No corona vs redshift comparison so far?

[boumay]

I'm surprised that we don't see active tests "corona vs redshift", as redshift is really fast so it would have been very interesting to see the results. I know we can't compare exactly because redshift uses gpu + cpu, and corona only cpu, but approximatively.
I only saw one post with a simple test.
Are you afraid of seeing corona being beaten by redshift? lol, just joking.

[racoonart]

I don't think there will be a problem if you're doing some comparisons between corona and redshift. I guess the lack of threads comparing corona and several other renderers is simple: why would you do it?
What do you want to compare? I mean, redshift is a biased gpu renderer, corona is an (un)biased cpu renderer, both have their pros and cons.
I think I tested pretty much every renderer which is available for 3dsmax (not redshift of course, since it's not available for max) and there's not much sense in comparing images. There are so many variables which are important for me to make a tool useful or "fun to work with", the technical stuff is even more complicated. If you don't know exactly what you're doing it's completely useless to compare two renderings.

So, feel free to make some comparisons but make sure you don't do a "Giant Shark vs. cherry-banana-shake" one ;)

[boumay]

There is a huge benefit indeed in this case, because it could determine whether you choose to invest in graphics cards or new pc nodes to build your renderfarm. That's exactly what I'm trying to do these days. Redshift is interesting and I was really wondering which setup I would build and that was depending directly on which renderer you pick, which was itself depending on this kind of comparison.

[Kramon]

i think redshift will be the fastest but it is biased so... it dosn't count :)

[Ondra]

i think redshift will be the fastest but it is biased so... it dosn't count :)

Why shouldn't it count?

[boumay]

Well, thank you for this info, I didn't know Redshift was biased, I always thought it was unbiased. That's a good thing to know.

[Captain Obvious]

Well, thank you for this info, I didn't know Redshift was biased, I always thought it was unbiased. That's a good thing to know.

It's kind of all over their website. ;-)


I've been testing Redshift a bit, but the lack of a 3ds Max version makes it kind of tricky to compare it with Corona. It's a hassle. However, here are my impressions about how Redshift compares to Corona:

Redshift is much more focused on film/TV production features. It does support progressive rendering, but it's mostly designed for a fast interactive preview, not final rendering. Final rendering in Redshift is buckets with adaptive anti-aliasing, which is very different to Corona's approach. While Corona's focus has been on realistic light transport and shaders, the Redshift team concentrate instead on things like SSS, proxies and memory cycling ("out-of-core").

I'd say Corona is better for that last bit of realism, but Redshift has more "production features," is (typically) faster, and deals better with high scene complexity. They have different goals, so a comparison wouldn't be entirely apt. I'd say Corona's GPU competition is Octane, rather than Redshift.

[boumay]

Well, thank you for this info, I didn't know Redshift was biased, I always thought it was unbiased. That's a good thing to know.

It's kind of all over their website. ;-)

lol, I must say that I didn't search. But that wasn't my motivation in this topic anyway : )

[Juraj]

Haven't (and will not) given it a test, but from my observation of their website, I would just repeat what Captain said.

[Kramon]

i think redshift will be the fastest but it is biased so... it dosn't count :)

Why shouldn't it count?

generaly i would not compare biased with unbiased it is kinda cheating...

[Ondra]

i think redshift will be the fastest but it is biased so... it dosn't count :)

Why shouldn't it count?

generaly i would not compare biased with unbiased it is kinda cheating...

Why? When the results look the same.

BTW: there are probably no truly unbiased engines on the market right now, so it does not matter ;)

[juang3d]

The focus on a comparison is not to know what of the engines is more scientifically accurate, is to know what of the render engines will fit in our piepline better, what is the fastest one for the best results, I don't car if it's biased or unbiased, as long as it delivers what I want it to deliver.

The leverage of unbiased engines is the lack of configuration needs, they are pretty simple, unlike the biased ones, but I always need the best posible result, so if I have to use a biased one, I'll do.

From my POV Corona is one of the best render engines I've saw in my life because it tries to stay as much unbiased as possible, but as fastest as possible, and if it has to bias a bit the scene to be faster, it will give the user the option to do it.

Biased or Unbiased fight it's a nonsense, the render fight should always be speed at the best possible quality the render engine can deliver, and that is where the redshift vs corona comparison should be IMHO.

I just wanted to trwo my 2 cents :)

Cheers.

[boumay]

The focus on a comparison is not to know what of the engines is more scientifically accurate, is to know what of the render engines will fit in our piepline better, what is the fastest one for the best results, I don't car if it's biased or unbiased, as long as it delivers what I want it to deliver.

The leverage of unbiased engines is the lack of configuration needs, they are pretty simple, unlike the biased ones, but I always need the best posible result, so if I have to use a biased one, I'll do.

From my POV Corona is one of the best render engines I've saw in my life because it tries to stay as much unbiased as possible, but as fastest as possible, and if it has to bias a bit the scene to be faster, it will give the user the option to do it.

Biased or Unbiased fight it's a nonsense, the render fight should always be speed at the best possible quality the render engine can deliver, and that is where the redshift vs corona comparison should be IMHO.

This is exactly what I meant with my thread.

[lasse1309]

comparing things is really hard in general. if something is faster and more accurate.. well how would you measure that? you can multiply your render time in vray e.g. by changing just one number after the comma in dmc sampler, you can also let your corona-render "cook" a few hours longer.
it is really hard to define the spot when it is "good" - thus it is hard to compare.

regarding fitting in pipeline: there are a lot more varibles in a production pipeline than the render-engine. first and most important would be the desired result :D

all the best
L

[boumay]

comparing things is really hard in general. if something is faster and more accurate.. well how would you measure that? you can multiply your render time in vray e.g. by changing just one number after the comma in dmc sampler, you can also let your corona-render "cook" a few hours longer.
it is really hard to define the spot when it is "good" - thus it is hard to compare.

regarding fitting in pipeline: there are a lot more varibles in a production pipeline than the render-engine. first and most important would be the desired result :D

Thank you for the input.
But I meant some kind of approximative comparison. We know for example than redshift is faster than vray, even if the test isn't really accurate.