Speed comparison Fryrender CPU vs Octane GPU

Generic forum to discuss Octane Render, post ideas and suggest improvements.
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
MaTtY631990
Licensed Customer
Posts: 754
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 8:38 pm

I was bored with what else to create lately so decided to install fryrender and do a comparison of speed against both render engines.
Here are the results.

This might be helpful for new users who are looking at whether to buy octane or not. This is one reason why.

Image

Fryrender renders for 1 hour and 40 minutes using only a CPU.

Image

Octane renders for 6 minutes using only the GPU.

If anyone is willing to, you can post your scenes you have created or downloaded from websites to compare octane and CPU renderers such as Maxwell render and Indigo render.
So better test might be more complex scenes with lots of materials and geometry.
This will be very useful when the core rendering engine as been further optimised with the new render kernel.

For the fryrender image I used a AMD Phenom II X4 940 processor which has a total of 4 cores
For the octane render images I used a GTX 470 GPU which has 448 cuda cores.
Last edited by MaTtY631990 on Mon Mar 28, 2011 12:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
GeoPappas
Licensed Customer
Posts: 429
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 5:31 pm

It would help if you posted the hardware that you used (e.g, the CPU used and GPU used).
User avatar
Chris
Licensed Customer
Posts: 439
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 5:01 pm
Location: Norway

And the point with this is what? Octane is not mature enough to be compared to + 5 year old unbiased cpu engines.
________________________________________________________
Win 7 64 | 1x GeForce GTX Titan | AMD Phenom II X6 3.20Ghz | 16GB
MaTtY631990
Licensed Customer
Posts: 754
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 8:38 pm

Actually the CPU based render was done with fryrender 1.5 which had only been released late last year so not quite old as you think. :)
arexma
Licensed Customer
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:48 pm
Location: Austria

MaTtY631990 wrote:Actually the CPU based render was done with fryrender 1.5 which had only been released late last year so not quite old as you think. :)
But Fryrenderer is around since 2006 IIRC. So it is under development 5 years.
Beyond that, you posted in the "Licensed Customer Forum" how would someone not sure yet if he want´s to buy it see your post and for that matter find it helpful?
[email protected]|GTX 470@750/[email protected]|ASUS P5Q-D|8GB-DDR2|Win7x64 Pro|Ubuntu 10.10 x64|CUDA 3.21|FW 285.38|Octane 252|Blender 2.59b
Chris_TC
Licensed Customer
Posts: 153
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 10:38 am

Why is everybody criticizing? I find comparisons interesting.
tehfailsafe
Licensed Customer
Posts: 229
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:27 pm

I think the point of the test was speed...
1 hour 40 mins in Fryrender for similar quality level in 6 mins in Octane.

As for which is in development longer, that just reinforces the point that Octane kicks ass doesn't it?
Of course, the colors in the Octane scene could be tweaked, but I don't think that was the point. We all have seen what the final product from octane renders can be.
windows 7 64 bit| GTX580 1.5Gb x2 | Intel 2600k @ 4.9 | 16gb ddr3 | 3ds max 2012
User avatar
EAHP74
Licensed Customer
Posts: 68
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 3:54 pm
Location: BAMAKO
Contact:

it was compared with arion, this was a comparison I find healthier
WIN 7 64bits|2x gigabyte 670 GTX|MSI 470 GTX|i7 920 @3.2ghz|18gigas|
User avatar
EAHP74
Licensed Customer
Posts: 68
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 3:54 pm
Location: BAMAKO
Contact:

it is about to release a new version 1.1 of arion here some days I think is not bad, with a new interface
Attachments
arion_1.1_beta_snapshot.png
arion_absorbtion_1_r.jpg
arion_absorbtion_2_r.jpg
arion_absorbtion_3_r.jpg
arion_absorbtion_4.jpg
candle.jpg
horse.jpg
pens.jpg
snapshot220110325155146 (1).jpg
arion_absorbtion_1_r.jpg
abstest-03.jpg
WIN 7 64bits|2x gigabyte 670 GTX|MSI 470 GTX|i7 920 @3.2ghz|18gigas|
User avatar
matej
Licensed Customer
Posts: 2083
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:54 pm
Location: Slovenia

^ looks nice, but also slow as hell.
6.5 hours for a 1024x512 (4th pic), 5 hours for 3rd pic? No thanks... :)
SW: Octane 3.05 | Linux Mint 18.1 64bit | Blender 2.78 HW: EVGA GTX 1070 | i5 2500K | 16GB RAM Drivers: 375.26
cgmo.net
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”