V-Ray 1.5 vs V-Ray 3.5 take 1

[vlado]

Hey guys,

I mentioned in another thread that I'll be doing some comparisons of V-Ray 1.5 vs V-Ray 3.5 (nightly builds) because someone "felt" that V-Ray 1.5 rendered faster. Here is one of the preliminary tests (there are a few more scenes to test).

The scene is from Bertrand Benoit; I rendered with V-Ray 1.5 with close to the original settings, with V-Ray 3.5 (just opening the scene and selecting "no" to the scene conversion dialogs) and V-Ray 3.5 with default settings.

The result is that V-Ray 3.5 rendered the scene close to twice as fast; additionally, resetting the render settings to the defaults produced a much cleaner image for virtually the same render time.

There are some differences in the lighting because the sun/sky/IES models went through a number of revisions throughout the years. Generally V-Ray 3.5 should be more accurate in that regard.

Best regards,
Vlado

[AndresAhumada]

That its amazing!. Cool comparative look.

Thanks for clarifying

[kosso_olli]

Vlado, thanks for the insight. What were the render times for these images? Sadly the frame stamp is missing.

[Mokiki]

@kosso_olli

First Picture: 23m_20s
Second Picture: 13m_24s
Third Picture: 13m_29s

At least those are the times mentioned in the filenames.

[kosso_olli]

Ah, I see. Thanks, I overlooked that.

[Neilg]

I always found comments like that funny. Like 10 years ago they were using complex reflective materials with maps in the glossiness, blends, 2 sided materials and fog.
I think my images and animation frames are averaging about the same render time as they did when I first started my career. results are very different though.

[dlparisi]

I always found comments like that funny. Like 10 years ago they were using complex reflective materials with maps in the glossiness, blends, 2 sided materials and fog.
I think my images and animation frames are averaging about the same render time as they did when I first started my career. results are very different though.

Exactly. I distinctly remember being very judicious about which materials would get blurry reflections, even interpolated at that due to the render time hit, and now every single material has some sort of raytraced blurry reflection and I don't give it a second thought. While a large part of this is due to the advancement in hardware, an equally large part is due to improvements in the renderer as well IMO.

[kosso_olli]

When is take 2 coming up? I am curious to see the difference.

[Alex_M]

Try using BF+LC or BF+BF with Vray 1.5 and then we'll talk about how "fast" Vray 1.5 was. This literally took ages to render with 1.5. Nowadays I don't use Irradiance map anymore except for animations maybe. And everything is nice and clean without the dreaded splotches and blotches.

[pixelplume]

I don't use Irradiance map anymore except for animations maybe

me too but I'm tempted to do my next animation (basic fly through) with the new default BF + LC....(loaded question I know) but shall I assume to just precalc LC using camera path, save and send to farm?

[vlado]

When is take 2 coming up? I am curious to see the difference.

The next scene is still rendering, but in the meantime you can enjoy these screengrabs from the V-Ray frame buffers

Best regards,
Vlado

[BBB3]

For some reason, I missed this post. Thanks for digging into this, Vlado. And yes, I probably stand corrected.

[duke2]

For some reason, I missed this post. Thanks for digging into this, Vlado. And yes, I probably stand corrected.

Now never let feelings doubt technical outcomes again!

[anthonyh]

it`s hard to compare what we felt way back when because we had slower pc`s than we do now, and also rendered lower resolutions, SD became HD now 4K etc. i presume this was some form of BF/LC i`m curious to see a comparison of IM/LC too. now hand me my rose tinted spectacles.