All posts related to V2
By camel
#308614
ok... So far i like v2, nice interface, not complaining about prices, etc..
cinema seems to work fine with it.

But..... I did some speed tests, with my old test scene:

winxp 32bit 1.7.1.
[05/September/2009 12:09:36] SL of 0.50. Benchmark of 48.949. Time: 28s
[05/September/2009 12:10:07] SL of 1.00. Benchmark of 51.296. Time: 58s
[05/September/2009 12:11:14] SL of 2.00. Benchmark of 59.803. Time: 2m05s
[05/September/2009 12:12:42] SL of 3.00. Benchmark of 66.743. Time: 3m34s
[05/September/2009 12:14:41] SL of 4.00. Benchmark of 73.475. Time: 5m32s
[05/September/2009 12:17:27] SL of 5.00. Benchmark of 79.379. Time: 8m18s
[05/September/2009 12:21:34] SL of 6.00. Benchmark of 83.669. Time: 12m25s
[05/September/2009 12:27:30] SL of 7.00. Benchmark of 87.619. Time: 18m22s

winxp 32bit v2.0.0.
[24/September/2009 18:56:17] Benchmark of 62.662. Time: 22s. SL of 0.50
[24/September/2009 18:56:47] Benchmark of 58.262. Time: 51s. SL of 1.00
[24/September/2009 18:57:57] Benchmark of 61.885. Time: 2m01s. SL of 2.00
[24/September/2009 18:59:35] Benchmark of 64.918. Time: 3m40s. SL of 3.00
[24/September/2009 19:01:59] Benchmark of 67.058. Time: 6m03s. SL of 4.00
[24/September/2009 19:05:28] Benchmark of 69.087. Time: 9m33s. SL of 5.00
[24/September/2009 19:10:41] Benchmark of 70.394. Time: 14m46s. SL of 6.00
[24/September/2009 19:18:27] Benchmark of 71.416. Time: 22m32s. SL of 7.00

This is starting to scare me... i can imagine the speed is not x5, but v2 is slower??
that was our reason for upgrade... we bought 2 licenses today.

ps. i did this test on the linux 64 v1.7 as well.. that one had 25-30% speed improvement over win32 v1.7
so.. that means linux64 v1.7 is 35% faster then v2 on 32bit.. hmmm time to tryout linux64 v2.

Maybe i should have spent last 24 hours installing linux instead of trying to download v2 and buy licenses.. thats my feeling now.
User avatar
By Eric Lagman
#308624
Yes like mashium said time and sl mean nothing. Do both renders for the same time then compare the noise between the two. This is the only way to see the difference between 1.7 and 2.0. Visual comparison.
By camel
#308626
hmm well, dont have the old images anymore.

but after almost an hour i have loads of noise..
especially complex transparent area's seem to take longer... or around the same.
simple area's are cleaner more quickly.

I'm just wondering what you guys notice for the speed/noise improvement?
User avatar
By Eric Lagman
#308640
Well I only do product renders, and I get to an acceptable noise level about 2-3 times faster than I did with 1.7. sometimes more. Most of my product renders which average about 1500xx1200 are clear around sl 15 where I used to have to wait until about SL 18 to get to the same noise level. This usually means a few hours of time saved. I can not speak for interiors since I do not do those.
By camel
#308650
i was rendering a product in studio also, coffee machine lots of chrome/transparency,

but now im doing a children car seat without transparency and with a fabric with sss.

thats going really quickly :)
only 5mins and i can see nice detail on a 800x600, sweet!
User avatar
By Eric Lagman
#308661
SSS has improved a lot. You might have to tweak the sss from the old 1.7 to get the same look. It clears much faster though now. There is also single surface sss which is super fast compared to standard volume sss. You may want to try that if you are using sss on a single surface that does not have volume. The manual has a good explanation now of how to create sss materials compared to the old manual.
Let's talk about Maxwell 5.2

Good news, thank you Jochen

Materials Library not working

I was trying via the web, but then I have just dis[…]

Help Volume RED

I found that best way to assign a maxwell material[…]

I'm writing a converter for curves from Houdini to[…]