Max/Maya/Xsi benchmarks
mod
http://www.3dspeedmachine.com/?idna=33
It's worth mentioning that these are Softimage-commisioned, but at a quick glance, they seem to be fully Autodesk-endorsed.
What's especially strange is the big gaps between xp64 and Vista64 on the same machine. How much of that could you 'fix' by turning off Vista's heavier graphical effects? Do those factor into it in any big way?
It's worth mentioning that these are Softimage-commisioned, but at a quick glance, they seem to be fully Autodesk-endorsed.
What's especially strange is the big gaps between xp64 and Vista64 on the same machine. How much of that could you 'fix' by turning off Vista's heavier graphical effects? Do those factor into it in any big way?
Replies
"When performing the same tasks, with the same models, XSI consistently won while Maya was a close second and Max a distant 3rd"
When it actually only was rated better 1 time more than Maya. Makes me somewhat question the validity of it all given that it was SoftImage commisioned.
Still very interesting results, definitely makes me wary of Vista.
I also found the point they made about the accuracy of the particles being better on Max while XSI went faster. Be interested to know how often there are speed boosts in other tests based on the program degrading quality a bit.
Thanks for sharing.
They don't set the scenes up at all similarly, some in XSI are set with only a couple of keyframes while the Max and Maya ones have a key every frame.
Some of the scenes in XSI are set to draw in bounding box mode and being compared against Max and Maya scenes set up in wireframe mode.
Of course there will be no contest.
It's a rubbish comparison, and barely worth reading, the three apps are much closer in most situations than this study would have you believe. The speed of each app is hugely dependent on your computer setup too, for example Maya will perform in highpoly scenes much better with a workstation GFX card than a consumer GFX card, and Max will not show much difference in this case. You're far more likely to have a consumer GFX card when working in the games industry (since many games don't tend to run well, if at all, on workstation cards) so again the comparison is pointless.
Read more here:
http://www.tech-artists.org/forum/showthread.php?t=222
For a breakdown of how the tests are flawed and biased.
Please don't post this link around more, it's just fuelling the fire of ignorance.
You mean, Autodesk-commisioned. :poly142:
Quoted For Truth.
Even their summary that tries a little better at being unbiased, fails to do so. At first I was reading it like "wow maybe I'm biased toward max and haven't been giving these other apps a fair shake?" Then read; Even after no mention of Maya, or that people might have more experience, prefer a certain UI or have existing pipelines built around other apps, they dismiss 3dsmax. Ouch. They can be brought more in line so that performance isn't the only benchmark, but why talk about shutting any of them down?
Sounds like XSI users are nervous and trying to throw poor ol Max under the bus. I'm sure big brother will be oh so pleased about that...
I would like to see the results of a proper test. Now that all three are owned by Autodesk.
edit: Vig, your post was better before the edit made to jab at XSI users.
Well if XSI users didn't attempt to skew results in tests I might not have a go at em... They should relax and not come up with this kind of crazy crap. All it ends up doing is pointing out that most apps are equal and "150% of all statistics are made up".
Use what you like, what you know, and what your comfortable with but they shouldn't step out of their way to try and make the other apps look bad and specifically finger one as being worse then the others. "If you compare all three, but remove maya and compare max on vista you're left with the only logical choice as to who gets the axe!" Silly argument that is decisive and condescending even without the skewed data to back it up.
But as always I hope personal experience wins out for everyone, no matter what app they decide to use. Oh I mean lets all form camps and come out with BS surveys and statistical data. I thought we where over that?
I hate Max but I try to hate it objectively, at least.
MightyPea, I posted that blog post before spacefrog's response. Sorry I never edited it, totally forgot (the part of me that wanted to believe it, I guess). Updated the blog post. Sorry!
Good. Because no XSI users skewed any results. Read my previous post. I want a fair comparison. Some company named Jon Peddie Research performed these tests, never heard of them. And take aim at Softimage if you like...but realize who owns them now. So what exactly are you going on about? Here we have a thread where MoP and myself are actually agreeing on something, and you're ranting.
Is it the general consensus that for 3d applications, (mudbox and max specifically), I'd be better off with winXP64 than vista64? Frankly I am partial to XP, never much cared for Vista but I've heard some people say XP64 is no longer supported by microsoft, and it would be a mistake to choose it over vista.
The comments so far in this thread have me thinking maybe I should just go with XP64. Especially after looking at the results in that test. But, if anyone else could contribute their thoughts on the 2 OS's I'd appreciate it
Scratch my post from the record. I meant to say Will smells funny and don't use XSI.
But seriously, I don't like it when people try to tar one app over the other, just reminds me of dirty politics. No matter what app it is. It is like going back to camp forming? I thought everyone was past that?
All this crap goes to prove is that most statistics are made up, everyone lies to favor their interests and people should just relax and let people use what they like, at least that's what I hope happens...
Anyway, the group that did this research called on the other software developers to perform their own tests to contest the results. I'd like to see it. Instead, of making blanket statements and shouting "YOU PEOPLE" in this thread.
yea yea yea, we're all on the same side...
bla bla bla...
Vig you argue too much especially about things we agree on.
bla bla bla...
Don't you have something better to do?
yadda yadda yadda...
no I don't mean rant.
Hitler used XSI
(Will still smells funny and don't use XSI)
*storms out, slams the door*
So, to get back to the whole vista/xp thing though, has anyone noticed this themselves, and can it be sorted out by turning off some of the more resource-heavy graphical effects that Vista uses, or is there something else going on?
People initially complained about Vista using nearly all of their memory, even in a 4gig setup, but I've since heard that this actually just makes sense, since it's using it to pre-cache stuff rather than letting it go to waste and all that.
Just hoping to get some perspective on all the Vista-hate here. I'm certain some of it's legit, I just don't know which.
edit: Pfft Caseofchill. PFFt. BeOS would blow those results out of the water.