I rendered this simple test scene to see how GPU Pathtracing would compare to CPU rendering, BIDIR MLT in this case.
My interest was mainly to see evaluate difference between dispersion and caustics.
Both images rendered for 40 minutes.the light source is a HDRI with many small light sources and the material of the twisted ring is the Lead Crystal from the online material DB with couchy B enabled.
The GPU renderer is nobly cleaner and the caustics are clearly visible. Nice!
However, there are dark areas mostly visible in the GPU render in in the left part of the image in the outer edges of the twisted torus. Those are not present in the CPU render. I checked the other CPU render modes as well (just not for 40 minutes) and these dark areas are not present in those render modes either..
Thoughts ?
Visible difference between GPU and CPU renders
Re: Visible difference between GPU and CPU renders
Hi
the second image is the best overall; which gpu did you use?
the second image is the best overall; which gpu did you use?
Mac Mini 2011 - 2,3 GHz Intel Core i5
16 GB 1333 MHz DDR3 - Intel HD Graphics 3000 512 Mb.
Samsung SSD 860 EVO 500GB - MacOS High Sierra 10.13.6
https://www.behance.net/Paolo_Conti
16 GB 1333 MHz DDR3 - Intel HD Graphics 3000 512 Mb.
Samsung SSD 860 EVO 500GB - MacOS High Sierra 10.13.6
https://www.behance.net/Paolo_Conti
Re: Visible difference between GPU and CPU renders
By default the GPU pathtracer uses a path depth of 8. It can lead to darkeing in certain areas, especially with specular materials. You can turn up the depth and the dark spots should get lighter or disappear completely (but it will also render a little slower).
Re: Visible difference between GPU and CPU renders
@fused
Thanks for the tip. increasing Path Depth does indeed eliminate these dark areas. it's just not a setting available in the Blendigo UI (or I simply have to look harder ):
@Contefugo:
All of these images have rendered for 40 minutes on a 2017 MacBook Pro with a Radeon Pro 560.
This is not usually how long you want to wait for a GPU render, but these serve as experiments for me to determine the best render set up for my situation. At this time I think I'll invest in a eGPU to complement my notebook.
Thanks for the tip. increasing Path Depth does indeed eliminate these dark areas. it's just not a setting available in the Blendigo UI (or I simply have to look harder ):
@Contefugo:
All of these images have rendered for 40 minutes on a 2017 MacBook Pro with a Radeon Pro 560.
This is not usually how long you want to wait for a GPU render, but these serve as experiments for me to determine the best render set up for my situation. At this time I think I'll invest in a eGPU to complement my notebook.
- pixie
- Posts: 2332
- Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 4:54 am
- Location: Away from paradise
- 3D Software: Cinema 4D
- Contact:
Re: Visible difference between GPU and CPU renders
Well, the thing is, specular materials and caustics always tend to take a lot more to denoise then simpler materials.
Re: Visible difference between GPU and CPU renders
wow I just found out about this option, why not add to faq? to make new indigo users understand
popular render engines have video instructions, this will all help make friends with this wonderful render engine
popular render engines have video instructions, this will all help make friends with this wonderful render engine
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 62 guests