Hi all,
I was on a Product Design conference today and was looking at a demo of Bunkspeed Shot
running on a pimped out PC.
The guy loaded a diamond scene and I noticed that well with that good hardware under the
hood Bunkspeed Shot was not that fast.
Did anybody do a speed comparison between Octane and Shot?
Speed Comparison Octane render VS Bunkspeed Shot
Forum rules
Please add your OS and Hardware Configuration in your signature, it makes it easier for us to help you analyze problems. Example: Win 7 64 | Geforce GTX680 | i7 3770 | 16GB
Please add your OS and Hardware Configuration in your signature, it makes it easier for us to help you analyze problems. Example: Win 7 64 | Geforce GTX680 | i7 3770 | 16GB
I don't think it's a good time for this.
the soon coming beta 2.3 v5 will be MUCH faster.
also, compare final products not demos vs non-demos etc...
also this has to be done by someone with expertise so he can configure both engines with no handicap.
and finally we're a spectral unbiased renderer, not an RGB directlighting renderer with some simplified diffuse GI.
Radiance
the soon coming beta 2.3 v5 will be MUCH faster.
also, compare final products not demos vs non-demos etc...
also this has to be done by someone with expertise so he can configure both engines with no handicap.
and finally we're a spectral unbiased renderer, not an RGB directlighting renderer with some simplified diffuse GI.
Radiance
Win 7 x64 & ubuntu | 2x GTX480 | Quad 2.66GHz | 8GB
Not to stir up any crazy back and forth about these render engines, but I have tried both, and a few others, just to see what is out there. Shot was ok. I tested it with a well used scene and I didn't find the render result all that impressive compared to Octane. One of the big things I didn't like was the navigation. We are in a time with a lot of options for GPU based render engines, which is awesome. Really though you can't complain about Octane when looking at other options. The price is great, the support is great, and it is fast fast fast. One of the things I like the most with Octane is that they really are focused on making the software better for us users and not just pushing unimportant features that only a few would use. And how many software companies have their head developers actually posting in the forums?
System 1: EVGA gtx470 1280Mb and MSI gtx470 1280 in Cubix Xpander for Octane, AMD 945, 4Gb Ram
All systems are at stock speeds and settings.
All systems are at stock speeds and settings.
moved this post from demo forum
Q: is the speed up mentioned for all cards or is that the optimisation for the GTX460's presently unused cores due to be fixed by Nvidia with the cuda 3.2 driver? Maybe if we are really lucky its both.
The Palit GTX460/2gb is now available where I live so I am anxious to hear of news about the idle cores before finally buying one.

Q: is the speed up mentioned for all cards or is that the optimisation for the GTX460's presently unused cores due to be fixed by Nvidia with the cuda 3.2 driver? Maybe if we are really lucky its both.

The Palit GTX460/2gb is now available where I live so I am anxious to hear of news about the idle cores before finally buying one.

i7-3820 @4.3Ghz | 24gb | Win7pro-64
GTS 250 display + 2 x GTX 780 cuda| driver 331.65
Octane v1.55
GTS 250 display + 2 x GTX 780 cuda| driver 331.65
Octane v1.55
- Jaberwocky
- Posts: 976
- Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:03 pm
Looking on the Nvidia Web site.Cuda 3.2 has now been released.Here's Hopeing the next release will be compiled to take advantage of this for all of us 460 owners/prospective purchasers out there.
CPU:-AMD 1055T 6 core, Motherboard:-Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 AM3+, Gigabyte GTX 460-1GB, RAM:-8GB Kingston hyper X Genesis DDR3 1600Mhz D/Ch, Hard Disk:-500GB samsung F3 , OS:-Win7 64bit