i just demo’d motion 1 on a dual mac G5 2ghz with an ATI card, and all I can say is: I hope Motion 2 is faster. The blurs and stuff were very fast, but I made a D1 composition and moved a still frame over a background still and applied motion blur, and it was approx. half as fast as combustion on my internet computer (single athlon 1.5ghz) with motion blur set to 8 samples.
combustion vs. motion
beaker
#2
Motion is like FFI, mostly hardware based rendering so the video card is very important, where combustion is mostly software based except for particles. You really need an Nvidia card, like the 6800 to see Motion’s strength. The base level Ati card isn’t exactly the staple of performance when it comes to opengl hardware rendering.
Running Flame on an old octane is pretty pokey too, but I wouldn’t exactly use it for my speed comparison of the whole package. Much rather see it on a Tezro before I start swinging around opinions about it’s speed.
buttachunk
#3
yeah, just checked out the lit on the apple site— the card i demo’d on doesn’t seem to be a supported card, which would explain the speed issue. also just read in some other forums that motion 2 optimizes the motion blur, among other things.
I really want to see Mo2 with the geforce 6800 on a quad G5 3ghz system !!! :bounce:
dfusion
#4
On another forum users were stating Combustion gets a nice bump in GUI performance under OS X Tiger. I do not have a Mac so I cannot confirm this. It’s worth taking into consideration.
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.