Author Topic: corona "vs" redshift  (Read 20217 times)

2015-01-20, 14:56:37
Reply #15

Juraj

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 4165
    • View Profile
    • studio website
My car is fuelled by gas.

My car has electric engine.

Let's not compare their speed! :)

Hi,

I think this comparison is not really equal, because the Redshift is GPU-base render engine. But looks good ! :)



And why would that be ?

Speed comparison is perfectly relevant measure. Does not necessarily mean it is ultimately better, but disregarding it because it seems unfair doesn't seem correct.
I wouldn't disregard comparison simply because some underlying cores don't match, BMW i8 (or Teslas) aren't compared to Toyota Prius either, but regular (fuel-driven) matching sport cars.

It's hardly ever objective, but that has to be taken with grain of salt for what it is. It still does provide informational value as long as it doesn't derided into "my dad can beat your dad" type of thing.
talcikdemovicova.com  Website and blog
be.net/jurajtalcik   Our studio Behance portfolio
Instagram   Our studio Instagram, managed by Veronika

2015-01-20, 15:26:04
Reply #16

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 10388
  • Marcin
    • View Profile

2015-01-20, 15:39:24
Reply #17

Juraj

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 4165
    • View Profile
    • studio website
:/ sorry. The fact it's often used argument (almost in exact wording) led me to believe you agreed. My apology
talcikdemovicova.com  Website and blog
be.net/jurajtalcik   Our studio Behance portfolio
Instagram   Our studio Instagram, managed by Veronika

2015-01-20, 16:04:25
Reply #18

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 10388
  • Marcin
    • View Profile
No problem. :) I haven't heard of such example, I just posted the first thing that came to my mind (which usually isn't a good idea).

Comparing speed of rendering engines sounds totally reasonable for me, whatever GI solutions or hardware they are using, as speed is one of the most important factors.

2015-01-20, 16:50:16
Reply #19

Ondra

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 8921
  • Turning coffee to features since 2009
    • View Profile
Comparing speed of rendering engines sounds totally reasonable for me, whatever GI solutions or hardware they are using, as speed is one of the most important factors.

except that the speed differ so much based on scene and individual's preferences, that any comparisons I have seen were totally irrelevant. You would have to compare tens or hundreds of scenes to get any relevant data
Rendering is magic.
Private scene uploader | How to get minidumps for crashed/frozen 3ds Max | Sorry for short replies, brief responses = more time to develop Corona ;)

2015-01-20, 17:20:58
Reply #20

jjaz82

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 299
    • View Profile
i like these tests with new render engines :)
In my opinion for a true speed comparison you must use a complex indoor scene  with  various types of materials.
this scene is too simple.
congratulations and keep going  :D

2015-01-22, 10:42:07
Reply #21

chopmeister

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
    • Polymachine
Like Keymaster said, although I appreciate the effort, I find comparisons like these irrelevant. Testing render speed should be done with really complex scenes to get any decent results. What happens with difficult light scenarios or very complex materials? What happens with thousands of instanced vegetation objects? What happens with an interior packed full of glossy reflective materials? How does complex displacement impact the renderer? Lots of questions to be answered... :D

And also, while speed is an important factor, for a professional there are lots of other things to consider if you want to have a valuable comparison. Like pricing and licensing options, how good is the integration, etc. :)

2015-01-22, 13:37:37
Reply #22

juang3d

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 636
    • View Profile
My question to you all that say that this type of tests are irrelevant...

How do you decide what render engine would you like to use for a project?

I'm not saying this tests are the perfect answer, but this could lead a lot of people to test things by themselves, it's like saying that I can't compare a Porsche vs a Smart.

Well I can, it all depends on what am I looking for, so probably if I want to spend very few fuel I will go to acquire the Smart, if I want to run and I want the luxury I'll go with the Porsche, it's not the definitive comparison, but i's ok for me, and maybe it may help others in their challenge of picking a car (or not hahaha )

So I find this tests pretty interesting, a more elaborated test may be welcome of course, with a real production scene like an interior or something similar, and of course every result in high resolution, but in the end, this is more info for the pocket, and I'll be doing my own tests for each project so I can decide the best engine for the job, but this is very welcome even when it's clearly biased :)

Cheers!!

2015-01-22, 13:48:07
Reply #23

borisquezadaa

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 615
    • View Profile
Hmmm... a practical question. How was the learning curve between redshift and corona to you as user?.
One of the outstanding things in Corona was that for me the learning curve was "0". Thats speed!.
So even if redshift cames with lapdancers if i have to spend  a month trying to achieve decent quality and learning new workflow i would say thats a big NO.

What i do with Corona My Corona post of random stuff rendering
WARNING: English.dll still loading...

2015-01-22, 18:53:30
Reply #24

piripi

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 69
    • View Profile
Sorry for taking so long...

@ Boris
I think redshirt is more complicated, its a mix between mental ray, vray and Arnold i would say... Much more to tweak and to take care off...
This has pros and  cons... "Better" optimization -> shorter render time, but takes longer to setup... Corona vis a vis the opposite...

And to setting up materials feels more difficult in my opinion/current knowledge level... And in corona its just so much fun! But well, everything needs time to learn...

I really love the artist friendly corona, newer had so much fun rendering!

But when it comes to animation its a different thing for me, makes big difference waiting 6 days for rendering instead of 1-2 days...

But on the other hand, setting up a scene for still image like Speedy Gonzales, and than just let it render for the night...

Learning Corona felt like switching from mentalray to Vray... It was a big nice surprise how easy/fun thing could be...
This feeling i don't have so much with redhsift at the moment, but the speed is impressive, but it is also still in alpha and support is as great as in corona!

So again it really depends what the target is and and and ...
Unfortunately there is no "the one and only might holy cow" render engine... Sofar ;)

And competition makes a better product...

If i have more time i will make more complex test...

Cheers
Piripi

2015-01-22, 21:03:44
Reply #25

juang3d

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 636
    • View Profile
@piripi One question, does RedShift works in a computer without GPU? (I know it's a GPU render engine, but iRay is also a GPU render engine but it can work with CPU, it can be slow, but it can work)

If the answer is yes, can you do the same comparison tests but just with the CPU?

One of the main reasons I abandoned GPU rendering is the cost, energy and hardware is a lot more expensive than using just CPU rendering, so no matter what the speed of redshift is for me, the GPU costs are too expensive to build a proper state of the art renderfamr with a proper amount of GPU memory :P
Anyways, i'm interested in knowing it's speed in just CPU mode if it can do it.

I think Corona needs some speed improvement for animation, my main projects now are animation related and while it's not crazy, it lasts aroung 30/40 minutes for an interior scene at 720p, and 60/80 minutes or more for a 1080p, wich is a lot, but the energy invoice is lower compairing it to when I rendered a project using the GPU's (same situation with GPU's was aroung 700€ of energy for two months, with just CPU's around 350€ for two months)

Cheers!

2015-01-22, 21:53:48
Reply #26

Ondra

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 8921
  • Turning coffee to features since 2009
    • View Profile
If the answer is yes, can you do the same comparison tests but just with the CPU?

Even if possible, that would not be fair, as code for GPU is written entirely differently from CPU, so what works fast on GPU would not necessarily run fast on CPU.
Rendering is magic.
Private scene uploader | How to get minidumps for crashed/frozen 3ds Max | Sorry for short replies, brief responses = more time to develop Corona ;)

2015-01-22, 22:33:30
Reply #27

juang3d

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 636
    • View Profile
I don't want to be fair, I want to be practical, I'm not trying to criticize RedShift, I'm trying to compare two render engines under my case of use :)

Cheers!