Luxcore vs CyclesX Benchmark

Our forum gallery for displaying your finished renders.
V17
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2022 12:45 pm

Re: Luxcore vs CyclesX Benchmark

Post by V17 »

It's not about scrambling, it's about using noise threshold for adaptive sampling. I notice in your video that you actually turned it off.

That's an optimization which brings afaik no downsides, all it does is that it stops wasting samples on places with little noise and instead spends more time on sampling noisy areas. This drastically speeds up rendering in scenes which contain both parts which need few samples (light areas with lots of direct light) and parts which need a lot of samples (areas illuminated by indirect light). It does so by measuring local noise and stopping rendering once it falls below some threshold.

I have scenes where some areas need 4000+ samples to stop being super noisy and other areas are clean with 512 samples. Without the noise threshold checked I have to render the whole scene with 4000+ samples, while using the noise threshold makes the rendering about 3x faster. And that's just using the default Blender setting without changing anything.

Your point about Cycles lacking some features and providing less accurate global illumination is of course correct and important to say, but a large part of your video is about speed as well and turning off this optimization, which brings one of the biggest speedups in Cycles X with no effect on GI accuracy, is imo a bit similar as not using PhotonGI in LuxCore.
User avatar
Dez!
Posts: 364
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2018 1:09 am
Location: Ekaterinburg
Contact:

Re: Luxcore vs CyclesX Benchmark

Post by Dez! »

Well, I wouldn't call a $2 file available to everyone. I do not want to pay money at all, imho the cost of my time is sufficient
Linux Plasma | Ryzen 5, 32Gb, SSD M2, GT 590 RX | BenQ 27 | Wacom One | Microsoft Ergo | Tie Guan Yin tea
http://dezigner.tilda.ws/
User avatar
Sharlybg
Donor
Donor
Posts: 3076
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 10:11 pm
Location: Ivory Coast

Re: Luxcore vs CyclesX Benchmark

Post by Sharlybg »

It's not about scrambling, it's about using noise threshold for adaptive sampling. I notice in your video that you actually turned it off.
Ah yes this one. No problem but as i told you It doesn't Change the story ON/OFF it will be what it is.
If you understand what i explain in the video you will get why it will not change anything.
Adaptive Sampling.jpg
Support LuxCoreRender project with salts and bounties

Portfolio : https://www.behance.net/DRAVIA
User avatar
Sharlybg
Donor
Donor
Posts: 3076
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 10:11 pm
Location: Ivory Coast

Re: Luxcore vs CyclesX Benchmark

Post by Sharlybg »

Well, I wouldn't call a $2 file available to everyone. I do not want to pay money at all, imho the cost of my time is sufficient
Anyone interested is not everyone. ;)
Here is my quote:
The file is also available to anyone interested
Support LuxCoreRender project with salts and bounties

Portfolio : https://www.behance.net/DRAVIA
JulianoLisboa
Posts: 146
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2020 3:29 am

Re: Luxcore vs CyclesX Benchmark

Post by JulianoLisboa »

Sharlybg wrote: Tue Feb 01, 2022 4:01 pm I understand that people like the tools they are using everyday but at some point we need to be serious.

1) What Scrambling distance have to do with Cycles / E-Cycles / Corona in Blenderguru bench
be so down in Gi quality while other render engine correctly compute GI ?

2) Is Scrambling Distance responssible of the Fact that Photon Gi cache wasn't used in luxcore for This Blguru Bench ?

3) It only work on GPU and can cause artefact so doesn't apply To CPU

4) And even with that scrambling enabled if you just follow the explanation it isn't the reason of cycles bad perf here :

Scrambling.jpg

Now I have the noise plus the artefact thanks you. And even without the furniture and trees plus displacement geometry.
And this took 26 min with the simplified scene and noisy output.

Scramb.jpg

I have nothing against Cycles and actually use the engine for what it as been buid for.
You just have to accept also that opensource CGI solution can exist also outside of Blender
And it isn't a bad thing. Actually how much opensource production render engine project are still alive
Cycles aside ?
By the way Let see what happen if we manage to make Luxcore 3.0 a reality ?

I agree with everything, and I say more that what moves evolution is competition. If Luxcore dies, Cycles will also be stagnant. After all, why evolve?

I'm looking forward to what's new in Luxcore 3.0
Post Reply