Author Topic: Corona GPU rendering  (Read 74093 times)

2015-01-24, 13:32:26

dux

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Hi.. My big question is
Will be CORONA also GPU ready ? .. 1.0 for max release ?
CUDA or OpenCL ?

I hope will be.. I am using IRAY.. but Corona is faster only with my CPU :) ...
will be COOL to have CPU-GPU rendering both same time

with best regards Dux

2015-01-24, 13:42:57
Reply #1

FrostKiwi

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 686
    • View Profile
Hi.. My big question is
Will be CORONA also GPU ready ? .. 1.0 for max release ?
CUDA or OpenCL ?

I hope will be.. I am using IRAY.. but Corona is faster only with my CPU :) ...
will be COOL to have CPU-GPU rendering both same time

with best regards Dux
Due to the nature of GPU rendering restrictions, there are no plans for either GPU or a Hybrid model in the foreseeable future.

(In a distant future, where Vram is not an issue and a corona GPU port does not mean to sacrifice 50% of compatibility with it's own features, unlike eg. Vray)

refer to: https://corona-renderer.com/features/proudly-cpu-based/

2015-01-24, 14:16:06
Reply #2

Ondra

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 9074
  • Turning coffee to features since 2009
    • View Profile
I hope will be.. I am using IRAY.. but Corona is faster only with my CPU :) ...

If Corona is faster using CPU, why would you want it to change?
Rendering is magic.How to get minidumps for crashed/frozen 3ds Max | Sorry for short replies, brief responses = more time to develop Corona ;)

2015-01-24, 14:40:06
Reply #3

FrostKiwi

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 686
    • View Profile
If Corona is faster using CPU, why would you want it to change?

2015-01-24, 18:57:01
Reply #4

dux

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
I am IRAY user (CPU+GPU).. but .. I tested Corona and Corona is a much faster than IRAY.. and Corona is running only CPU and faster...
So my question was.. when will be +GPU :) will be more more FASTER  :)

big thanks to programmer of Corona renderer

2015-01-24, 19:41:17
Reply #5

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 11507
  • Marcin
    • View Profile

2015-01-24, 23:42:10
Reply #6

juang3d

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 639
    • View Profile
Hi Dux.

I was also an iRay user and completely changed to Corona, it's cheaper (in energy terms, having a famr loaded with GPU's will increase the energy cost A LOT)

I don't want it to be GPU, I want it to be faster, but not with GPU but just like it is now, in CPU :) No constrains and limitations like in GPU render engines, you have your system ram and old fashion systems like proxys (wich does not suffer from slowdown like in GPU render engines).

Enjoy Corona!! :D

Cheers.

2015-01-25, 13:34:31
Reply #7

dux

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
I changed my MAIN render to Corona from IRAY :)
It is much faster even only CPU :)

and one BIG reason why ?

 - much faster
 - less grain
 - no fireflies
 - easier material model

..I hope will be better material converter from Mental Ray... still not support for each properties

Dux


2015-01-25, 14:20:13
Reply #8

DeadClown

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 1445
    • View Profile
    • racoon-artworks
..I hope will be better material converter from Mental Ray... still not support for each properties

Then please make a request in the converter thread what you would like to have. I'm not a MR user, so I have no idea what people normally use.
Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature.

2015-01-25, 15:46:53
Reply #9

FrostKiwi

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 686
    • View Profile
I hope will be.. I am using IRAY.. but Corona is faster only with my CPU :) ...
I am IRAY user (CPU+GPU).. but .. I tested Corona and Corona is a much faster than IRAY.. and Corona is running only CPU and faster...
I changed my MAIN render to Corona from IRAY :)
« Last Edit: 2015-01-25, 15:50:17 by SairesArt »

2015-01-25, 22:09:02
Reply #10

juang3d

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 639
    • View Profile
...

...

Cheers :)

2015-01-26, 01:08:37
Reply #11

arqrenderz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 901
  • arqrenderz.com
    • View Profile
    • arqrenderz
Looool love those posts!

2015-03-08, 11:30:56
Reply #12

GLG

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 9
    • View Profile
According to the GPU limitations, I understand the use of the CPU, however, developpers should be able to find ways or means to use such a technological potential.
We need speed in rendering and there exist hardware capacities to use to improve our needs.
So, developpers, yes, it may be harder but we need all the power of our devices....find a solution...
In computer programming, the limitations are just in the capacity brain. I'm joking...
There is a challenge to do and Corona seems to be on the best way than other ones.

I have tryed Octane,Thea,Arion and only Corona gave the fastest way to change our way of working.
Easy workflow, very high implementation in 3ds Max, fast, very good quality renderings and no crash...strong and stable...I didn't find it in the other render engines.
I'd like it to be developped more especially in the speed with a GPU solution, and I bought a licence to encourage the team .

I work in France with 5 workstations but I go to China often where I cannot bring all my render farm.
I need to get a big power in China and Corona may help me to not wait after long renderings on one computer, but I'd like to get more power as I know
how powerfull are the graphic cards. It would be a non sense, nowdays to not use them for high calculations.

I know, it is a large debate and the corona team seems not ready to search in this direction however, I invite them to really think about it.

A last note: we need a good displacement integration...really urgent...thank you !
Gaƫl

2015-03-08, 12:11:54
Reply #13

juang3d

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 639
    • View Profile
As Ondra stated in other threads, GPU's are not faster than CPU's, it's just a different way of programming, the power of corona relies on "being as fat as a GPU on a CPU".
I used to think like you that GPU's are faster per-se, but they are not, apart from their limitations, it all depends on the type of algorythms you use for that specific kind of CPU (in the end a GPU is an task-oriented ARM CPU), so what Corona gives us is that speed plus the freedom of the CPU regarding RAM and other things like using proxys without slowdown, etc...

I'm sure Ondra can be more specific on this matter and explain you why CPU is not slower than GPU, and specifically using Embree.

I'm also sure that more speed optimizations will be done soon as is the most voted feature request in the feature requests post, and I suspect that it will be forever hahaha

I'm talking as a person that was a huge promoter of GPU rendering, I could have been an Nvidia salesman even hahaha, but when things change, the change is a must, and Corona gave us that change for sure :)

Cheers!

2015-03-08, 12:25:04
Reply #14

Juraj

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 4383
    • View Profile
    • studio website
As Ondra stated in other threads, GPU's are not faster than CPU's,

Well it's not that black and white equal either. It was by now thoroughly debunked that GPU renderers are by no means 100-to-10 000 :- D faster as was often advertised, fueled by nVidia's marketing of their CUDA.

But by on average, they are faster, and that is only supported by fact that GPUs were able to almost double their performance each year, something that didn't hold true at all for cpu performance development.
Previously, I had no belief in sustainability of using GPU renderer, but right now it's exactly the time when things might finally take off for them. 'Mainstream' GPUs with 12GB memory like Titan-X with 3k stream cores, under 1000 euros ? That's damn cheap and humungously powerful. Renderers able to overcome most limitations (memory cycling, out-of-core texture keeping).
talcikdemovicova.com  Website and blog
be.net/jurajtalcik   Our studio Behance portfolio
Instagram   Our studio Instagram, managed by Veronika