Author Topic: Gpu rendering  (Read 18805 times)

2017-10-12, 20:44:35
Reply #30

3di

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 128
    • View Profile
Just had chance to test them again in the way Maru and Cecofuli suggested.  This time I rendered fstorm until it looked to be an acceptible noise level and then rendered with corona to the same time of 25 mins.  There's a bit of a speed increase in Fstorm with the latest graphics drivers.  Corona also performed much better than last time after resetting the render settings (not sure why, the only thing that changed was max sample intensity raising from 10 to 25 and the filter changing from 1.5 parabolic to 2 tent.  Same hardware was used as last time.


2017-10-12, 21:03:08
Reply #31

Juraj

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 4743
    • View Profile
    • studio website
So we moved from "it's 10 time faster" to "it's the same" ;- ) ? As confirmed by the actual f-storm pros and not car rotators.

What picks my attention:
F-Storm has perfect AA. Does it clamp the result ? If you save the result as 32bit .exr and take it into Photoshop, (or anywhere else), is there full dynamic range ?
F-Storm really has quite nicer lighting on the ceiling. Is this due to different material only (more reflective) ?
Please follow my new Instagram for latest projects, tips&tricks, short video tutorials and free models
Behance  Probably best updated portfolio of my work
lysfaere.com Please check the new stuff!

2017-10-12, 21:19:39
Reply #32

3di

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 128
    • View Profile
Hi Juraj

I didn't change the materials at all, just hit the convert button and turned up the lights a bit, then tweaked the tone mapping.  Just checked and all values are the same for both the corona and fstorm ceiling material.

The other questions, i'm too new to the engine to be able to answer.  I'd recommend you ask over on their facebook page.

As for the noise....I thought there was a noticeable difference still in Fstorm's favour, but perhaps I've just spent a little too much time today being an over analytical geek :D

2017-10-12, 22:13:40
Reply #33

daniel.reutersward

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 310
    • View Profile
Hello,

I had to jump in since I use FStorm in my daily work and have been for the past 1,5 years.

Hardware wise my 2x Xeon 2697v3 cost very similar to my 4x Titan X (Pascal), at least here in Sweden.

Overall regarding render times when I have tested new Corona versions (which I do from time to time) I feel I get similar render times compared to FStorm.

Perhaps I need download the scene and see what result I get :)

@Juraj: Yes, you have full dynamic range if you save an image as 32-bit exr, at least when I opened it up in Affinity (don´t have PS anymore) :)

/Daniel

2017-10-12, 22:30:00
Reply #34

Juraj

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 4743
    • View Profile
    • studio website
Daniel, when you open the images as 32bit .exr, is the AA still so perfect ? If so...that's quite some feature.

I really want to get into what makes the light behave tiny bit more directional in F-Storm (which is very nice), we've been analyzing this with Dubcat and it's quite interesting that it really is there.
But I can't put my finger if it's due to AA, different HDRi sampling, or shaders. Esp. since you have diffuse "roughness", where lower values can make materials more plastic and more suspectible to light. It's always very noticeable on ceiling, and below the window.
Please follow my new Instagram for latest projects, tips&tricks, short video tutorials and free models
Behance  Probably best updated portfolio of my work
lysfaere.com Please check the new stuff!

2017-10-12, 22:49:48
Reply #35

daniel.reutersward

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 310
    • View Profile
Far from perfect in the two images I tested with! Unless you go really dark.

Yes, I´ve been talking to him too a bit. Very interesting to see his tests :)

2017-10-13, 01:58:49
Reply #36

burnin

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 1532
    • View Profile

one of last year's tests, 10min with Luxrender (OCL) @ luxrender forums.
Has bit better AA.

ps
Corona is doing fine on CPU :)

2017-10-13, 04:13:55
Reply #37

3di

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 128
    • View Profile
Wow, so many good renderers out there at the moment! 

I'd say corona's doing more than fine on cpu, it's an incredible engine, not to mention it's ever increasing range of excellent features, and stellar customer service.

My main reason for the request was that looking to the future, gpu's are cheaper to have multiple of,  due to many motherboards being able to house up to four,  they're cheaper to replace/upgrade as pcie is less likely to change, and even if it does it's generally backward compatible unlike ever changing cpu sockets which often require a new build, and they hold their value well due to a massive gaming market.   With all that in mind, if you then consider that even a single consumer gpu can either roughly match a similarly priced cpu in some rendering scenarios and vastly out gun it in other scene types...then it just seems like a good direction to consider.

2017-10-14, 09:05:37
Reply #38

3di

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 128
    • View Profile
Ok, final post from me.  I obviously hadn't been using the engine for long enough on the previous experiments. 

After learning a little more about kernel settings, removing the portal brought over from corona, removing refraction from the windows, and overclocking my 1070 to 2025mhz I was able to get the scene rendered to roughly the same level as before in just over 4 minutes, with a fraction more noise I was able to render it in just over 2 mins.

Peace out.


2017-11-25, 14:26:08
Reply #39

Ondra

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 9048
  • Turning coffee to features since 2009
    • View Profile
already tracked here, moving to resolved:
https://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php?topic=96.0
Rendering is magic.How to get minidumps for crashed/frozen 3ds Max | Sorry for short replies, brief responses = more time to develop Corona ;)