits:
Spp: 304.77; S/s: 486028
Indigo 2.2.12 64 bits:
Spp: 369.88; S/s: 588851

Caterpillar scene:
Indigo 2.2.8 32 bits:
Spp: 154.59; S/s: 359615
Indigo 2.2.12 64 bits:
Spp: 212.97; S/s: 495339

Erotica scene:
Indigo 2.2.8 32 bits:
Spp: 306.28; S/s: 664858
Indigo 2.2.12 64 bits:
Spp: 379.63; S/s: 822309

The test has been runned on a Core i7 iMac.
Impressive numbers, ¿doesn´t it?

[fused]

wow impressive!

so its still slower in some scenes than the 2.2.1 build (18% slower) but a lot faster than the 2.2.8 build (21% - 37% faster, based on the number of samples per seconds)?

[juan_irender]

I´ve downloaded Indigo 2.2.1 for OSX...
In the three scenes mentioned above, 2.2.12 have slightly better performance than 2.2.1, not so spectacular as compared with 32 bit 2.2.8 build. Other tests with the old Indigo scenes reveals the same: very similar figures, but 2.2.12 build is always superior... FakeShamus ¿maybe you can left us the Standford Bunny scene for trying?

[FakeShamus]

yeah I did some more testing with the indigo packaged scenes and everything else is actually pretty comparable in speed. it may be some freak thing with a couple of my scenes. I tried with some other very high-poly scenes and 2.2.12 is actually running a bit faster than 2.2.1, so I'm not sure what the issue was before

[fused]

Nice, thank you guys for testing and reporting back!

I guess this can go stable then

[juan_irender]

Nice, Fused!
Many thanks, FakeShamus.