Author Topic: Mac M1 LOW POWER MODE bug lives on.  (Read 10321 times)

2022-10-24, 23:27:42

rafaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Few ppl here already reported this few releases ago and the bug lives on..

Very simple, on the macbook settings has an option to save battery called "Low power mode"

If you're not on low power mode the render speed drops to 600-750% (processors power), when you switch it on to Low power mode the processor's cores go full blast up to 900% ish speed.

It wouldn't be a big deal if I didn't have to use other apps that are very affected by the low power mode turned on

tested on lots of differente scenes,
it's not a Heat problem

I'm on Macbook pro 16 m1
tried on Cinema 4d r25,26 and 2023 latest version
Corona 9 final release

2022-11-07, 10:07:47
Reply #1

masterzone

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 156
  • CGI Generalist since 1998
    • View Profile
    • ZuccherodiKanna
mmm...I tried several time to found a solution to use more than 800% or more of the CPU during rending on my MBpro M1 Max. I continue to have around that percentage.
There are some Corona Render problems on M1 processors. I have Intel processor iMac too here and the percentage during rendering go up to 990%...
I will give to your tips a try....
If you try the Cinema4D internal rendering engine you will able to use all percentage of the processor...but not with corona render....

| www.c4dzone.com
| Italian Maxon Training Center
| www.zuccherodikanna.com
| Italian based CGI Studio

2022-11-07, 10:17:13
Reply #2

masterzone

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 156
  • CGI Generalist since 1998
    • View Profile
    • ZuccherodiKanna
I tried your tips...I switched to low power mode during rendering and this is the test. On signed area Ive switched OFF low power mode and Corona render slow down the process up do 750%...
Absolutely strange behaviour...I think that developer needs to found a solution on M1 processors...
| www.c4dzone.com
| Italian Maxon Training Center
| www.zuccherodikanna.com
| Italian based CGI Studio

2022-11-07, 10:19:58
Reply #3

masterzone

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 156
  • CGI Generalist since 1998
    • View Profile
    • ZuccherodiKanna
did you try with interna cinema4D engine? here is a comparison with a standard Cinema4D scene...the settings doesn't affects the rendering speed that still uniform...I think Corona developers have a lot to do with M1 processor...we lost around 20 or 30% of the power on the trash...
Very disappointed..
Alex
« Last Edit: 2022-11-07, 10:36:20 by masterzone »
| www.c4dzone.com
| Italian Maxon Training Center
| www.zuccherodikanna.com
| Italian based CGI Studio

2022-11-07, 14:38:03
Reply #4

rafaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Thx for yor response!!


that's exacly what the problem is, I also tried differente engines and only on corona has this issue. It has been like this for few releases already, we did report and some other post but never got looked at.

Please Devs take a look at it.

thx

2022-11-10, 11:23:43
Reply #5

Philw

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 267
    • View Profile
Can the Devs comment on this please? Would be good to know that if we are spending a tonne of cash on an Ultra Studio or whatever comes next that we are going to get all the juice out of it? (or even my current M1Max)

2022-11-11, 11:26:50
Reply #6

masterzone

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 156
  • CGI Generalist since 1998
    • View Profile
    • ZuccherodiKanna
Maybe something is going wrong with Cinema4D with or without corona render.
Take a look into this video and watch what happen to Cinema4D memory....I got many crash on Corona Render during day too...but maybe Cinema4D help Corona to crash....(watch it on YouTube so you can enlarge the video)



This is the replay from Maxon's Support:

Thank you for reaching out and sorry for the issue you experienced.

I was able to reproduce the issue here to.

There's been a bug filed for the behavior you've described. I've aggregated all of your comments and information alongside the bug report to our Engineering team, who will continue to dig into the issue and prioritize it for a fix.

The timeline for a fix will vary depending on the impact (how many customers are affected) and severity (how bad is the bug) as well as the status of new feature work. As such, I cannot provide a time estimate as to when it'll be fixed.

I am very sorry, but currently I have no solution for you to prevent it.

As we are able to reproduce this from Cinema 4D 2023 down to S24, we think this is an issue with the macOS Graphics Driver.
We have to clarifiy this with Apple first.


« Last Edit: 2022-11-11, 11:56:37 by masterzone »
| www.c4dzone.com
| Italian Maxon Training Center
| www.zuccherodikanna.com
| Italian based CGI Studio

2022-11-11, 15:23:13
Reply #7

rojharris

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 99
    • View Profile
Just out of interest, is this setting for 'On battery' or 'On power adapter'? I have my macbook charger plugged in all the time 24/7 so have battery set to automatic and power adapter to 'high power'.. Should I be setting both to low for rendering?
 
Thanks

2022-11-11, 18:27:27
Reply #8

masterzone

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 156
  • CGI Generalist since 1998
    • View Profile
    • ZuccherodiKanna
You can leave settings to "automatic"...usually this settings is for optimising the energy saving. If you leave all to automatic you will get the best performance during the rendering. Most of this settings is for the GPU. We don't know why Corona change the rendering speed based on these settings...
| www.c4dzone.com
| Italian Maxon Training Center
| www.zuccherodikanna.com
| Italian based CGI Studio

2022-11-11, 19:56:57
Reply #9

rafaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Hey mate,

M1 doesn't have the automatic setting, it's either on or off and that's the most annoying part having to switch on and off depending on what software you're using.

Hello? Any dev around? at least to say something about it? 

2022-11-19, 16:44:52
Reply #10

rojharris

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 99
    • View Profile
Er... Mine does. M1 Max Macbook pro.

Assume you mean that Automatic setting?

2022-11-29, 12:48:27
Reply #11

rafaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Great!

We have one more release and no ANSWER OR MENTIONS about this issue, the real question here is why the corona team is totally avoiding this problem? We're are paying just like everybody else and being totally excluded.

2022-11-29, 18:38:19
Reply #12

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 12652
  • Marcin
    • View Profile
Sorry for the delay. I can assure you that we are looking into this. We don't want to share any updates before we have some specific results and explanations from the dev team.
Marcin Miodek | chaos-corona.com
3D Support Team Lead - Corona | contact us

2022-12-01, 12:33:53
Reply #13

rafaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Sorry for the delay. I can assure you that we are looking into this. We don't want to share any updates before we have some specific results and explanations from the dev team.

Thanks for letting us know!

2022-12-02, 08:59:23
Reply #14

masterzone

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 156
  • CGI Generalist since 1998
    • View Profile
    • ZuccherodiKanna
finger crossed....
| www.c4dzone.com
| Italian Maxon Training Center
| www.zuccherodikanna.com
| Italian based CGI Studio

2022-12-13, 18:07:24
Reply #15

bnji

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 190
  • Benjamin
    • View Profile
    • Corona Renderer

Hi all,
After reviewing the issue, our dev team found that it is actually a CPU issue (thermal throttling).
I mean, you'd think that if you set your power preset to "High" you should then get all the power from the CPU, this idea is correct; however, Corona exhausts the CPU way more than the OS or CPU is expecting, so the automatic response from the CPU is to reduce the overall performance.
This is happening mostly on laptops (Macbooks) due to the inefficiency of their cooling system.
This shouldn't be happening when using a desktop computer (including Mac minis), as they have a more efficient cooling solution than Macbooks.
You can monitor the CPU temperature and the overall performance of the CPU by using either the built-in "Activity Monitor" app, or using the "TG Pro" app, or using the "iStatistica Pro for Mac" app.
I hope this helps.
Benjamin Rosas | chaos-corona.com
3D Support Specialist - Corona | contact us
Corona Uploader l Upload

2022-12-13, 20:28:26
Reply #16

rafaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile

Hi all,
After reviewing the issue, our dev team found that it is actually a CPU issue (thermal throttling).
I mean, you'd think that if you set your power preset to "High" you should then get all the power from the CPU, this idea is correct; however, Corona exhausts the CPU way more than the OS or CPU is expecting, so the automatic response from the CPU is to reduce the overall performance.
This is happening mostly on laptops (Macbooks) due to the inefficiency of their cooling system.
This shouldn't be happening when using a desktop computer (including Mac minis), as they have a more efficient cooling solution than Macbooks.
You can monitor the CPU temperature and the overall performance of the CPU by using either the built-in "Activity Monitor" app, or using the "TG Pro" app, or using the "iStatistica Pro for Mac" app.
I hope this helps.


hm, then why when we switch to low power mode and it goes full blast and does not throttle?

2022-12-14, 16:09:28
Reply #17

masterzone

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 156
  • CGI Generalist since 1998
    • View Profile
    • ZuccherodiKanna

Hi all,
After reviewing the issue, our dev team found that it is actually a CPU issue (thermal throttling).
I mean, you'd think that if you set your power preset to "High" you should then get all the power from the CPU, this idea is correct; however, Corona exhausts the CPU way more than the OS or CPU is expecting, so the automatic response from the CPU is to reduce the overall performance.
This is happening mostly on laptops (Macbooks) due to the inefficiency of their cooling system.
This shouldn't be happening when using a desktop computer (including Mac minis), as they have a more efficient cooling solution than Macbooks.
You can monitor the CPU temperature and the overall performance of the CPU by using either the built-in "Activity Monitor" app, or using the "TG Pro" app, or using the "iStatistica Pro for Mac" app.
I hope this helps.

Sorry but I don't think so, and your Dev Team may doesn't know How Apple silicon CPU works.... If you monitoring the overall performance during Cinema4D Internal Rendering Engine the CPU stay around 980% for all the time (see attachment), and no action is needed from the preference panel where battery settings are, you also can hear fun running very quietly. Only with Corona Render we got performance issue and wrong CPU usage. Is not a thermal issue...this low CPU usage appears on second or third rendering start...or after the five pass....
Why does Corona slow down to 780% and Cinema4D Rendering Engine still on 980% of CPU using? Why does Cinema4D is not Thermal affected? Because Corona doesn't run correctly on M1 device...is very simple...

Take a look to these screenshots...Tell to your Dev Team that Corona Render must be compiled correctly for M1 devices...is not a Apple Silicon throttle issue...I think that with this kind of CPU your Dev Team need to investigate more deeply on the Code.

so...does is difficult for Devs to run a Cinema4D rendering engine scene and monitoring the CPU usage?
« Last Edit: 2022-12-14, 16:46:42 by masterzone »
| www.c4dzone.com
| Italian Maxon Training Center
| www.zuccherodikanna.com
| Italian based CGI Studio

2022-12-14, 19:37:53
Reply #18

rafaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Perfect explanation!


We did report this long time ago and they came up with same explanation blaming Thermal throttle then and now, All we need is the true explanation about it, I don't know why they're dragging this for so long! NONE of the devs come with a real answear on when will actually look at it.   

What I see is that the dev team does not have a macbook machine to teste at, they probably have an mac mini m1 and that's all they call for.

2022-12-15, 10:21:07
Reply #19

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 12652
  • Marcin
    • View Profile
Challenge accepted. ;)
Marcin Miodek | chaos-corona.com
3D Support Team Lead - Corona | contact us

2022-12-15, 12:51:59
Reply #20

masterzone

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 156
  • CGI Generalist since 1998
    • View Profile
    • ZuccherodiKanna
Perfect explanation!


We did report this long time ago and they came up with same explanation blaming Thermal throttle then and now, All we need is the true explanation about it, I don't know why they're dragging this for so long! NONE of the devs come with a real answear on when will actually look at it.   

What I see is that the dev team does not have a macbook machine to teste at, they probably have an mac mini m1 and that's all they call for.

It's very simple to explain from a developer...if you try to compiling a software originally developed on a CISC processor architectures (Intel) you need a clean work to do on the code, not only hit "compiling" e finger crossed and you need also good compliers....I think that the dev team of Corona Render is very skilled but maybe doesn't know deeply the RISC (ARM) architecture.
So, right now Corona Renderer is not compiled on Apple M1 as expected due to performance issue.
Cinema4D is very well compiled on M1...
| www.c4dzone.com
| Italian Maxon Training Center
| www.zuccherodikanna.com
| Italian based CGI Studio

2023-01-05, 13:24:54
Reply #21

rafaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Happy new year to all of you!

Let's not forget that soon this bug will be 1 year old!!

2023-01-10, 13:39:23
Reply #22

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 12652
  • Marcin
    • View Profile
@Rafaz @Masterzone @Philw @Rojharris + anyone else experiencing this issue:

When you have time, could you please:
1. Open any scene where you can reproduce the issue
2. Enable the render stamp in render settings
3. Set a pass limit (e.g. 25 passes - the point is to render with a fixed pass limit, but the rendering should not be very short, a few minutes would be great)
4. Do not use any other limit (noise limit or time limit must be disabled)
5.DISABLE the "low power" mode
6. Render and wait for it to reach the pass limit.
7. Write down your total render time. A screenshot showing the render with the stamp would be great (or if you cannot share the image - a screenshot of the Stats tab of the VFB).
8. ENABLE the "low power" mode
9. Render and wait for it to reach the pass limit.
10. Write down your total render time. A screenshot showing the render with the stamp would be great (or if you cannot share the image - a screenshot of the Stats tab of the VFB).

Please share your results along with your Macbook model and CPU model. Thanks in advance!


Marcin Miodek | chaos-corona.com
3D Support Team Lead - Corona | contact us

2023-01-10, 19:19:57
Reply #23

rafaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Hello, and thx for you response Maru,

I took the time to do few tests to show you guys what a come up with,

I did 3 renders as show on the pic,

1 - Physical render from C4d
2- Corona - Low power off
3- Corona - Low power On

With these results we can assure that Thermal is not the issue here, I had 0 problems with physical stock render on c4d. But when we start using corona you can see the graphs all messy when low power mode is off and it gets a little better when it's on. Usually after pass 5 is when the speed start to drop. Even with higher temps on Physical it kept stable all the way towards the end.

I have zero knowledge on programing but the results sure show us something is off on how corona is using the cores, it uses the Efficiency cores at full blast and the performance cores are all messy. 
I Also did record the screen and you can see the difference with low power on and off.

I'll try to do test you asked for to see the differences.

Machine:

Macbook pro 16" - M1 Pro
16gb ram
Cinema 4D 2023.1.3
Ventura 13.1
Corona 9 HotFix 1 ( also tried the latest 10v)


https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KRWFQA4Rtx7yxAr9ahYu2glyfxXuaH0k/view?usp=sharing

« Last Edit: 2023-01-10, 19:25:15 by rafaz »

2023-01-10, 22:15:22
Reply #24

johnnyswedish

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 236
    • View Profile
Hi Rafaz,

Looking at your ram (16GB). Could this be a problem? I had a Macbook Pro 2012 with 16MB, could not achieve anything. Only my own experience, but anything less than 32MB is a no, no. My laptop has 64MB and can handle most scenes unless totally insane. I did get frustrated at Apples non-comital attitude so switched to PC. A better option if you ask me for any 3D work. Hope you get it sorted though. John

2023-01-11, 09:52:15
Reply #25

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 12652
  • Marcin
    • View Profile
Hello, and thx for you response Maru,
I took the time to do few tests to show you guys what a come up with,


What is your exact CPU model?
Did you use pass limit or time limit? Unless I am missing something, in both cases the render time was identical - 08:29.

Update: I just saw your video and your test is very different from what I requested in my original post. Please follow the steps I listed.

I can also clearly see in your video that:
with "low power" set to "never" the ray/s are lower than with "low power" set to "always". You get faster rendering with "low power" set to "never". It's contrary to what users are reporting in this thread.


Please carefully follow the steps I listed at https://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php?topic=38220.msg208166#msg208166 and share your results.
« Last Edit: 2023-01-11, 13:40:04 by maru »
Marcin Miodek | chaos-corona.com
3D Support Team Lead - Corona | contact us

2023-01-11, 13:36:55
Reply #26

rafaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
I believe you got it all wrong and the test you saw it's not contrary what users are reporting...

"I can also clearly see in your video that:
with "low power" set to "never" the ray/s are lower than with "low power" set to "always". You get faster rendering with "low power" set to "never". It's contrary to what users are reporting in this thread."
A: Maybe because you watched 2-3 min of the video?

If you watch the video you're gonna notice that after PASS 5 it will drop the CPU usage ( Around 1:35 video time) to the 600%s.. and it will stay around 720% or less, after I  Turn LOW POWER MODE ON (ALWAYS) it will go up to 850%++, it would go higher but recording the screen will take a chunk of the cpu.. Like I said, the first 5 passes there's no problem at all, it keeps the cpu usage @ 950% and thats how it should be  the whole render, C4d Physical does that for hours  and does not thermal throttle.

Like I said, the CPU model is M1 Pro, I have attached the print

2023-01-11, 13:40:35
Reply #27

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 12652
  • Marcin
    • View Profile
Sorry, it was my mistake. Thank you for the clarification. But still, could you please do "render X passes and measure render time" test as I requested and share your results?
Marcin Miodek | chaos-corona.com
3D Support Team Lead - Corona | contact us

2023-01-11, 14:57:53
Reply #28

rafaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
I did the test as you asked,

25 passes with ON and OFF low power mode

Results:

Low Power ON  = 19:52 min
Low Power OFF = 21:45 min

Watching these 2 renders it's very clear that has something wrong on how corona use the cores? M1 pro is a 10 core cpu 2 Efficency and 8 Performance cores. therefore, if we take a look at the graphs i posted the 2 efficiency cores are taking the high load and the other 8 are like "thermal Throlling" going up and down, just to be clear they're acting like themal T. but they're not.. Like i said it starts with just few low minutes into the render right after pass 5  maybe that's the place to look at, what happenas after pass5  that causes the cpu to drop it's perfomance.

I hope this is very clear to have a better understanding.

2023-01-11, 16:13:50
Reply #29

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 12652
  • Marcin
    • View Profile
In addition to my previous request, please also try this:

1. Enable the Development / Experimental Stuff tab - https://support.chaos.com/hc/en-us/articles/4528469959953
2. DISABLE adaptivity
3. Test the same scenario again with Low Power ON and OFF
4. Share your results (please specify where you used adaptivity on and off and where you used low power on and off)
« Last Edit: 2023-01-11, 16:41:58 by maru »
Marcin Miodek | chaos-corona.com
3D Support Team Lead - Corona | contact us

2023-01-11, 18:19:29
Reply #30

rafaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Here we go again,

Since the last test was with adaptivity ON I didn't test this time, I only tested with Adaptivity OFF

Low Power ON  - 19:58 min
Low Power OFF - 22:47 min

Both with Adaptivity OFF

I Also add the graph once again to show how the Pertformance cores are very messy. 

2023-01-12, 09:08:29
Reply #31

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 12652
  • Marcin
    • View Profile
Ok, thank you for running the tests. So most likely it's not related to adaptivity. The reason why I asked about testing adaptivity on and off is that it starts working after the 5th pass and that was the exact number that you mentioned in your message.
Marcin Miodek | chaos-corona.com
3D Support Team Lead - Corona | contact us

2023-01-12, 15:28:22
Reply #32

rafaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
ok,

So whats next step? Do you guys have an macbook m1 there so you can test and find the issue?

2023-01-12, 17:15:36
Reply #33

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 12652
  • Marcin
    • View Profile
Do you guys have an macbook m1 there so you can test and find the issue?

According to your post, we don't ;)

In reality, we do, and we even have our own results. But we need more user tests first.
Marcin Miodek | chaos-corona.com
3D Support Team Lead - Corona | contact us

2023-01-12, 17:31:15
Reply #34

Philw

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 267
    • View Profile
I'm happy to help here on my M1 Max MBP - but wouldn't it be wise to provide a scene we can all use in exactly the same manner to standardise the results?

Just my 2c

2023-01-12, 18:46:06
Reply #35

rafaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
I'm happy to help here on my M1 Max MBP - but wouldn't it be wise to provide a scene we can all use in exactly the same manner to standardise the results?

Just my 2c

that's a good point, let see if they agree and provide us one.

2023-01-12, 19:30:55
Reply #36

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5412
    • View Profile
We wouldn't be able to provide one due to the complexities of being able to legally redistribute assets, sorry. So far though, reports have not said this is scene dependent, people do not seem to be reporting that some scenes are fine and others problematic, so testing using different scenes should be fine and not obscure the cause.
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2023-01-12, 19:32:33
Reply #37

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5412
    • View Profile
(PS you can always send your scene to us, privately, and we can always run a test on our machine versus yours)
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2023-01-13, 09:07:56
Reply #38

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 12652
  • Marcin
    • View Profile
I'm happy to help here on my M1 Max MBP - but wouldn't it be wise to provide a scene we can all use in exactly the same manner to standardise the results?

Just my 2c

Please follow the steps I listed in my post here: https://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php?topic=38220.msg208166#msg208166
Marcin Miodek | chaos-corona.com
3D Support Team Lead - Corona | contact us

2023-01-18, 09:50:31
Reply #39

YURII

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 76
    • View Profile
    • YURII SUHOV
Ok, MacBook Pro 16 M1 MAX 64GB RAM (Cinema R25 + latest public Corona). I 'warmed' up CPU so it will start with throttling.

Low Power mode OFF - 18:38 (around 70% CPU load)
Low Power mode ON - 15:54 (around 85% CPU load)

For comparison - I did run Cinebench with Low Power mode OFF for extended time and CPU load was constant at about 97% (which is comparable to intel Macs) + fans were spinning a lot more compared to Corona Renderer.

2023-01-27, 12:25:51
Reply #40

rafaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
hey all

I installed the latest daily and Idk if is just me but seems worse than before on v9 hot fix, anyone else?

2023-02-02, 11:09:27
Reply #41

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 12652
  • Marcin
    • View Profile
What was reported:
- Macbooks have a “low power” mode which you can toggle on and off.
- What is expected is that “low power” on would mean that there is less power consumed by the device which should also result in lower performance (higher render times).
- The issue: What actually happens is that with “low power” on, the performance is better (render times are lower).

How we tested:
- We used a MacBook Pro 16 inch 2021 (Apple M1 Pro with 10-core CPU, 16-core GPU, 16-core Neural Engine)
- We used Corona 9 HF1
- We also tested with V-Ray
- We also tested on an M1 Mac Mini

Monitoring:
- In Terminal for frequency and power: sudo powermetrics --samplers cpu_power
- For temperature: https://www.tunabellysoftware.com/tgpro/
- CPU history graph, Apple Activity Monitor

We used multiple scenes with a specific pass limit. We measured the time required for each rendering from start to finish. During the rendering, we monitored the CPU (history, temperatures, frequencies).
The Macbook was always connected to the power supply.

The observations:
Test 1:
When we started rendering on a cold machine (subjectively “cool” ambient temperature in the office), it took 10 minutes for the CPU to underclock from the initial 3228 MHz to 2285 MHz on all cores. 
On the second run in identical conditions, it took only 5 minutes for the CPU to underclock.
If the CPU frequency stays higher for a longer time during the first run, and it underclocks faster in each subsequent run, thermal throttling is the only sensible explanation.

We also repeated the test with V-Ray instead of Corona and the results were similar.


Test 2:
(the test was performed using the same machine and tools, but by a different person on a different date and using different scenes)
“Low power” off:
At the beginning, the CPU hovers around 780% CPU usage in Apple's Activity Monitor. Once the CPU reaches about 90°C (it took 4 min 30s) it underclocks and the CPU usage drops to about 670% +- 20%.

“Low power” on:
The CPU % was about 710% the whole time, which made the render faster because it never underclocked/throttled.

The test was repeated a few times and the performance with low power turned off was always very similar. First 4 minutes and about 30 seconds the CPU performs well and in the process heats up to about 90°C, after that, it underclocks and the performance of the CPU is throttled until the remainder of the render time.
In low power mode, the CPU reached temperatures of about 80°C and 86°C max which caused the CPU to not throttle as much as it did with low power mode turned off. This means that if the render is long enough to render on a mostly throttled CPU, it will render faster in low power mode.
The same happens in V-Ray.

Short render with cold CPU and low power mode turned off = 8 minutes 54 seconds
Short render with cold CPU and low power mode turned on = 8 minutes 59 seconds
(difference: 0,9%)

Longer render with cold CPU and low power mode turned off = 22 minutes 10 seconds
Longer render with cold CPU and low power mode turned on = 20 minutes 16 seconds
(difference: 9,37%)

Renders that took longer than a few minutes were always slightly faster with low power turned on and it was always due to CPU throttling after a few minutes.


Conclusions:
We are able to reproduce the main reported issue:
- With “low power” on, the rendering performance is better (lower render times) and consistent during the whole rendering process. Less heat is produced and the CPU temperature stays lower during the whole rendering process.
- With “low power” off, the rendering performance is worse (higher render times) because the rendering process starts with the expected performance, and later the CPU is underclocked. More heat is produced and this results in higher CPU temperatures.
- The specific numbers from our tests are shared in the Observations section.
- The issue does not occur on an Ma1 Mac Mini, however it has a CPU with less cores (and possibly better air flow).

As software developers, we have no control over the underclocking which is done by the system. We cannot control it in any way.
We cannot really provide a full technical explanation why exactly the issue appears because M1 CPUs are too new and there is not much information and experience on how exactly they work (e.g. the issue appears only in M1 macBook, but not in macMini (which has less cores)). We don't yet know what is the state for the new M2 (we would like to find out soon).
Based on our tests and experience, we can say that Corona and V-Ray (they are similar considering the CPU instructions and memory access patterns) can utilize CPU more than other commonly used software. This causes CPU overheating, and in turn leads to CPU underclocking. Similar issues were reported by AMD Threadripper 2990wx users when the CPU first became available. They would report the screen becoming black and requiring a system reboot, the system rebooting on its own, and other issues and blamed Corona for this. The solution was to make sure that the CPU is not overheating (e.g. because of an inefficient CPU fan), that the right motherboard model was picked for this CPU type, that the PSU is powerful enough, etc. They were always hardware problems, and fixing them resulted in problem-free rendering with exactly the same software (OS, host app, Corona version). The issues usually happened during the denoising stage, which engages specific CPU instructions, which is very demanding to the CPU (but again, the software is not doing “too much” considering the CPU capabilities - the system should be assembled in a way to handle such CPU usage without issues). If the hardware is built properly, then Corona rendering cannot cause overheating and/or CPU throttling, system reboots, random shutdowns, bluescreens, or similar issues. If the CPU is reaching thermal limits, this is not the fault of the software (same with voltage / power limits / power throttling / VRMs, etc).


Suggestions:
- We encourage you to retry our tests on your own and share your results:
1) In your case, does the CPU throttling appear with a delay the first time you start your “cold” Macbook, and then it starts happening faster when you retry the tests later on a “hot” Macbook?
2) Does the issue also appear in V-Ray for you?
- You can switch to other types of computers (desktop, Mac mini, etc - it is likely that they have better thermal design)
- You can switch to Windows OS (we are not getting reports about throttling from Windows users and Windows PCs are easier to customize in terms of hardware and software)
- You can use other rendering software than Corona (if the throttling does not appear when using it; according to our tests it happens in V-Ray too)


Other notes:
- “Only Corona has this issue” - this is not true. This is not a Corona-only issue. According to our tests, the same issue appears when rendering with V-Ray.
- “What I see is that the dev team does not have a macbook machine to teste at, they probably have an mac mini m1 and that's all they call for.” - We used a MacBook Pro 16 inch 2021 (Apple M1 Pro with 10-core CPU, 16-core GPU, 16-core Neural Engine) for our tests, and also compared it with an M1 Mac Mini. 
- What exactly do the red squares represent in the graph? In V-Ray there is much more of it than in Corona. - It means how much of CPU power is spent for system tasks (kernel space) vs how much of CPU time is spent for application tasks (green squares - user space).
- The M1 CPUs are still quite new and they may be confusing to users. For example: https://eclecticlight.co/2022/02/24/cpu-percentage-is-misleading-on-m1-macs/
- M1 CPUs are known to throttle in some cases, for example when an external monitor is connected, or when the GPU is under heavy load. Most likely this is related to either thermal limits or power limits:
CPU throttling when GPU under load:
https://www.reddit.com/r/macbookpro/comments/q7x8zr/cpu_throttling_with_gpu_active/
"This isn’t thermal throttling of CPU or GPU. It’s VRM power throttling. Essentially, the VRM chips cannot sustain more than 60W of power for more than 10-15 mins. It’s a terrible problem."
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/2019-16-is-hot-noisy-with-an-external-monitor.2211747/page-213?post=30336806#post-30336806
"VRM power throttling -> This is the main issue with the 16" MBP due to no cooling mechanism on VRM chips. This is why we actually face the severe performance drop/throttling even on a cleaned 16" MBP."


Images / screenshots: [link]




« Last Edit: 2023-02-05, 16:18:39 by maru »
Marcin Miodek | chaos-corona.com
3D Support Team Lead - Corona | contact us

2023-02-02, 15:27:56
Reply #42

masterzone

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 156
  • CGI Generalist since 1998
    • View Profile
    • ZuccherodiKanna
Quote
- “Only Corona has this issue” - this is not true. This is not a Corona-only issue. According to our tests, the same issue appears when rendering with V-Ray.

Did you try with a Cinema4D internal engine scene? download an example scene from the content browser and give it a try..please.
| www.c4dzone.com
| Italian Maxon Training Center
| www.zuccherodikanna.com
| Italian based CGI Studio

2023-02-02, 16:54:41
Reply #43

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 12652
  • Marcin
    • View Profile
Quote
- “Only Corona has this issue” - this is not true. This is not a Corona-only issue. According to our tests, the same issue appears when rendering with V-Ray.

Did you try with a Cinema4D internal engine scene? download an example scene from the content browser and give it a try..please.

It does not happen with the Cinema 4D native render engine.
It happens with Corona.
It happens with V-Ray.

Does it mean that "Only Corona has this issue"?
Marcin Miodek | chaos-corona.com
3D Support Team Lead - Corona | contact us

2023-02-02, 18:01:15
Reply #44

masterzone

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 156
  • CGI Generalist since 1998
    • View Profile
    • ZuccherodiKanna
Quote
It does not happen with the Cinema 4D native render engine.
It happens with Corona.
It happens with V-Ray.

Interesting thinks...maybe this can be used to investigate more?

Quote
Does it mean that "Only Corona has this issue"?

I mean that Corona Render and now also Vray has issue...
What do you think about Cinema4D Rendering engine has not issue? do you think that could be a "C++ C4D plugin behaviour" problem? I would like to know if a Corona Benchmark stand alone is afflicted from this issue or come from plugin ecosystem.
Anyway take it easy, we love corona render and we would like to see it render at speed of light on Apple silicon CPU...

Alex
| www.c4dzone.com
| Italian Maxon Training Center
| www.zuccherodikanna.com
| Italian based CGI Studio

2023-02-02, 18:36:06
Reply #45

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5412
    • View Profile
The thing is, further investigation does not seem necessary. We can't say how the native renderers in C4D use threads, how optimized they are, etc. What we can say is that Corona and V-Ray are VERY good at using a CPU to its full capacity, and this seems to be the problem as the CPUs or some other element in the machine end up throttling. Since no program can ever "make the CPU do more than it can do" that comes down to the hardware not keeping everything below operating temperatures when the CPU is maxed out.

The only solution would be to deliberately make Corona and V-Ray NOT run at full power, which would be somewhat backward. Of course this should be possible for you to control at some level by reducing the number of threads Corona is allowed to use for rendering, which may keep temperatures down (EDIT - or of course use low power mode, which is the OS equivalent of reducing the power of the CPU available for use). But ultimately the tests are pointing toward the fact that the hardware does not keep the CPU (or some other element in the machine) cool enough to avoid throttling when the full power of the CPU is used for an extended period of time, and that one comes down to the hardware manufacturer.

Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2023-02-02, 18:38:09
Reply #46

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5412
    • View Profile
On the benchmark - it doesn't run for that long, so probably doesn't push the CPU for long enough. It's also based on Corona 1.3, so a rather old and outdated version of Corona that may or may not utilize the full power of modern CPUs as well as the current release of Corona.
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2023-02-03, 08:39:45
Reply #47

masterzone

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 156
  • CGI Generalist since 1998
    • View Profile
    • ZuccherodiKanna
The thing is, further investigation does not seem necessary. We can't say how the native renderers in C4D use threads, how optimized they are, etc. What we can say is that Corona and V-Ray are VERY good at using a CPU to its full capacity, and this seems to be the problem as the CPUs or some other element in the machine end up throttling. Since no program can ever "make the CPU do more than it can do" that comes down to the hardware not keeping everything below operating temperatures when the CPU is maxed out.

The only solution would be to deliberately make Corona and V-Ray NOT run at full power, which would be somewhat backward. Of course this should be possible for you to control at some level by reducing the number of threads Corona is allowed to use for rendering, which may keep temperatures down (EDIT - or of course use low power mode, which is the OS equivalent of reducing the power of the CPU available for use). But ultimately the tests are pointing toward the fact that the hardware does not keep the CPU (or some other element in the machine) cool enough to avoid throttling when the full power of the CPU is used for an extended period of time, and that one comes down to the hardware manufacturer.

I don't totally agree with you Tom. Try to follow me: if you start a render with Cinema4D internal rendering engine, (I agree that we don’t know how it uses thread or how is optimized) you can push the Apple silicon cpu to near 100%. (I have 10 cores so around 998% CPU) My MacBook Pro M1 Max can handle a scene for many hours running without any CPU or GPU throttle. Sure you can hear fan running (medium velocity of course). If it was a hardware problem related the same thing should happen. Cinema4D can't tell to the CPU to avoid throttling so is very easy to make a conclusion about.

The fact is that Corona (I can't try any rendering engine that uses CPU unfortunately) uses around 80% of total cores after some passes or after some loop renders. Cinema4D can handle the full percentage of the CPU without any throttle.
The throttle it does not matter here, believe me.

About other kind of test with Corona Bench, I know that right now is not compiled for Apple silicon CPU, I seen on Trello about future re-compiling for M1. I think that a good test should be to try with a stand-alone app for to see what happen during rendering. Avoiding to pass through Cinema4D C++ plugin ecosystem is a good way to test the power of the compiled app.

Alex
« Last Edit: 2023-02-03, 10:28:37 by masterzone »
| www.c4dzone.com
| Italian Maxon Training Center
| www.zuccherodikanna.com
| Italian based CGI Studio

2023-02-03, 12:28:16
Reply #48

Nejc Kilar

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 1238
    • View Profile
    • My personal website
From my understanding of things I think what is important to recognize here is that 100% CPU utilization doesn't necessarily directly correlate to how hot your CPU will get. At least that is the behavior you see in Windows.

Think of it this way - Doing a render with Corona will saw your CPU utilization reach ~100%. Lets say your temps are around 70c at that point. Then, when denoising kicks in, the CPU utilization is still 100% but its hitting different parts of the CPU and now your temps are closer to 80c. More or less same reported utilization but vastly different temperatures.

Similar thing happens with AVX workloads. Your CPU can be 100% utilized on non-AVX workloads and your temps will be fine. Then if you run an AVX workload the CPU will downclock itself automatically and you'll still see your temps rise up considerably.

So behavior like that is also something worth considering imho especially since we don't necessarily know how the built in Cinema 4D render engines are hitting the CPU (and which parts of the CPU).
« Last Edit: 2023-02-03, 12:33:51 by Nejc Kilar »
Nejc Kilar | chaos-corona.com
Educational Content Creator | contact us

2023-02-04, 21:23:53
Reply #49

YURII

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 76
    • View Profile
    • YURII SUHOV
The thing is, further investigation does not seem necessary. We can't say how the native renderers in C4D use threads, how optimized they are, etc. What we can say is that Corona and V-Ray are VERY good at using a CPU to its full capacity, and this seems to be the problem as the CPUs or some other element in the machine end up throttling. Since no program can ever "make the CPU do more than it can do" that comes down to the hardware not keeping everything below operating temperatures when the CPU is maxed out.

The only solution would be to deliberately make Corona and V-Ray NOT run at full power, which would be somewhat backward. Of course this should be possible for you to control at some level by reducing the number of threads Corona is allowed to use for rendering, which may keep temperatures down (EDIT - or of course use low power mode, which is the OS equivalent of reducing the power of the CPU available for use). But ultimately the tests are pointing toward the fact that the hardware does not keep the CPU (or some other element in the machine) cool enough to avoid throttling when the full power of the CPU is used for an extended period of time, and that one comes down to the hardware manufacturer.

So, thats it, you are saying that you guys give up on this and it is the way it should be?

2023-02-05, 16:16:46
Reply #50

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 12652
  • Marcin
    • View Profile
"As software developers, we have no control over the underclocking which is done by the system. We cannot control it in any way."

Update: bolded some parts in https://forum.corona-renderer.com/index.php?topic=38220.msg209024#msg209024 and made them reddish in color so that even if you decide not to read the whole thing, you can at least see the important bits.
TL;DR: We cannot fix something that we have no control over.


« Last Edit: 2023-02-05, 16:20:18 by maru »
Marcin Miodek | chaos-corona.com
3D Support Team Lead - Corona | contact us

2023-02-06, 15:49:03
Reply #51

rafaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Botton line is....


The corona team Don't know how to optimize the render to M1 processors and are the're giving up on trying.

Now what is over the board is you guys trying to blame the system for the lack of knowledge on the matter. I would totally agree if all other softwares like c4d physical and standart render or even blender would cause the same problem but they don't. They took the time to learn and optimize the software as we go and still working on it.

"As software developers, we have no control over the underclocking which is done by the system. We cannot control it in any way."

Maybe you don't have to controll it, maybe just optimize to work it right. We know it's a low demand you guys won't spend the time to work on.

The thing is, further investigation does not seem necessary.
Right here says it all.

It's time to move on.
 

2023-02-06, 15:59:00
Reply #52

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5412
    • View Profile
"The corona team Don't know how to optimize the render to M1 processors and are the're giving up on trying."

This is simply not true. The truth is we use the CPU to its maximum, and the hardware can't keep up, and something overheats. Controls to limit this already exist - low power mode, or use less threads. These all will result in slower rendering compared to the hardware actually supporting using the CPU to its maximum over an extended period of time. To be honest, these are issues best raised with the hardware manufacturer, not with us (so, I hope you have raised this with Apple with as much vigor as you have raised it here). There is no "optimizing" for the CPU, there would simply be "using less of it so the system doesn't overheat". The problem is we are TOO optimized at using the CPU.

The fact that other software can't run the CPU to its full capacity over an extended period, and so doesn't overheat, is also not saying that software is better - in many ways, it is worse, because it is never really pushing the CPU as hard as it can go and never getting the best from it.

Imagine a car that can go at 100mph. We drive it at a 100mph all the time, and it overheats. Other software drives it at 85mph all the time so it never overheats. The problem there is not the driver, it's that the car has not been built all round to support the maximum speed it can go at.

I am not sure why there is some confusion over this, and why "just calculate less / make less use of the power of the CPU so it doesn't overheat" is being called "optimizing". Optimizing would be the other way round, getting more power out of the CPU. And if you want it to calculate less, you as a user have that control already, in threads used and in low power mode - actually changing Corona code to always calculate less would be counter-productive.
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2023-02-07, 10:59:47
Reply #53

masterzone

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 156
  • CGI Generalist since 1998
    • View Profile
    • ZuccherodiKanna

The fact that other software can't run the CPU to its full capacity over an extended period.

Sorry Tom, but all Corona Team continue to replay that. I understand that every software developer loves it's creatures...and we love Corona Render too...but please could we try to analyse the fact that Cinema4D Cinebench or Cinema4D standard/physical rendering engine can handle the CPU up to 99% for hours without any overhead, without any CPU throttle and without any ISSUE on Apple Silicon Processor...?

Nejc Kilar is the only one said interesting things about the "different" part of the CPU used for calculations...maybe Cinema4D rendering engine takes part of the CPU for calculation that Corona and Vray don't....it's interesting. I don't know deeply how the pure calculation works...but what I know that Cinema4D push the CPU at it's best, Corona it doesn't...Science is a fact and numbers say that.

Anyway, I wrote many time about that Corona Render "sometimes" reach the 98% of the CPU...and after some loop renders on the same scene, continuous works or long period or "I don't know why", it falls below 800%...sometimes 750% of a total of 1000% of 10 core Apple silicon CPU. The Cinema4D rendering engine stay up to 990% of the CPU, this make the CPU Hot, not as my second iMac with Intel 10K generation processor that become very hot, but the CPU never falls below 990%.

I tested internally the behaviour of:

iMac i9 10K
Apple Silicon M1 Max.

We have the same Cinebench numbers: around 14.000 CB. So when I try a complex scene, my M1 Max and my iMac i9 renders with the same timing...M1 Max is a little bit speedy.. and stay cold..the i9 seems a phon and drive me crazy :)
I tried with a complex Corona Render scene and at first passes my M1 Max outperformed the iMac i9. But after sometime my M1 has fails with a 20-25% of processors percentage unused.

It seems a throttle issue, but it doesn't...

I want to repeat my question: way does Cinema4D rendering engine use 98% of the processor for hours? How different are the mathematical instructions sent to the CPU by Cinema4D rendering engine and Corona Render? Do you think is a good idea to try a Stand Alone Rendering without pass through plugin Ecosystem? Maybe Cinema4D creates a bottleneck?

This pictures from me are absolutely clear.
PS: I don't tested the low power on or low power off...I work with automatic power...my corona issues come up with any settings.


« Last Edit: 2023-02-07, 12:10:16 by masterzone »
| www.c4dzone.com
| Italian Maxon Training Center
| www.zuccherodikanna.com
| Italian based CGI Studio

2023-02-07, 13:50:35
Reply #54

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5412
    • View Profile
It was mentioned and explained earlier that the graphs you see there are not a reliable indicator of how hard the CPU is being pushed - Nejc explanation was the one, that pointed out different parts of the CPU can be used which can result in different amounts of heat being generated. Not all "98% of the processor" results in that very high level monitoring tool are equal.

"I tried with a complex Corona Render scene and at first passes my M1 Max outperformed the iMac i9. But after sometime my M1 has fails with a 20-25% of processors percentage unused."

This is exactly the evidence of overheating. Clearly the CPU can do the calculations we ask of it, it does it initially, but over time it is not able to lose its heat effectively and thus has to throttle. This is not something we can control - if the CPU was NOT capable of those calculations, it wouldn't run faster at first. If the CPU was cooled effectively, it would maintain that and not drop performance.

The only "solution" for us would be to make Corona stop doing calculations, set up some idle clock cycles to let the CPU cool... but this has the same result as less threads / low power mode, ie, slower rendering. We talk about different parts of the CPU, well if we use a different part of the CPU "like some other CPU render engines" then... it will render slower, as we're using the correct part of the CPU to get the maximum performance out of it and changing that will make our calculations less efficient and slower.

The only solution which gives the result of "continue operating at that level of effective use of the power the CPU can provide" is... better cooling. And there is nothing we can do about that since we didn't design the cooling.

If this was a PC that one person had built themselves, this conversation would not drag on like this. Simply because it is a computer designed by a company though it seems to cause doubt - surely the cooling is good enough! How could a company not design their machine to perform at maximum capacity for an indefinite time! But the truth is, being designed by a company and not put together by an individual does not mean the machine is designed well enough to handle the situation of extended use of the maximum power of the components.

With all that said, all the evidence is here, and if evidence and facts do not convince someone, then there is nothing else we can do to convince that person, so we won't keep repeating the cause that the evidence points to. It's not that "we choose to ignore it" it's "There's nothing we can do (other than cripple Corona, which you can already do via thread limitation or low power mode as all those have the same result of less heat but slower rendering so the existing solutions are just as good as anything we could put into the Corona code)".
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2023-02-07, 13:55:30
Reply #55

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5412
    • View Profile
PS standalone would do the same thing - C4D should be almost entirely idle in terms of CPU use during rendering, so it isn't consuming CPU power and adding to the heat.

A last note is that this is not unique to these machines - all machines get pushed to their max with Corona, as I can attest by the sound of my PC fans which are never louder than during Corona rendering and denoising in particular :) In other words my CPU is running at its hottest (and probably other parts of the motherboard too), the cooling is ramping up to handle it, but it DOES handle it and nothing needs to throttle. I think anyone who uses Corona on any machine can attest to how it really asks the CPU to do everything it is capable of :)
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2023-02-08, 10:28:06
Reply #56

Philw

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 267
    • View Profile
I think a fair point to make as well is that I would think the M1 ports of the Intel Embree raytracing kernels (that I believe most CPU renderers are tapping into) may still be finding its feet?

2023-02-09, 10:18:38
Reply #57

Philw

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 267
    • View Profile
+ I do think as has been mentioned elsewhere there is stuff under the hood that makes the MacBook Pro machines just that little bit more cautious with their CPU use. If anyone would like to gift me a 20core Mac Studio Ultra for "testing" I'd happily do some more testing :-)

2023-02-09, 18:01:01
Reply #58

frv

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
No need for testing the M1 Ultra. I have one and its flawless on all 20 cores at maximum.
I never hear fans even when renders take hours. I know that the fans work since I can feel a light breeze from the Mac Ultra and it feels just a tiny bit warmer than room temparature. So if you like a rock solid desktop that does not make any noise and you can carry in a backpack on the bike home the Mac Studio Ultra is fantastic.

Only problem is that the Mac Studio Ultra is a one trick pony when you are in Archviz. There is really nothing out there that does it on a Mac. Lumion, TwinMotion, Redshift, Octane, Enscape etc etc. all are either not available or simply not effective on a Mac.
So if Chaos decides the Mac market is no longer profitable my Mac Studio investement is lost as well.

2023-02-09, 18:10:22
Reply #59

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5412
    • View Profile
Actually, Enscape is on the Mac and works with Sketchup: https://enscape3d.com/enscape-for-mac/ and https://blog.enscape3d.com/enscape-for-mac-available-sketchup

This came out of beta just a few days ago :) (or at least, that blog post was updated a few days ago) So Chaos definitely sees the Mac as a viable and important market!

Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2023-02-09, 19:33:37
Reply #60

Chules

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
I have done many tests and always the Mac Book Pro M1 Max was much slower than the iMac i9. Always the M1 Max rendered at an average of 750-800% and the iMac i9 at 950%. Apparently, the M1 with better ventilation do not have the %CPU drop problem... I have raised the Mac Book Pro from the work surface leaving the lower central space free and cool and the render times have improved... it takes 1 hour with an average of 950% CPU. I'm doing long-term render tests and I'm buying it with iMac i9 and it's starting to improve a lot in performance. A little below the M1 Max. When I carry out more tests I will be able to throw a percentage or comparative times. I hope I can shed some light on this matter because my workflow is mac and corona and I am so comfortable that I would not want to change it. From what I read, the mac studio does not have this performance drop and it seems to be a very powerful processor. I have the problem on an iMac M1 that I don't know what I can do to improve its cooling or CPU performance. Thanks to all users and the corona team. Thank you for bringing this wonderful rendering engine to mac. A greeting from Spain.
« Last Edit: 2023-02-09, 20:05:15 by Chules »

2023-02-10, 16:10:06
Reply #61

rafaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
I have done many tests and always the Mac Book Pro M1 Max was much slower than the iMac i9. Always the M1 Max rendered at an average of 750-800% and the iMac i9 at 950%. Apparently, the M1 with better ventilation do not have the %CPU drop problem... I have raised the Mac Book Pro from the work surface leaving the lower central space free and cool and the render times have improved... it takes 1 hour with an average of 950% CPU. I'm doing long-term render tests and I'm buying it with iMac i9 and it's starting to improve a lot in performance. A little below the M1 Max. When I carry out more tests I will be able to throw a percentage or comparative times. I hope I can shed some light on this matter because my workflow is mac and corona and I am so comfortable that I would not want to change it. From what I read, the mac studio does not have this performance drop and it seems to be a very powerful processor. I have the problem on an iMac M1 that I don't know what I can do to improve its cooling or CPU performance. Thanks to all users and the corona team. Thank you for bringing this wonderful rendering engine to mac. A greeting from Spain.

I have my macbook pro on a notebook stand with coolers on the botton and makes no diference.

I'm starting to build a PC :( and will be using it as a render server. Anyone here use this kind of setup, how's the workflow? I'd like to model on mac and render on the PC

2023-02-10, 16:48:07
Reply #62

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5412
    • View Profile
Not sure if you are a long time Corona user or not rafaz, but you would need at least one extra render node for that to be an efficient workflow. If you have been with us from before Corona 8, you may have free render nodes already, but if not you would have to ensure you add one to your subscription. Just as a heads up!

Other than that it should work fine, you can use Team Render to send things over to another machine (or network of machines) for rendering.
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2023-02-10, 17:49:49
Reply #63

rafaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Not sure if you are a long time Corona user or not rafaz, but you would need at least one extra render node for that to be an efficient workflow. If you have been with us from before Corona 8, you may have free render nodes already, but if not you would have to ensure you add one to your subscription. Just as a heads up!

Other than that it should work fine, you can use Team Render to send things over to another machine (or network of machines) for rendering.

i've been with corona since the early betas.

This is it right?


2023-02-10, 19:28:30
Reply #64

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5412
    • View Profile
Perfect, yes, as a long time user you have your 3 extra free render nodes :)
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2023-02-11, 16:19:25
Reply #65

masterzone

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 156
  • CGI Generalist since 1998
    • View Profile
    • ZuccherodiKanna
I have done many tests and always the Mac Book Pro M1 Max was much slower than the iMac i9. Always the M1 Max rendered at an average of 750-800% and the iMac i9 at 950%. Apparently, the M1 with better ventilation do not have the %CPU drop problem... I have raised the Mac Book Pro from the work surface leaving the lower central space free and cool and the render times have improved... it takes 1 hour with an average of 950% CPU. I'm doing long-term render tests and I'm buying it with iMac i9 and it's starting to improve a lot in performance. A little below the M1 Max. When I carry out more tests I will be able to throw a percentage or comparative times. I hope I can shed some light on this matter because my workflow is mac and corona and I am so comfortable that I would not want to change it. From what I read, the mac studio does not have this performance drop and it seems to be a very powerful processor. I have the problem on an iMac M1 that I don't know what I can do to improve its cooling or CPU performance. Thanks to all users and the corona team. Thank you for bringing this wonderful rendering engine to mac. A greeting from Spain.

This will be my last post about this issue because is very difficult to explain here. More test must be done but not from us but from developers. Try to run a Cinema4D native render scene (not corona or Vray). You will able to reach the 995% of the CPU for hours and also you can place the MacBook on a pillow without any issue. You will find the same Cinebench of an iMac i9 10K generation.
Alex
« Last Edit: 2023-02-11, 16:24:59 by masterzone »
| www.c4dzone.com
| Italian Maxon Training Center
| www.zuccherodikanna.com
| Italian based CGI Studio

2023-02-11, 17:35:27
Reply #66

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 12652
  • Marcin
    • View Profile
This will be my last post about this issue because is very difficult to explain here. More test must be done but not from us but from developers. Try to run a Cinema4D native render scene (not corona or Vray). You will able to reach the 995% of the CPU for hours and also you can place the MacBook on a pillow without any issue. You will find the same Cinebench of an iMac i9 10K generation.
Alex

I'm glad that you have finally read the explanations that we wrote multiple times on why the issue occurs with Corona and not with some other software and that finally the issue does not require any further comments.
Marcin Miodek | chaos-corona.com
3D Support Team Lead - Corona | contact us

2023-02-11, 23:27:50
Reply #67

frv

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
Tx TomG
I used sketchup till about 6 or 7 years ago. I don't know of any architect who still does. It's all Archicad, Vectorworks or Revit, the last one not on a Mac. Architects work with BIM models so all the modelling in Sketchup became redundant.
So for me no Enscape still. It's really only Coronarender for me considering the Mac Ultra.

2023-02-19, 16:13:26
Reply #68

YURII

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 76
    • View Profile
    • YURII SUHOV
Issue occurs with Corona ONLY BECAUSE it is poorly optimised for Mac silicone! Simple as that! How you can be so blind and try to convince us that it is hardwares fault? That M1 Mac cant handle 100% CPU load for extended period of time on Corona, even though it can with other software? Clearly other guys did something right that you guys did wrong! Its like blaming a tutor for not being able to submit test at 100% while other students did that just fine.

Maybe call Apple and ask them for help? Call Maxon and ask how they were able to optimise their app and native renderers? This - We cant do anything - just kills me!

Im seriously thinking of switching to some other renderer, even though Ive ben with you guys since first ever version.

Do something -

This will be my last post about this issue because is very difficult to explain here. More test must be done but not from us but from developers. Try to run a Cinema4D native render scene (not corona or Vray). You will able to reach the 995% of the CPU for hours and also you can place the MacBook on a pillow without any issue. You will find the same Cinebench of an iMac i9 10K generation.
Alex

I'm glad that you have finally read the explanations that we wrote multiple times on why the issue occurs with Corona and not with some other software and that finally the issue does not require any further comments.

2023-02-19, 17:35:38
Reply #69

James Vella

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 534
    • View Profile
Issue occurs with Corona ONLY BECAUSE it is poorly optimised for Mac silicone! Simple as that!

I dont work for Corona but didn't you see the graphs and comments in this thread?

The take home points I see is - just because a native render engine 'claims to be using 100%' of the CPU doesn't mean it is. Is there any proof? Can you show how the native render engine is utilizing the CPU to its fullest? Are you sure the native render engine isn't reducing consumption so those % numbers are higher while reducing the actual performance of the CPU to ensure the CPU doesn't throttle?

I see results from the Ultra Studio in another thread which show no reduction due to higher thermal regulation, so if the Mac laptop is experiencing this isn't this a direct enough comparison to throttling? What are you trying to achieve, as TomG has noted if you down throttle the CPU its the same as using low power mode correct?

Here is an example:
I use a 3080RTX GPU in a laptop, I understand due to power/thermal limitations that my 3080 is about half the performance of a desktop 3080. In this situation my preference to be mobile is the limiting factor, not my expectation that it should match the desktop performance of a 3080.

Example 2:
Imagine you have 2 identical computers, First computer is at room temperature and when it hits 90degrees centigrade it throttles to keep the components cool, thus you have the first computer reducing CPU power even though it stays at 100% the entire time = slower render time.

Second computer is kept in room temperature of -20 degrees. No matter how hard you push that CPU its going to stay at 100% the entire time and not throttle because it doesn't ever reach 90 degrees centigrade. Second computer is going to finish the render faster.

This is oversimplified due to how you cool your CPU etc however I think the point is clear.

Also you can check on youtube for yourself search "mac pro throttle" and filter by the last year, you will see plenty of videos with similar issues regardless of 3D.
« Last Edit: 2023-02-19, 20:09:02 by James Vella »

2023-02-19, 20:41:59
Reply #70

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5412
    • View Profile
The main, simple thing to take away here is that a CPU is NOT a uniform single thing - it has different parts that make it up. Different software will call upon those different parts to different amounts, and those different parts may result in different amounts of heat being generated. The example most commonly given is the AVX instruction set.

Not all software will call those different parts in the same way, so even though 2 different software says "100% being used", it may NOT mean the same parts are being used. Corona is very optimized for performance, and when it uses 100% that can indeed cause more heat than other software - but doing anything else would mean Corona would be slower, even before thermal throttling happened.

If Corona was poorly optimized, we'd not see the graphs and user reports where it runs faster FOR A WHILE than in low power mode, THEN runs slower. The only explanation for this is that the design could not dissipate the heat and it built up until the CPU decided to throttle itself. If Corona was poorly optimized, it would always run slower and that speed would be consistent and not change over time.

Thus, there is no way to "optimize" Corona here, only to "cripple" it to avoid so much heat being generated - and you can already do this yourself by setting Corona to use less threads, or by swapping to low power mode.
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2023-02-19, 20:50:18
Reply #71

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5412
    • View Profile
PS - I should also add there are other components on the motherboard that can thermal throttle too, e.g. when the CPU demands more power to work and parts of the board have to start supplying that extra juice, so overall design has to be good to ensure those can dissipate heat.

Either way, "starts faster in full power mode then gets slower than when in low power mode" is a sure sign of thermal throttling somewhere in the machine. The decision is then whether it's faster to have it run at max capacity for a while and then swap to something slower than low power mode, or just having it all in low power mode from the beginning - short renders may complete before throttling occurs, for instance, so you can just do those in full power; but very long ones may benefit from just starting in low power mode for final overall render times.
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2023-02-19, 21:02:18
Reply #72

YURII

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 76
    • View Profile
    • YURII SUHOV
Yes, and as a matter of fact, crippling it by setting Mac to 'Low Power mode' gets better results than by using your very optimised algorithm, does it makes sense?

Im just saying, that it can't be that everyone is doing it wrong and you guys are doing it right, if you take into account scale of corporations like Apple, Maxon, BlackMagic, Adobe etc. You guys don't even have your own set of M1/M2 Macs to test all these hypothesis in house.

So, that is what is not making sense to me and few other people in this thread, who tried to tell you same stuff but in a bit more calmer tone. It just doesn't make sense!

Maybe, we should write to Chaos about it? Maybe they have extra budget for these types of scenarios?

The main, simple thing to take away here is that a CPU is NOT a uniform single thing - it has different parts that make it up. Different software will call upon those different parts to different amounts, and those different parts may result in different amounts of heat being generated. The example most commonly given is the AVX instruction set.

Not all software will call those different parts in the same way, so even though 2 different software says "100% being used", it may NOT mean the same parts are being used. Corona is very optimized for performance, and when it uses 100% that can indeed cause more heat than other software - but doing anything else would mean Corona would be slower, even before thermal throttling happened.

If Corona was poorly optimized, we'd not see the graphs and user reports where it runs faster FOR A WHILE than in low power mode, THEN runs slower. The only explanation for this is that the design could not dissipate the heat and it built up until the CPU decided to throttle itself. If Corona was poorly optimized, it would always run slower and that speed would be consistent and not change over time.

Thus, there is no way to "optimize" Corona here, only to "cripple" it to avoid so much heat being generated - and you can already do this yourself by setting Corona to use less threads, or by swapping to low power mode.

2023-02-19, 21:28:55
Reply #73

YURII

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 76
    • View Profile
    • YURII SUHOV
So, I did a Cinebench R23 benchmark just now (16", M1 Max, 64RAM), started with Low Power mode, ran it for 10:00:00 and the score was 10834, then, immediately, after this test, I ran it again, this time in High Power mode and **SHOCKER** it scored 12108.

So why is that? Why Corona does it backwards? We want performance the same way it is when running Cinebench - CPU at 99%, Low Power Mode uses less power and scores lower. High Power Mode ramps up the fans and scores higher! I can hear fan ramping up, because it is not letting it to throttle as you guys claim! CPU is at 98% as we speak. Why Corona is not ramping up fans the same way as Cinebench is?

Again, question - why you guys think that everyone else got it wrong (or are faking CPU usage of 100%) and you guys got it right? Numbers speak for themselves!

PS - I should also add there are other components on the motherboard that can thermal throttle too, e.g. when the CPU demands more power to work and parts of the board have to start supplying that extra juice, so overall design has to be good to ensure those can dissipate heat.

Either way, "starts faster in full power mode then gets slower than when in low power mode" is a sure sign of thermal throttling somewhere in the machine. The decision is then whether it's faster to have it run at max capacity for a while and then swap to something slower than low power mode, or just having it all in low power mode from the beginning - short renders may complete before throttling occurs, for instance, so you can just do those in full power; but very long ones may benefit from just starting in low power mode for final overall render times.

2023-02-19, 22:17:43
Reply #74

James Vella

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 534
    • View Profile
So, I did a Cinebench R23 benchmark just now (16", M1 Max, 64RAM), started with Low Power mode, ran it for 10:00:00 and the score was 10834, then, immediately, after this test, I ran it again, this time in High Power mode and **SHOCKER** it scored 12108.

Interesting! Can you try a 60 minute test and post the results?

2023-02-20, 06:37:21
Reply #75

YURII

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 76
    • View Profile
    • YURII SUHOV
Sarcasm here? It will be same result

So, I did a Cinebench R23 benchmark just now (16", M1 Max, 64RAM), started with Low Power mode, ran it for 10:00:00 and the score was 10834, then, immediately, after this test, I ran it again, this time in High Power mode and **SHOCKER** it scored 12108.

Interesting! Can you try a 60 minute test and post the results?

2023-02-20, 09:06:46
Reply #76

James Vella

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 534
    • View Profile
Sarcasm here? It will be same result

Not sarcasm, just genuinely curious. It would be a good way to test/compare the throttle theory.

2023-02-20, 12:49:21
Reply #77

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5412
    • View Profile
YURII, as has been explained multiple times, 100% CPU is not the same thing, it all depends on which parts of the CPU software is using. Corona drives the CPU harder, or some parts of it, or makes the CPU require more consistent draw of power, than other software. It's as simple as that - the fact that some high level approximation says "100% CPU" does not mean you are comparing apples to apples.

Corona is known to use the CPU in a much more demanding way - ie taking full advantage of what the CPU can do - than other software, because we are so well optimized to use the CPU to its full advantage for rendering. Again, the evidence is in the fact that a 2 minute render on high power will run faster than a 2 minute render on low power mode, but after 5 minutes suddenly everything drops in speed - which can only be thermal throttling of some part of the motherboard or CPU. This then comes down to the design not being able to keep everything below throttling thresholds when the CPU is exploited so well.

This is not unique to Macs - if a PC had inappropriate cooling on it, it would do the same. If a motherboard had inappropriate cooling in any machine, it would do the same. It is impossible for software to ask a CPU to do more than it was designed to do - but it's entirely possible for a cooling system or motherboard design not to be able to support the CPU doing its maximum for an indefinite period.

So again, there is nothing we can do other than "cripple" Corona to NOT use the CPU to its best advantage - which you can already do yourself, with less threads, or low power mode.

I really don't know how else to explain it, so I guess if you choose to believe otherwise and have some explanation for why high power mode works at high speed for a period of time then slows down, then we will have to leave you to that belief.
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2023-02-20, 12:54:35
Reply #78

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5412
    • View Profile
"you guys don't even have your own set of M1/M2 Macs to test all these hypothesis in house." - it has been answered already that we have access to the machines to do our own testing in house.

"Doesn't happen with other software" - other software doesn't access the CPU in the same way as we do. e.g. on my PC when denoising kicks in, I can hear my fans increase in speed, because it is known that denoising fully exploits the CPU more than anything else I have on this machine, with no spare clock cycles where the CPU gets any chance to cool down for microseconds. Remember, it's not just using the CPU, it's what parts of the CPU, and how consistently they are used without breaks, gaps, or pauses. Every software is different (but in the high level, approximate / summary, all will still say "100%" even though that represents different access to the CPU).
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2023-02-20, 12:59:02
Reply #79

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5412
    • View Profile
"crippling it by setting Mac to 'Low Power mode' gets better results than by using your very optimised algorithm, does it makes sense?"

No, for short renders (before heat has time to build up), Low Power will be slower, as expected. After a period of time where the CPU working so hard causes heat to build up, performance will drop as thermal throttling kicks in. Your 2 minute render will be faster in full power mode, in fact every render up until the CPU or motherboard hits the thermal threshold will be faster. For the render time after that, performance will be worse than low power mode, meaning that for long renders you may be getting a better average performance with low power mode  vs. high power mode for a time then thermally throttled performance after that time.

Again, this change in performance after rendering for a period of time is what points to thermal throttling - if it was poor optimization, high power performance would be worse even at the first few minutes of rendering.
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2023-03-01, 09:22:08
Reply #80

lamfadel

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
I bought m1 and here are the results in the rendering of one scene.
It's very slow...
My iMac 2020 is faster...
The old i7 makes 16 threads and renders the same scene twice as fast!!!
The new M1 Max has 10 threads…

« Last Edit: 2023-03-02, 07:08:41 by lamfadel »

2023-03-02, 12:18:24
Reply #81

Stefan-L

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
not sure where the data shows the speed, number threads etc not show any about speed.
but overall:

the intel i7 has hyper-threading, so shows 16 threads but they are actually only 8 real ones.

the m1 has different cores, where as far i know not all are made for the same tasks, there are very specialized ones included. some are for have tasks like rendering, some for other tasks, or for light things, video encoding, or to save electricity/battery etc., so maybe i woudl not be even sure if it would be actually correct that all m1 cores are all time at 100% while rendering, i woudl expect only the one suited for render like tasks?

for me in some tests the m1/2 macs feel nice fast at GUI, and 2d graphics, video editing  etc, but not so in any 3d cpu app. Not sure if this is by missing optimization yet or by design of the chips.
« Last Edit: 2023-03-02, 16:55:28 by Stefan-L »

2023-03-02, 14:56:26
Reply #82

Philw

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 267
    • View Profile
Yep a 16 core iMac is absolutely going to be faster than a 10 core M1. M1 is good but not magic :-(

2023-05-16, 23:09:06
Reply #83

YURII

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 76
    • View Profile
    • YURII SUHOV
Im rendering now on same M1 Max and I dont see a difference in CPU load while looking at Activity Monitor in both - low and high mode. I think latest Apple updates did something, could be? Can anyone confirm it?

2023-09-19, 13:14:42
Reply #84

habber

  • Users
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Im rendering now on same M1 Max and I dont see a difference in CPU load while looking at Activity Monitor in both - low and high mode. I think latest Apple updates did something, could be? Can anyone confirm it?

Hi,

I just stumbled upon this post as I discovered this issue by chance. Just been testing it and I am still experiencing this issue.

Another interesting fact I found out today is that render times vary significantly between Corona 10 and Corona 9 in my case (M1 Max 64GB on Ventura 13.5.2) I only recently updated to Corona 10 and was shocked by significantly higher Rays/s total, literally like up 5 to 10 times more rays/s depending (at first I was even thinking that I am miscounting the zeros lol) on the scene but surprisingly at the same time about half the absolute render times - very strange.

Just "downgraded" back to Corona 9 and even though it shows me lower rays/s my render times are split in half. Guess I'll stick with good old Corona 9 :)

The problem with lowpower vs highpower still continues though but in my case the difference is something I can live with. I never really realized because I was so happy with render times in general :)

Cheers!

2023-09-19, 13:24:27
Reply #85

TomG

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 5412
    • View Profile
Did the scene that was slower on 10 use the Triplanar map?
Tom Grimes | chaos-corona.com
Product Manager | contact us

2023-09-20, 11:52:50
Reply #86

habber

  • Users
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Did the scene that was slower on 10 use the Triplanar map?

Hi Tom,

No, it didn't use any Triplanar map. Only UVW + Cubic mapping throughout the whole scene.

In any case I was mostly astonished about the difference in rays/s compared to total render times in v9 vs. v10