Hi,
I think maxwell still good renderer but not the best because of more noise, slow render, material's plugin not work.I used sketchup and can't edit maxwell or assign maxwell's material in sketchup ( not same vray). Octane can't too, but have faster preview render and fewer noise.
For now. 1st is octane, 2nd is maxwell, 3rd is indigo render.
Thank, nipparnlert
Hope 2.3 Has a System Like This
-
nipparnlert
- Posts: 75
- Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 3:59 pm
- Location: Thailand
new user :
Hardware : win7-x64 / i7-930-2.8 / ASUS P6T / PCI Express x16 Gen2 / DDR3 G.Skill 6GB. / Inno Geforce GTX470 CUDA Cores 448 / CoolerMaster / GX-750
Software : Octanerender pre-Beta 2.42 / Sketchup8 / Nvidia Driver 260.99 / CUDA 3.2.1
Hardware : win7-x64 / i7-930-2.8 / ASUS P6T / PCI Express x16 Gen2 / DDR3 G.Skill 6GB. / Inno Geforce GTX470 CUDA Cores 448 / CoolerMaster / GX-750
Software : Octanerender pre-Beta 2.42 / Sketchup8 / Nvidia Driver 260.99 / CUDA 3.2.1
-
Jvincentrs4
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 5:43 pm
- Location: Los Angeles
Yea,
I dont know I think Maxwell is great but I use it either as standalone or out of maya 201164bit. I also have a machine that can reach 15-16 samples in a good amount of time. I will say this the new dual hexcore Mac Pro were announced today and at a price of 5000 or more, I Maybe checking out a GPU-X system. I will wait and see what octane 2.3 is all about, but I rather invest in future technology. Its only a matter of time before Maxwell does a gpu engine. I also think if octane develops the way it has it will be great in a short time here (please hdri plus sun with channels for reflection and refraction emission and backgroundand a really cool default library). I refuse to go back to biased engine like vray or mental ray don't have time to worry about emitting caustics and final gather and all that stuff im over it.
So for me
1. Maxwell 2.1
2. Octane (running a close second just need a couple feature and maybe invest in gpu-x then go from there, but like were its going and octane live sounds cool)
I dont know I think Maxwell is great but I use it either as standalone or out of maya 201164bit. I also have a machine that can reach 15-16 samples in a good amount of time. I will say this the new dual hexcore Mac Pro were announced today and at a price of 5000 or more, I Maybe checking out a GPU-X system. I will wait and see what octane 2.3 is all about, but I rather invest in future technology. Its only a matter of time before Maxwell does a gpu engine. I also think if octane develops the way it has it will be great in a short time here (please hdri plus sun with channels for reflection and refraction emission and backgroundand a really cool default library). I refuse to go back to biased engine like vray or mental ray don't have time to worry about emitting caustics and final gather and all that stuff im over it.
So for me
1. Maxwell 2.1
2. Octane (running a close second just need a couple feature and maybe invest in gpu-x then go from there, but like were its going and octane live sounds cool)
MAC PRO Intel |OSX 10.6.3 Win XP64 Via BootCamp | Geforce GTX285 | Dual Quad 2.8GHz | 16GB|500gbHD_OSX|1tbWDBlackHD_XP64|1tbWDBlackHD_General Storage
Oh my God, if this is not fake.......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHyrROqA ... r_embedded#
Sjonsjine
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHyrROqA ... r_embedded#
Sjonsjine
It's not fake, it's has been confirmed by Nextlimit, and it's CPU based for now... and it will be for studio only for now... wait for official announcement... and don't get that excitedsjonsjine wrote:Oh my God, if this is not fake.......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHyrROqA ... r_embedded#
Sjonsjine
it will be slower than Octane for sure...Vista 64 , 2x Xeon 5440 - 24GB RAM, 1x GTX 260 & I7 3930 water cooled - 32GB RAM, 1 x GTX 480+ 1x8800 GTS 512
CGsociety gallery
My portfolio
My portfolio2 - under construction
Web site
Making of : pool scene - part1
CGsociety gallery
My portfolio
My portfolio2 - under construction
Web site
Making of : pool scene - part1
CPU based, hmm, it looks so fast so I thought it had to be GPU. I am a Maxwell user also so I am ready for it!andrian wrote:It's not fake, it's has been confirmed by Nextlimit, and it's CPU based for now... and it will be for studio only for now... wait for official announcement... and don't get that excitedsjonsjine wrote:Oh my God, if this is not fake.......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHyrROqA ... r_embedded#
Sjonsjine
As far as I known this preview are based on GPU and only for preview section. Rendering process is still based on CPU. But there is no block from maxwell to change to full GPU or CPUGPU in their next move.
Anyway there is one deep comparison on modo forum between maxwell, modo and octane. Take a look if you want to know the story.
I still love Octane all the way but Maxwell support and materials are still the best for me.
Anyway there is one deep comparison on modo forum between maxwell, modo and octane. Take a look if you want to know the story.
Code: Select all
http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=48218&page=1I still love Octane all the way but Maxwell support and materials are still the best for me.
Hey,
That comparison should have been made with MLT, adding glass to a scene without MLT (which maxwell has) will never render clean.
I also never saw the first render made with maxwell, eg the one with all diffuse. The maxwell render posted uses glass.
Radiance
That comparison should have been made with MLT, adding glass to a scene without MLT (which maxwell has) will never render clean.
I also never saw the first render made with maxwell, eg the one with all diffuse. The maxwell render posted uses glass.
Radiance
Win 7 x64 & ubuntu | 2x GTX480 | Quad 2.66GHz | 8GB
Remember when I pointed the new maxwell optimization feature for HDR maps ?radiance wrote:Hey,
That comparison should have been made with MLT, adding glass to a scene without MLT (which maxwell has) will never render clean.
I also never saw the first render made with maxwell, eg the one with all diffuse. The maxwell render posted uses glass.
Radiance
it has a lot to do with the chosen HDR map, I did a lot of testing while I was looking after sharp shadows from HDR env and I found than maxwell was doing pretty good with HDR with very high bright spots (the one producing sharp shadows) while octane was not very efficient in this situation. If the guy use a smoother HDR map he will notice than octane is much faster than maxwell.
Anyway it's a poor comparison with almost only direct lightning, would be more interesting to do a test with an interior scene with indirect lightning rather than almost direct only.
Win7 x64 - I7 920@4Ghz - 6Go DDR3 - GTX470