PDA

View Full Version : Rendering speed 4x faster??? wow



kiwisheep
05-26-2006, 02:29 PM
I'm not beta user but have already upgraded to LW9. I was looking at the gallery of LWv9 and saw some impressive rendering test. I think it was a render of wagon. According to that test, it's about 4 times faster than 8.5 rendering speed.

Does that mean I don't need to buy FPRIME anymore? Or is FPRIME still faster?

Earl
05-26-2006, 02:34 PM
FPrime is a great tool, and you'll probably still want a copy. Even if you don't end up using FPrime for the final render, it's an indispensable tool for previewing your scene in real time while texturing and lighting.

Lewis
05-26-2006, 04:38 PM
BUT for now AFAIK Fprime don't recognize LW9 NODAL so you'll be able to use "only" standard LW layered texturing system - right ?

Or Steve Worley is already prepared and waiting for Lw9 shiping to roll out new Frpime ;)?

ShawnStovall
05-26-2006, 07:44 PM
LightWave new perspective camera is a big improvement for those large scenes. It can really speed up Radiosity and Ray tracing renders.

Dodgy
05-27-2006, 09:38 AM
For those really heavy ray traced scenes some people were reporting 11 or 20 times as fast, but for your average render expect a 2 - 4 times improvement.

Dave Jerrard
05-28-2006, 03:23 PM
I'm personally seeing improvements of 2-4 times here. The more complex the scene, the better the improvement generally. Simple stuff, like the cliche ball & checks stuff will probably take longer with the new Perspective Camera since it's such a short render time anyway - the extra speed optimizations actually take slightly longer on those simple scenes.

Now, a 2x speed increase might not sound all that impressive, but when you have stuff that's takes up to 6 hours a frame, that's a 3 hour time savings, which is good in anyone's book!

The memory overhead is also reduced. Rendering can be done with less RAm, or with more polygons in the same amount of RAM. APS can drastically increase your polygon counts, and this subdivision usually takes place so fast you never even notice it happening (another big time saver). HyperVoxels take about 1/40th the memory too, so stuff that you might have been hitting memory limits with before will render with tons of leftover RAM. That asteroid field I did would not be possible with 8.5, even the 64 bit version of it.

He Who Has Seen Reports Of Rendering Being Up To Twenty Five Times Faster.
(not a typo)

Pavlov
05-31-2006, 05:42 PM
Whatever may happen Fprime will be an unvaluable tool.
It's a 2 days effort: ten minutes are to buy it, remaining time is to ask yourself how can you have done without until now.

Paolo

Lottmedia
05-31-2006, 05:55 PM
All things said, I'm not seeing that much improvement at all. Even my heavier scenes (which arn't that heavy) I'm only seeing a few seconds at most shaved off. Take that for what it's worth, I'm still wondering where everyone is seeing all this speed increase.

Casey :cat:
(waiting on render....)

hrgiger
05-31-2006, 08:53 PM
All things said, I'm not seeing that much improvement at all. Even my heavier scenes (which arn't that heavy) I'm only seeing a few seconds at most shaved off. Take that for what it's worth, I'm still wondering where everyone is seeing all this speed increase.

Casey :cat:
(waiting on render....)

Are you using the right camera? The new perspective camera is the one that has been optimized for raytracing.

I pulled a few benchmarks from the LW8 content:

Teapot.lws
LW 8.5................... 2 minutes 48 seconds
LW 9 .................... 1 minute 46 seconds

If the teapot scene was a simple two minute animation, you just saved yourself 62 hours, or 2 1/2 days of rendering time given that your animation is 30fps.


Moonbase.lws
LW 8.5................... 17 minutes 48 seconds
LW 9 ...................... 7 minutes 15 seconds

If the moonbase scene was a simple two minute animation, you just saved yourself 633 hours, or 26+ days of rendering time given that your animation is 30fps.

Snosrap
05-31-2006, 09:33 PM
I have made some decent renders with 9, but for me it's not about rendering time it's about how fast I can set the scene up, and this is where FPrime rocks! I think Nodal is extremely powerful, but for me without FPrime support, it will not get be used to it's fullest. In the long term it will be a must that FPrime works with Nodal. I think I remember hearing someone from NT say at last years Siggraph, that Worley would make it happen. I just wish Worley would say something.

Cheers
Snos

colkai
06-01-2006, 02:58 AM
Whatever may happen Fprime will be an unvaluable tool.
It's a 2 days effort: ten minutes are to buy it, remaining time is to ask yourself how can you have done without until now.
Paolo speaks a real truth here.
Sure, at present it supports neither shaders or nodal, but don't let that put you off.
Just in terms of lighting and 'test renders' once you'v used it a few times, you wonder how you got by without it. Plus of course, for those renders where you are only using the 'normal' layers for surfacing, it's still capable of giving you your full render a lot faster than the native renderer.

Dont forget also, a lot of the IFW2 texture shaders can also be applied as layers within the procedural options so they are open for use.

toby
06-01-2006, 08:11 PM
All things said, I'm not seeing that much improvement at all. Even my heavier scenes (which arn't that heavy) I'm only seeing a few seconds at most shaved off. Take that for what it's worth, I'm still wondering where everyone is seeing all this speed increase.

Casey :cat:
(waiting on render....)
Are these scenes that would take 5 minutes or more to render one pass? Try something like glass with shadows, reflection and refraction and I'm sure you'll see a difference -
What kind of system do you have?

colkai
06-02-2006, 02:51 AM
I've tested it on a simple room scene with a glass cabinet, nothing fancy, just a typical video cabinet with a glass front.
In LW9, it was easily 2 or 3 times faster than LW8.5 - I checked the renders side by side and the result was identical, just a heck of a lot quicker.

Other renders from the shot where tha cabinet was in background or not seen gave varying results on speed based on if any raytracing objected were in focus.

I'm just a hobbyist, but being able to render heavy scenes so much faster opens up a world for me. No wonder those using it in production are excited about the time savings.

Lottmedia
06-02-2006, 08:27 AM
Are these scenes that would take 5 minutes or more to render one pass? Try something like glass with shadows, reflection and refraction and I'm sure you'll see a difference -
What kind of system do you have?

Usually less. Machine is adequate (PC 3.01 1G Ram and such) I've just installed 8.5 back and am trying a side by side on one of my full scenes to see.

Hummm......
8.5 = 249.7
9 (RC1) = 140.2
9 (RC1) with 2 threads = 125.1

I'll sit down now......

Casey :cat:
(What sidedish goes with crow...?)

BeeVee
06-02-2006, 08:37 AM
I think humble pie? :D

B

tburbage
06-04-2006, 01:26 PM
Can anyone comment on global illumination (radiosity and caustics) in LW9 -- changes, or just benchmark comparisons?

toby
06-04-2006, 01:48 PM
Can anyone comment on global illumination (radiosity and caustics) in LW9 -- changes, or just benchmark comparisons?
In just about every test I've done, radiosity is double speed! :santa:

Exception
06-13-2006, 08:54 PM
Radiosity itself has not changed, but if there's any tracing to be done, which is always the case with radiosity, some things will be sped up.

Personally, I've experienced as much slow down as speed ups, when concerning radiosity. It all depends on your application.

Chuck
06-13-2006, 10:23 PM
Several messages have had to be removed from this thread - remember that testing is still underway and test build specifics are still confidential - if you have issues with a specific build you should be posting that only in the private Open Beta sections.

Lottmedia
06-13-2006, 11:07 PM
Thought that's where I was.......

The rest of the post is here, heck someone from Newtek was part of it. There's no more information here than there was before (or is it because this information isn't as glowingly positive?)

Casey :cat:
(What? Who?)

mav3rick
06-14-2006, 04:13 AM
i think lw9 discuss forum should stay under open beta forum and only lw9 gallery shoul be shown to public so this kind of things dont happen

Chuck
06-14-2006, 07:26 AM
Thought that's where I was.......

The rest of the post is here, heck someone from Newtek was part of it. There's no more information here than there was before (or is it because this information isn't as glowingly positive?)

Casey :cat:
(What? Who?)

It's because they were reports of a possible bug in the latest build, and belong where bug reports for v9 test builds are supposed to be discussed. If you haven't posted the information there yet, please do - we'd certainly like to confirm if there is an issue there and to get it addressed promptly.

Lottmedia
07-16-2006, 08:15 AM
Just to update, did a clean install of system and LW. Used the same scene as previous and much slower, took almost twice as long as RC1.

Repost of numbers(
8.5 = 249.7
9 (RC1) = 140.2
9 (RC1) with 2 threads = 125.1
)
New
LW 9Final = 235.5

What happened? It's back to the same speed as 8.5


Casey :cat:

cagey5
07-16-2006, 08:25 AM
And this type of discussion still belongs in the beta section, even after release.

Bog
07-16-2006, 09:16 AM
This is definately much, much nippier.

Can we get special LW9 goggles and white scarves to go with the speed increases? :D

Lottmedia
07-17-2006, 10:26 AM
Well, looks like I spoke too soon again. Once I switched to Perspective camera (obviously it's an 8.5 scene) the times jumped considerably (124.5s equil to RC1) but the images look different. The shadows and different and the colors are off a bit. Any word on why?

Casey :cat:
(Yep, again....)

toby
07-18-2006, 12:23 AM
I think it's just the rule of thumb that different renderers will always look different in some way. It changed when they released LW6, and 7 too. The Perspective camera is completely raytraced, and it's more of a scan-line renderer. Trasparency usually gets handled much differently, so if there's any of that in your scene that could be the answer. Turning raytrace transparency on or off might help.

Lottmedia
07-18-2006, 12:36 AM
It's actually an office scene with sun coming in through the windows, so probably a lot of that.

OT: cagey5, where are you in manchester? I was just there last week on a trip, spent a few nights there checking out the shopping. I should have checked if there were any 'Wavers there. Poo. missed chances.

Casey :cat:
(sorry if my typing is crap, just had my nails done and it's hard to type :) )

starbase1
07-18-2006, 04:07 AM
One of the first things I tried with LW9 was my latest Earth model, with multiple 9000x9000 image maps, (and very simple geometry).

Renders are taking about 40% longer, defeinitely not as fast for those.

Nick

Exception
07-18-2006, 05:40 AM
Very light scenes in terms of poly count are slower in lw 9 due to the new polygon sorting method (octree). Also the overhead is slightly more, so renders with speeds such as 3 seconds can be a bit longer.

pabloarce
07-19-2006, 12:04 AM
Are any of you getting values for estimated time to completion on renders?
That was one of the features I was looking forward to. So I can time my life around LW.
I am on a Mac.

BazC
07-19-2006, 01:31 AM
Are any of you getting values for estimated time to completion on renders?
That was one of the features I was looking forward to. So I can time my life around LW.
I am on a Mac.

You won't get an estimate until it's completed a pass so you need to be using multiple AA passes or be rendering at larger resolutions.

J-D
07-19-2006, 04:46 AM
Hi,
I made a test with an actual project,
650000 polygons, spot lights with shadow map, reflection bluring and backdrop GI on

LW 8.5 1183s
LW9 final 223s

speed increase 5.3

Cheers
J-D

Lightwolf
07-19-2006, 04:54 AM
I've got a scene here, 2.4 million polygons, 3 area lights, backdrop radiosity, 7 pass PLD, motion blur.
Roughly 17-18 minutes in LW 8.5, 3 minutes using LW 9.0... I ain't complaining.

Cheers,
Mike

Captain Obvious
07-19-2006, 06:49 AM
Wow. :eek:

pixym
07-19-2006, 07:11 AM
Already posted on another thread but...

A simple 1 pass AA PLD Archi Viz test
Nearly 16 times faster...

LW 8.3: 13mn29sec
LW 9.0: 0mn51sec

Captain Obvious
07-19-2006, 09:44 AM
Already posted on another thread but...

A simple 1 pass AA PLD Archi Viz test
Nearly 16 times faster...

LW 8.3: 13mn29sec
LW 9.0: 0mn51sec
Even if it's just one AA pass, the fact that you rendered 1,200,000 polygons with monte carlo GI in less than a minute is REALLY impressive, even if we don't compare it to LW8. What hardware do you have? I guess I'll have to retract my statement that Lightwave can't ever render with radiosity in animation-friendly render times, because even if it takes 15 minutes with enhances high anti-aliasing, that's not really bad at all.

righteous
07-20-2006, 07:36 AM
You guys got me curious so i did some of my own tests

pretty standard scene for me, 4 area lights roughly 150000 polys

LW 8.5 365 seconds
LW 9 107 seconds

I forgot how impressive the render increase was untill I testes it for myself. Can only imagine how much money and time it saves for those people animating and rendering for days on end. Like owning 2 extra PC's for me. Just fantastic :)

Pavlov
07-20-2006, 08:01 AM
Pixym's test is very good, but i cannot get anywhere near these times on my machine.
Gonna try better... mmm.

Paolo

pixym
07-20-2006, 08:05 AM
Even if it's just one AA pass, the fact that you rendered 1,200,000 polygons with monte carlo GI in less than a minute is REALLY impressive, even if we don't compare it to LW8. What hardware do you have? I guess I'll have to retract my statement that Lightwave can't ever render with radiosity in animation-friendly render times, because even if it takes 15 minutes with enhances high anti-aliasing, that's not really bad at all.

PC DELL Dimension 8250 3,06 ghz fsb 533 HT 1,5Gb ram (wich is being replaced by a brand new Precision 490 dual-xeon 5160 3ghz dual core 4 GB ram...)

starbase1
07-20-2006, 08:30 AM
Very light scenes in terms of poly count are slower in lw 9 due to the new polygon sorting method (octree). Also the overhead is slightly more, so renders with speeds such as 3 seconds can be a bit longer.

In my case the frames typically went from 2 minutes to 3 a frame, rounded...

(Thats slower with 9)

starbase1
07-20-2006, 08:33 AM
Kind of related - I do like all the extra information visible when the render is going on, much more useful. I hadn't realised how much I was doing mental arithmetic while squinting at the old display until the new one sorted it out!

Plus an end to those 'did I remember to turn on xxx?' questions hours into a render.

It's one of the little things that makes a big difference.

Nick

Lottmedia
07-20-2006, 12:42 PM
Kind of related - I do like all the extra information visible when the render is going on, much more useful. I hadn't realised how much I was doing mental arithmetic while squinting at the old display until the new one sorted it out!

Plus an end to those 'did I remember to turn on xxx?' questions hours into a render.

It's one of the little things that makes a big difference.

Nick


True true, that was one of the small additions to 9 that really turned out to be a big one.

Casey :cat:

Dave Jerrard
07-20-2006, 01:12 PM
Kind of related - I do like all the extra information visible when the render is going on, much more useful. I hadn't realised how much I was doing mental arithmetic while squinting at the old display until the new one sorted it out!

Plus an end to those 'did I remember to turn on xxx?' questions hours into a render.That's exactly why that extra information is there now. I foud myself dong the same thing for year, aborting a render to check that I had shadows on, or radiosity, etc., and it always irritated me when I realized it was set up right and I just wasted a few minutes for nothing. Having that info right there is a big benefit. Also, the Status Line would frequently get garbled up on the next column of text in older versions when you had objects with long names, so that was moved onto its own line. No more garbling.

The time remaining displays were a nice surprise too.

He Who Was Particularly Surprised By Those.