grazing sheeps - grass mats for vray

[metroberlin]

as i said....this scene is NOT OPTIMIZEDD for rendertests. dicplacement can be rendered much faster than in this scene. it was just so show the materials, nothing more

[minimum]

I did a test also but with a different scene...
for close ups is very hard to give the grass a high quality result
but if you look from a far distance point the results are very convincing.

this is the result:

rendertime: 1min. 35 sec. (close-up).



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

rendertime: 1min. 58 sec. (Incremental add to current map).



C&C are welcome!

[DaForce]

awesome, thanks metroberlin for sharing the knowledge

minimum:
What are the spec of the machine used for those renders? want to post the scene files?

[DaForce]

hmmm something dont seem right here. i logged onto my machine at home via VNC, and rendered the grass scene, everything was at the settings stored in the file, i didnt change a thing.
The render time was 51mins!!! MY comp is a AMD 2700 1GBram win2k.
Doesnt it seem a little odd that it took so long on my machine?!?!?

[Psy]

yes considering i have a 1.9ghz p4 and it only took mine 14mins

[DaForce]

14mins....really...did you tinker with any of the settings at all? or was it just open file and render? what version of vray are you using?

damn 14mins....there is something horribly wrong with my puter....

[zerofractal]

Thanks for the share. your grass looks really nice.

[Psy]

i changed the AA from -1, 2 to -1, 1

not really a super huge change, but for fairness, I'll rerender w/ the original settings and give you my result.

[f97ao]

Guys, perhaps more of use could post some render times so we have a little benchmark here.
I'm considering the P4 2.8 HT, would be nice to see rendertimes with those. I'm rendering with my Athlon 1.3GHz and it's taking looong, still waiting.

/Andreas

[metroberlin]

yes, but then please build a new scene. this one is not suitable for a benchmark

[Psy]

whys it not suitable?

true enough its not optimized for speed, but so long as ppl leave the default settings, its a good benchmark regardless.

[manray]

Thanks a lot metroberlin

i´ve just downloaded the scene and hit render leaving the default settings

with P4 2500 1gB DDRram it took 25 minutes

i hope my computer is optimized.

i will try to build others scenes with those maps

regards

[DaForce]

yes, but then please build a new scene. this one is not suitable for a benchmark

Yeah this file hates my computer...i am being beaten by a p4 1.9ghz, and i got a athlon 2700+

Psy:
Thanks ...btw your not using a stored IR map are you?

why is my puter being beaten by all these slower P4's? is it because Vray displacement hates AMD's or something....very strange IMHO

[Psy]

well, in actuality, we are not slower pcs. your amd is.

an amd 3200+ for example. is really clocked at 2.2ghz, not 3.2ghz, the 3200+ label is for how its performance is, not the clock speed.

[DaForce]

yeah i realise all that....(comon knowledge) but if you compare an athlon and a pentium of the same ghz the athlon will be faster because it has more instructions per cycle. So an AMD 3200 is meant to be roughly equivilent to a Pentum 4 3.2ghz, even tho the AMD has a much lower GHZ it is able to perfom at a on par with the p4.

So my athlon 2700+ is roughly as powerful as a Pentium4 2.8ghz (without HT) even tho my ghz is only 2.165 (or so)

So i should easily be able to beat the render time of your 1.9ghz

BTW what i meant by slower p4's was that their performance was less than my CPU, not the actual ghz speed. And if i say faster i mean that my computer performs faster than a slower p4...make sense....hmmmm maybe not ...LOL