Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 84

Thread: LW B747 Benchmark (LW 2020+)

  1. #61
    Almost newbie Cageman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Malmö, SWEDEN
    Posts
    7,778
    Quote Originally Posted by allabulle View Post
    Very interesting, Cageman.

    So I tried changing Polygon Intersection Mode from Watertight to Fastest to see the impact of the setting in a fairly slower machine.
    Here it is:

    PIM set to Fastest: LW_B747_Bench.lws 20m 36s
    PIM set to Watertight: LW_B747_Bench.lws 22m 11s

    So indeed that was quite substantial.

    Renders done with LW 2020.0.1 on an i7-5960X 8C/16T OC to 4.2GHz

    Attachment 148296
    Attachment 148297
    Wow... that is way more than my machine shows... Which scene did you render? The regular or the Volumetric one? Almost 2 minutes difference with that simple setting... wow.
    Senior Technical Supervisor
    Cinematics Department
    Massive - A Ubisoft Studio
    -----
    AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X (64 cores/ 128 threads)
    64GB Ram
    Quadro 620
    Windows 10 Pro x64

  2. #62
    Thanks for test guys, I've not wanted to mess with polygon intersection 'coz as Cageman mentioned my settings are default one and i was not sure does LW save that with Scene (LWS) or Layout configs so it would be "unfair" advantage if i change it on my layout and then user loads this in vanilla Layout settings . But anyway the point was not to absolutely make fastest scene but benchmark usable on fast and slower machines. also scene is not up to final quality, there is still way too much noise to be cleaned but that would make it too long on slower machines so i opted for some middle ground between quality and speed .
    RAM-Studio
    WS - Dual Xeon E5-2698v4/128GB/Win10x64/4xRTX 2080Ti
    My LWM Video Car Modeling Tutorial

  3. #63
    Almost newbie Cageman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Malmö, SWEDEN
    Posts
    7,778
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewis View Post
    Thanks for test guys, I've not wanted to mess with polygon intersection 'coz as Cageman mentioned my settings are default one and i was not sure does LW save that with Scene (LWS) or Layout configs so it would be "unfair" advantage if i change it on my layout and then user loads this in vanilla Layout settings . But anyway the point was not to absolutely make fastest scene but benchmark usable on fast and slower machines. also scene is not up to final quality, there is still way too much noise to be cleaned but that would make it too long on slower machines so i opted for some middle ground between quality and speed .
    Well... when you start LW with an empty scene, Polygon Intersection Mode is by default Watertight.

    We always change this to Fastest, because it has, in the past help shave off 1-2 minutes / frame on the renderfarm... and it is a setting that is saved with the scenefile.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Lewis View Post
    Thanks for test guys, I've not wanted to mess with polygon intersection 'coz as Cageman mentioned my settings are default one and i was not sure does LW save that with Scene (LWS) or Layout configs so it would be "unfair" advantage if i change it on my layout and then user loads this in vanilla Layout settings . But anyway the point was not to absolutely make fastest scene but benchmark usable on fast and slower machines. also scene is not up to final quality, there is still way too much noise to be cleaned but that would make it too long on slower machines so i opted for some middle ground between quality and speed .
    Well... when you start LW with an empty scene, Polygon Intersection Mode is by default Watertight.

    We always change this to Fastest, because it has, in the past help shave off 1-2 minutes / frame on the renderfarm... and it is a setting that is saved with the scenefile.
    Senior Technical Supervisor
    Cinematics Department
    Massive - A Ubisoft Studio
    -----
    AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X (64 cores/ 128 threads)
    64GB Ram
    Quadro 620
    Windows 10 Pro x64

  4. #64
    Super Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    1,762
    Well, the scenes aren't certainly about how fast can LightWave be, but how to compare our computers while using a standarized LightWave scene with the new renderer. So yes, I think I am with Lewis here: not about optimizing performance and or quality. It's not about that, here.

    What transpired, though, due to Cageman's experimentation, is that a significant gain was to be obtained by changing the Polygon Intersection Mode. And his machine crunches scenes like the one at hand like nothing. So I got tickled and wanted to try out how far that would go on an already slower machine, like mine. I thought it was an interesting find, albeit completely unrelated to the intent of the original proposal.

    It's not the point if we can make this particular scene faster or cleaner, as stated. And yet, finding how to make LightWave faster in general in probably most scenes as a by-product of the experimentation of these scenes kindly provided by Lewis was not irrelevant to the LightWave community as a whole. Or so I presume.

    Now I'll quit wasting more and more of your time, fellow LightWavers. Promise.

    And thanks again, Lewis.
    Salut!,
    Allabulle.

  5. #65

    Quote Originally Posted by Cageman View Post
    Sure... but since this is a benchmark scene, I am fairly sure that those using Blender, will try to optimize the **** out of it, while we, LW users are being handcuffed behind our backs because it is a "benchmark scene" and you are not allowed to touch it in any form, in order to make it render way faster.

    What we will get is a banana vs apple comparison in the end, unless we are allowed to optimize the scene, right?
    not saying it is fair, but when the other option is 10x faster, on a simple test, then it should curve some eyebrows,
    not only that, motion blur is soon to receive an update making it 10x faster also.

    agree, difficult to compare, but no, i did make some tweaks to this scene in LW, and it doesn't come anything to close to the speed of App [X]

    so more of a watermelon vs an apple.


    Last edited by erikals; 07-07-2020 at 05:10 PM.
    LW vidz   DPont donate   LW Facebook   IKBooster   My vidz

  6. #66
    Super Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    1,762
    If we find we can do something similar in some other app, that would be fine, but it wouldn't be that relevant to the ones talking about how to use this one. Wouldn't it? And hardly anything at all to do with the topic at hand here in this thread.

    What I mean, dear erikals, and with all due respect, is that your derailing of the thread is even worse than mine. At least mine had something to do, tangentially, to the use of LightWave and the topic. More or less. ;-P
    Salut!,
    Allabulle.

  7. #67

    well, we closed it, but then someone brought it up again.  

    At least mine had something to do, tangentially, to the use of LightWave and the topic. More or less. ;-P
    my message wasn't about App [X] being better, rather it was about App LightWave being really-really slow. and thus it -absolutely- has something to do with LW.

    i'm sure several other Wavers will agree with me that it is somewhat relevant, others, like yourself of course, will not.

    anyways, i'll leave this thread/subject alone for some time.
    Last edited by erikals; 07-07-2020 at 06:23 PM.
    LW vidz   DPont donate   LW Facebook   IKBooster   My vidz

  8. #68
    Super Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    1,762
    Of course I find it relevant, but way out of topic.

    :-)
    Salut!,
    Allabulle.

  9. #69
    Super Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    a place
    Posts
    2,484
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewis View Post
    Yes, having a list with bench top results (2 columns one for regular one for volumetric) would be nice, who is volunteering to create google docs/table ?
    I can do one, if you want?

  10. #70
    Super Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    a place
    Posts
    2,484
    Quote Originally Posted by Cageman View Post
    that is why I still want to use my "old" workstation as well.
    make sure to use the nvidia tool that allows for open gl acceleration under remote desktop
    Last edited by gar26lw; 07-08-2020 at 09:11 AM.

  11. #71
    Super Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    a place
    Posts
    2,484
    Quote Originally Posted by allabulle View Post
    What transpired, though, due to Cageman's experimentation, is that a significant gain was to be obtained by changing the Polygon Intersection Mode. A
    I already did that and got slapped :P

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by erikals View Post


    not saying it is fair, but when the other option is 10x faster, on a simple test, then it should curve some eyebrows,
    not only that, motion blur is soon to receive an update making it 10x faster also.

    agree, difficult to compare, but no, i did make some tweaks to this scene in LW, and it doesn't come anything to close to the speed of App [X]

    so more of a watermelon vs an apple.


    yeah, important comparison.

  12. #72
    I applaud the zeal.
    Cageman brought up a point, which I think is paramount to perception and performance: how vanilla lightwave is setup is less than ideal.
    To see others point to this as the reason to not absorb this into the conversation; to not encourage the ubiquitous 'they' to update the vanilla settings for better performance; to bat away the opportunities to learn, in building a better startup setting and benchmark scene in how better to use the rendering engine, seems incoherent in the moment.

    I understand the initial thrust of Lewis' post. Lewis does high-quality work. Others who have commented, as well. 2020, with it's revised engine, continues to throw curves on its learning.

    I wonder: why can't the benchmark serve a functional purpose, like a better community startup scene/settings, that perhaps is respected enough to have the devvers make it the de facto startup scene?
    Robert Wilson
    i-7-4770k @3.5ghz, Titan, GTX 1660 Ti, et al

  13. #73
    Super Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    1,762
    Let me see: So Lewis can't have a thread to benchmark our computers using his scene because we have to discuss some other important matters, here and now. Nah, come on, gentlemen.
    We may be better off starting a thread with that purpose. By all means, let's do that. The ones concerned with such matters the most could easily start that conversation. A conversation worth having, I agree. But it would be nice if this thread was to be kept in topic. As all threads roughly should, I'm tempted to say.

    And now I'm probably the one derailing it the most. We can't win, can we? :-)
    Salut!,
    Allabulle.

  14. #74
    Founding member raymondtrace's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,293
    Some knucklehead just created a topic where render optimizations can be discussed. https://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php/162739
    Last edited by raymondtrace; 07-08-2020 at 12:43 PM.
    LW4, 7.5D, 2015, 2018, 2019, 2020 running portably on a USB drive.
    Active LW Development in 2020: DB&W | Deep FX | DPont | LWCAD | TrueArt | ...

  15. #75
    Super Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    1,762
    Nice! Thanks raymondtrace.
    Salut!,
    Allabulle.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •