OTOY Forums

atoyuser1 wrote:Hi, thinking of getting this souped-up Mac mini:

The attachment Mac Mini.jpg is no longer available

I realise it's not been tested with Octane yet, but would anyone hazard a guess as to what the OctaneBench score might be?

Thanks

Hi,
in theory, it should be slightly faster than M2 Ultra, but you cannot test the speed with OctaneBench yet, you need to run the following alternative bench scene:
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=75411&start=1320#p421617

Here is the latest chart I have, probably all results need to be redone with OctaneRender 2024.1, apart from iPad Pro results, I guess: It would be also nice to have results from new M4 Max chip of new MacBook M4 version... it should be the faster chip for rendering.

ciao,
Beppe

This is really handy, thanks Beppe

bepeg4d wrote:

atoyuser1 wrote:Hi, thinking of getting this souped-up Mac mini:

Mac Mini.jpg

I realise it's not been tested with Octane yet, but would anyone hazard a guess as to what the OctaneBench score might be?

Thanks

Hi,
in theory, it should be slightly faster than M2 Ultra, but you cannot test the speed with OctaneBench yet, you need to run the following alternative bench scene:
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=75411&start=1320#p421617

Here is the latest chart I have, probably all results need to be redone with OctaneRender 2024.1, apart from iPad Pro results, I guess:

IMG_3334.jpeg

It would be also nice to have results from new M4 Max chip of new MacBook M4 version... it should be the faster chip for rendering.

ciao,
Beppe

atoyuser1 wrote:Hi, thinking of getting this souped-up Mac mini

Are you considering the base 24 GB of uni-RAM or more?

The minimum strongly recommended would be 48, out of the three choices.
24 will soon or later be too low given the fact that less will be available in-practice.

skientia wrote:

atoyuser1 wrote:Hi, thinking of getting this souped-up Mac mini

Are you considering the base 24 GB of uni-RAM or more?

The minimum strongly recommended would be 48, out of the three choices.
24 will soon or later be too low given the fact that less will be available in-practice.

That's good to know. On MacOs 12 Monterey I've managed to work even with 8GB Ram, but I think the latest MacOs is more memory-hogging

Octane Standalone 2024.1 / OctaneXBench_VolumeDenoiser

MacBook Pro M4 Max (40 core): 18s
(M4 Max with Realtime 16)

MacBook Pro M3 Max (40 core): 22s
(M3 Max with Realtime 19)

atoyuser1 wrote:

skientia wrote:

atoyuser1 wrote:Hi, thinking of getting this souped-up Mac mini

Are you considering the base 24 GB of uni-RAM or more?

The minimum strongly recommended would be 48, out of the three choices.
24 will soon or later be too low given the fact that less will be available in-practice.

That's good to know. On MacOs 12 Monterey I've managed to work even with 8GB Ram, but I think the latest MacOs is more memory-hogging

What the "scene" files look like?
Seemingly and presumably nothing heavy.
8GB without memory swap doesn't get someone too far, particularly on high detailed "photo-plausible" imagery.

Hi all,

I'm running Cinema 4D 2025.0.2 and OctaneX 2024.1-R3 on macOS Sequoia 15.1. This is running on a Mac Studio M2 Ultra with 76 GPU Cores and 128 GB RAM.

No matter the render settings in regards to priority I can't get Octane to utilize more than 50% of my GPUs. Is there any known issues like this or anyone else having the same problem?

If I render a test scene in OctaneX Standalone 2024.1 it maxes out my GPUs.

Sorry, I cannot reproduce the slowdown here, the GPU usage is 100% in both Live View and Picture Viewer, in C4D 2025.0.2 and c4doctane 2024.1-R3... but I'm working in Sonoma 14.7, not Sequoia: Have you tried with different scenes?

ciao,
Beppe

m0dm0d wrote:Octane Standalone 2024.1 / OctaneXBench_VolumeDenoiser

MacBook Pro M4 Max (40 core): 18s
(M4 Max with Realtime 16)

MacBook Pro M3 Max (40 core): 22s
(M3 Max with Realtime 19)

Thanks!

Did you connect both MacBook Pro to power supply during test?

ciao,
Beppe

bepeg4d wrote:

m0dm0d wrote: Thanks!

Did you connect both MacBook Pro to power supply during test?

ciao,
Beppe

Yep, Power supply on both (same results whether 'automatic' or 'high power' in system settings).

Standalone 2024.1
M3 Max (Sonoma 14.1)
M4 Max (Sequoia 15.1)

I can't get near 15s with M3 Max (which you have listed), so I'm guessing that was an earlier Standalone version?
Would be great to see M-series results replaced with the latest standalone (if you can collect them).

That said, the M4 Max feels significantly faster than M3 Max in C4D Live Viewer C4D 2024.4.1 / Studio 2024.1-R3).
So I'm pretty happy with this upgrade!