Jump to content

Cycles for C4D


Guest

Recommended Posts

On 10/8/2016 at 8:17 PM, Zmotive said:

The link below has what you need. It's a CPU render test of 6 options including V-Ray and Octane, the latter of which they picked an older GPU that has similar performance to the CPU used in the tests. It's an imperfect analogy but still somewhat useful. The other comparisons vs. Cycles are all apples to apples. 

No it isn't I'm afraid. I mentioned that very test in my previous post. I'm interested in a side by side Cycles4D vs Physical. I'd hope Insydium would be working on a comparison.

If I could get similar or even better render times out of CPU Cycles4D over Physical while being able to do GPU OpenCL previews on my iMac before switching to CPU for rendering on the Mac Pros that would be super convenient and I'd be up for a license.

Link to post
  • Replies 149
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 hours ago, Cutman said:

No it isn't I'm afraid. I mentioned that very test in my previous post. I'm interested in a side by side Cycles4D vs Physical. I'd hope Insydium would be working on a comparison.

If I could get similar or even better render times out of CPU Cycles4D over Physical while being able to do GPU OpenCL previews on my iMac before switching to CPU for rendering on the Mac Pros that would be super convenient and I'd be up for a license.

 

You cant compare CPU vs GPU, is not the same hardware, and theres no video card / processor chart comparison. This is something you need to test yourself with your own specs. Hopefully we get a demo so we can run our own tests based on our needs. What would be the CPU equivalent of 2 x 970 or 4x titans  for example?

In my own rig, doing tests, Octane is faster than Physical and Arnold, except if I need to render a million or more hair, then Arnold does the job faster. And if my scene is huge, Octane cant render it at all, while Arnold is in heaven when dealing with billions of polygons. Also, setting volumetrics and participating media in Octane is a pain in the butt, so Arnold wins because it is reliable, plus I love Arnold Utility nodes, and Octane lacks those. I have never found Physical Render accurate or physical at all, because their materials doesnt react the way they should, neither C4D lights do, and on top of it GI with Physical takes forever in my rig, so I dont really use it.

Link to post
14 hours ago, Cutman said:

No it isn't I'm afraid. I mentioned that very test in my previous post. I'm interested in a side by side Cycles4D vs Physical. I'd hope Insydium would be working on a comparison.

If I could get similar or even better render times out of CPU Cycles4D over Physical while being able to do GPU OpenCL previews on my iMac before switching to CPU for rendering on the Mac Pros that would be super convenient and I'd be up for a license.

Hmm. I must've misunderstood. The post I saw said "There's a comparison of Cycles vs 5 other renders and Cycles is slightly slower than Octane and VRay etc, obviously that's GPU not CPU which I'm interested in." And while the bold part is true that's only for Octane. All the other comparisons are CPU to CPU. I thought that's what you were asking for. And then I saw this from the article:

"All the rendering was done using CPU rendering, on an Intel i7 3770 in a desktop with 12 GB of RAM and Windows 7. For Octane, a purely GPU renderer, an nvidia GTX 650 was used (*it performs very similarly to the Intel i7 3770)."

Which is why I said it was what you were looking for, but you're right there's no comparison with the Physical renderer in C4D obviously. From my understanding Cycles is faster over CPU than the Physical renderer but we'll have to see.

Link to post
  • 2 weeks later...

I look forward to the renderer, hope will check it before Christmas on new PC (i7 6core/GFX1070). Are there somewhere some "real" benchmarks? Maybe Steve, Mike, David or other guy´s from beta can reveal something closer? ;-)

 

Link to post

I've just upgraded our VRayforC4D to the early bird 3.3 beta and I'm mighty impressed. In the scenes that I've tested it is easily 2x faster than 1.9.0. The other big improvement is the look of the noise, it's much more natural and more of a fine grain than a noise which means you can get away with lower sample settings and still have a usable image. Actually, I think the images gain something by having this grain in them so I've been keeping the settings low.

It's also way more easy to set up with really only two main settings that you really need to worry about, Max Samples and Threshold. VRay 1.9.0 used to be a dog to balance the samples against DMC etc. Now it's almost fire and forget.

Not all planned features are and running yet like the denoiser but VRayForC4D 3.4 will be feature comparable to the Max and Maya 3.4 release. If you're a Mac user dependent more on CPUs than GPUs I would recommend giving VRayForC4D a look especially while they have their Earlybird deal on. I think VRay will suit me better than Cycles4D running on the CPU.

Link to post
7 minutes ago, Cutman said:

I've just upgraded our VRayforC4D to the early bird 3.3 beta and I'm mighty impressed. In the scenes that I've tested it is easily 2x faster than 1.9.0. The other big improvement is the look of the noise, it's much more natural and more of a fine grain than a noise which means you can get away with lower sample settings and still have a usable image. Actually, I think the images gain something by having this grain in them so I've been keeping the settings low.

It's also way more easy to set up with really only two main settings that you really need to worry about, Max Samples and Threshold. VRay 1.9.0 used to be a dog to balance the samples against DMC etc. Now it's almost fire and forget.

Not all planned features are and running yet like the denoiser but VRayForC4D 3.4 will be feature comparable to the Max and Maya 3.4 release. If you're a Mac user dependent more on CPUs than GPUs I would recommend giving VRayForC4D a look especially while they have their Earlybird deal on. I think VRay will suit me better than Cycles4D running on the CPU.

looks promising 

Link to post
On 22/10/2016 at 1:28 PM, Cutman said:

I've just upgraded our VRayforC4D to the early bird 3.3 beta and I'm mighty impressed. In the scenes that I've tested it is easily 2x faster than 1.9.0. The other big improvement is the look of the noise, it's much more natural and more of a fine grain than a noise which means you can get away with lower sample settings and still have a usable image. Actually, I think the images gain something by having this grain in them so I've been keeping the settings low.

It's also way more easy to set up with really only two main settings that you really need to worry about, Max Samples and Threshold. VRay 1.9.0 used to be a dog to balance the samples against DMC etc. Now it's almost fire and forget.

Not all planned features are and running yet like the denoiser but VRayForC4D 3.4 will be feature comparable to the Max and Maya 3.4 release. If you're a Mac user dependent more on CPUs than GPUs I would recommend giving VRayForC4D a look especially while they have their Earlybird deal on. I think VRay will suit me better than Cycles4D running on the CPU.

Yes it certainly has moved move since v1.9. and am using Vray 3.4 beta every day with little problems.  I think once some areas get sorted, finalised, then the release will be very nice indeed.  Just to add, having the Alsurface for SSS in Vray4C4D is a real treat for me, as Arnold had this over Vray regarding skin, now I have the speed of Vray, and what would seem to be a faster ALsurface in Vray than in Arnold, although I cant confirm this.

Dan

Link to post
  • 2 weeks later...
On 10/22/2016 at 5:28 AM, Cutman said:

Not all planned features are and running yet like the denoiser but VRayForC4D 3.4 will be feature comparable to the Max and Maya 3.4 release. If you're a Mac user dependent more on CPUs than GPUs I would recommend giving VRayForC4D a look especially while they have their Earlybird deal on. I think VRay will suit me better than Cycles4D running on the CPU.

I've been using VrayForC4D for a long time, but am also quite impressed with the recent 3.3 pre-releases and their functionality (both CPU & GPU).  I'm very satisfied with the upgrade thus far, and by 3.4 release suspect I'll be even more impressed/satisfied overall.

OTOH, I am a bit interested in whether Cycles4D will offer integration functionality with X-Particles (and similar "volumetric" plugins) beyond what is currently available in VrayForC4D.  That's one area where I expect Insydium to put a LOT of effort, and could possibly beat Thinkbox Krakatoa in terms of offering a particle/volumetric-optimized render engine (in Cycles4D), surpassing other general purpose third-party render engines as well in that regard.  

We shall see.  IMO, the low cost cited for Cycles4D would make it very attractive if it offers optimized particle/volumetric rendering broader/deeper than existing options, and that could possibly give Cycles4D an "initial sustained niche" in the C4D market.

Link to post
On 08/10/2016 at 8:31 PM, docphibs said:

... I've had a huge falling out with vrayc4d... is 3.25 ever going to get released? i just can't handle the horrendously slooooow updates simply cause it's not supported directly by chaos group. and yes... documentation is terrible too. it's a shame cause it's an incredibly fast render engine.

This is a regular misconception about VRayforC4D, the developers didn't get the necessary SDK for many months so point the finger at Chaos group not Stefan and his crew. Given the delay they faced they're actually not that far behind the other versions.

VRay documentation is appalling on every platform not just on C4D.

All VRay versions are released but might as well be labelled betas just like the C4D version. Chaos Group seem focussed more on the Max version than anything and if the C4D version was brought in house I think that could be a backward step.

Link to post

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

ABOUT US

We are dedicated Cinema 4D Community of friendly and passionate artists, hobbyists and developers. Feel free to join us and share your knowledge, your art and anything that might help Community to grow. We are providing guidance, free plugins and files, feedback, sponsorships and various discounts for our Contributors. :cowboypistol:

SUPPORT

Tickets

Purchases

×
×
  • Create New...

Copyright C4D Cafe © 2020 Powered by Invision Community