TurboCAD Forums

Turbo Talk => Gallery => Topic started by: paultc21 on April 22, 2016, 08:00:19 AM

Title: turbocad 2016 vs 21 deluxe redsdk vs lightworks
Post by: paultc21 on April 22, 2016, 08:00:19 AM
Hi all, just bought turbocad 2016 deluxe. Here are some renders in redsdk and light works. Its the model of the house, adjusted the lighting from the first post and remapped textures. Both renders are using the same lighting in these two comparisons. Redsdk Global Illumination fine, lightworks using raytrace full. I couldn't get the cushions on the stools to take a texure on the redsdk render for some reason but it worked fine on lightworks. Let me know what you think about the two differences in the renders. Note: the plant and the two vehicles I got from 3d warehouse. Those are the only ones I didn't make. Oh and those floating blinds are there because I lowered the walls so its easier to see. Let me know your thoughts.
Title: Re: turbocad 2016 vs 21 deluxe redsdk vs lightworks
Post by: Tim Stewart on April 22, 2016, 08:29:52 AM
Hi paultc21,

yes, you've certainly made a good start.
Personally, I prefer the Lightworks render, but, with development, I might be persuaded to change my mind!

Regards Tim
Title: Re: turbocad 2016 vs 21 deluxe redsdk vs lightworks
Post by: paultc21 on April 22, 2016, 09:25:17 AM
Yes Tim Ive just started with turbocad 2016 deluxe and Redsdk. I like some aspects of the render but it takes a lot longer than Lightworks when running global illumination fine. Raytrace standard in Redsdk seems to be faster than lightworks raytrace full though on my machine. Thanks for your input too!
Title: Re: turbocad 2016 vs 21 deluxe redsdk vs lightworks
Post by: paultc21 on April 22, 2016, 10:35:12 AM
here are my render times.
lightworks render 52 seconds  full raytrace
Redsdk raytrace standard 21 seconds.
Redsdk raytrace fine 77 seconds.

Redsdk global illumination standard 43 seconds.
Redsdk global illumination fine 200 seconds
Title: Re: turbocad 2016 vs 21 deluxe redsdk vs lightworks
Post by: Henry Hubich on April 22, 2016, 11:11:03 AM
That's a wonderful drawing.

Henry H
Title: Re: turbocad 2016 vs 21 deluxe redsdk vs lightworks
Post by: Dean on April 22, 2016, 11:47:25 AM
Hi all, just bought turbocad 2016 deluxe. Here are some renders in redsdk and light works. Its the model of the house, adjusted the lighting from the first post and remapped textures. Both renders are using the same lighting in these two comparisons. Redsdk Global Illumination fine, lightworks using raytrace full. I couldn't get the cushions on the stools to take a texure on the redsdk render for some reason but it worked fine on lightworks. Let me know what you think about the two differences in the renders. Note: the plant and the two vehicles I got from 3d warehouse. Those are the only ones I didn't make. Oh and those floating blinds are there because I lowered the walls so its easier to see. Let me know your thoughts.

Nice work Paul!
Try turning on "double sided' in the red material options.Though this is intended for surface objects with "0" thickness some times TC surface objects that do have thickness need this on. Deluxe works only with surface objects.
Also, I would recommend using "Physical lights" with Redsdk, I mean, you can do whatever you want but it's good practice for producing redsdk realistic lighting. All of the "Fluoresc architect AV" luminance categories are physical lights or try creating your own. In other words, I wouldn't recommend using the same environment, and luminance "Settings" in lightworks and redsdk.
Title: Re: turbocad 2016 vs 21 deluxe redsdk vs lightworks
Post by: paultc21 on April 30, 2016, 01:18:35 AM
Well I finally figured out how to fix the stool seats in redsdk. I had to remake them and texture set it to no texture before I subtracted a mold I made for the cusion shape. This time the way I made it was a different process so the red texure worked correctly but if I set the material in light works on the object before I subtracted the mold the light works material would only texture the top and not the sides or bottom. So the only way to get light works and redsdk to work right is to set it to no material before I subtracted the mold. Anyways it works. Have another question though, which is better for redsdk gaming radeon geforce or the pro version like firepro and quadro? I have 2016 deluxe
Title: Re: turbocad 2016 vs 21 deluxe redsdk vs lightworks
Post by: Tim Stewart on April 30, 2016, 03:34:29 AM
Paul,

IMHO, you may be better sticking with what you've got, as most rendering is done using the CPU, not the graphics card.
I use a Quadro K2200 card, which only makes itself really useful when using software like Adobe products, for instance.

Regards Tim
Title: Re: turbocad 2016 vs 21 deluxe redsdk vs lightworks
Post by: paultc21 on April 30, 2016, 09:59:27 AM
Thanks for the reply Tim
Title: Re: turbocad 2016 vs 21 deluxe redsdk vs lightworks
Post by: John R on April 30, 2016, 02:27:13 PM
Well I finally figured out how to fix the stool seats in redsdk. I had to remake them and texture set it to no texture before I subtracted a mold I made for the cusion shape. This time the way I made it was a different process so the red texure worked correctly but if I set the material in light works on the object before I subtracted the mold the light works material would only texture the top and not the sides or bottom. So the only way to get LightWorks and RedSDK to work right is to set it to no material before I subtracted the mold. Anyways it works. Have another question though, which is better for RedSDK, a gaming radeon geforce or the pro version like firepro and quadro? I have 2016 deluxe

Go to "Options / Preference" and uncheck the "3D Boolean operations" checkbox. Then you can subtract "objects with materials" and not get it applied to the other object.
Title: Re: turbocad 2016 vs 21 deluxe redsdk vs lightworks
Post by: paultc21 on May 02, 2016, 12:36:15 PM
Thank-you very much for your help. I'll try again with it unchecked. Hopefully it works.
Title: Re: turbocad 2016 vs 21 deluxe redsdk vs lightworks
Post by: Jeffin90620 on May 13, 2016, 12:21:57 PM
IMHO, you may be better sticking with what you've got, as most rendering is done using the CPU, not the graphics card.
I use a Quadro K2200 card, which only makes itself really useful when using software like Adobe products, for instance.

Tim,

Have you run the benchmark at http://forums.turbocad.com/index.php/topic,8615.msg94205.html (http://forums.turbocad.com/index.php/topic,8615.msg94205.html).  I'd really like to know how your Quadro card performs.

Also, have you investigated turning the GPU ON for RedSDK renders?


Jeff

Title: Re: turbocad 2016 vs 21 deluxe redsdk vs lightworks
Post by: Tim Stewart on May 14, 2016, 11:35:25 AM
IMHO, you may be better sticking with what you've got, as most rendering is done using the CPU, not the graphics card.
I use a Quadro K2200 card, which only makes itself really useful when using software like Adobe products, for instance.

Tim,

Have you run the benchmark at http://forums.turbocad.com/index.php/topic,8615.msg94205.html (http://forums.turbocad.com/index.php/topic,8615.msg94205.html).  I'd really like to know how your Quadro card performs.

Also, have you investigated turning the GPU ON for RedSDK renders?


Jeff

Jeff,

briefly, TurboCAD is not CUDA enabled, so it cannot take advantage of graphics cards, including my Quadro K2200, which allow the utilisation of the GPU in this way.

Below is a screen grab example of Majo's render test, showing the CPUs doing all the work.
In Adobe Première Pro, Autocad and Solidworks, the card's GPU is recognised, which allows rendering to take place on the GPU, similar to the GPU render test example.
I purchased the Quadro card principally for work with Première Pro.

I have experienced no subjective difference, with TurboCAD renders, after tweaking any settings in the  Render Manager or otherwise.
Therefore, I would suggest that any significant rendering gains, for the time being, can only be made through other means.  :(
Perhaps IMSI might consider incorporating the CUDA libraries into TurboCAD, in some future release?


Regards Tim
Title: Re: turbocad 2016 vs 21 deluxe redsdk vs lightworks
Post by: Jeffin90620 on May 14, 2016, 12:00:18 PM
Jeff,

briefly, TurboCAD is not CUDA enabled, so it cannot take advantage of graphics cards, including my Quadro K2200, which allow the utilisation of the GPU in this way.

I ran some experiments earlier this week (see http://forums.turbocad.com/index.php/topic,18652.msg112785.html#msg112785 (http://forums.turbocad.com/index.php/topic,18652.msg112785.html#msg112785)).

Using the GPU reduced rendering times by 65%-75%, although there are some errors.

I haven't been able to run the Majo benchmark, apparently because I have to set the Sample Size to 1 in order to use the GPU for processing (in another thread at http://forums.turbocad.com/index.php/topic,19037.msg113096.html#msg113096 (http://forums.turbocad.com/index.php/topic,19037.msg113096.html#msg113096)).


Jeff

Title: Re: turbocad 2016 vs 21 deluxe redsdk vs lightworks
Post by: Tim Stewart on May 14, 2016, 12:29:12 PM
Jeff,

briefly, TurboCAD is not CUDA enabled, so it cannot take advantage of graphics cards, including my Quadro K2200, which allow the utilisation of the GPU in this way.

I ran some experiments earlier this week (see http://forums.turbocad.com/index.php/topic,18652.msg112785.html#msg112785 (http://forums.turbocad.com/index.php/topic,18652.msg112785.html#msg112785)).

Using the GPU reduced rendering times by 65%-75%, although there are some errors.

I haven't been able to run the Majo benchmark, apparently because I have to set the Sample Size to 1 in order to use the GPU for processing (in another thread at http://forums.turbocad.com/index.php/topic,19037.msg113096.html#msg113096 (http://forums.turbocad.com/index.php/topic,19037.msg113096.html#msg113096)).


Jeff

Jeff,

        as a matter if interest, are you able to record, using GPU-Z, how/if the GPU is being loaded?

Regards Tim
Title: Re: turbocad 2016 vs 21 deluxe redsdk vs lightworks
Post by: paultc21 on May 14, 2016, 08:32:10 PM
Jeff I just ran that benchmark and got 74 seconds to save the JPG at 100%. just rendering took without saving took 50 seconds in view_1. that's in turbocad pro platinum 2016. using the trial. turbocad deluxe 2016 didn't display the model properly, missing open door and hinge parts.
using AMD fx8350 8 core 4 ghz and AMD Radeon HD 7950 OC boost, 16 gb 1866 memory 1 tb Samsung Evo ssd. when I went into render sytles I selected use gpu radio button in global illumination fine raytrace setting and rerendered and got 50 seconds. So I saved a whole 2 seconds. I'm not sure if I did anything useful by selecting the gpu radio button but just wanted to put that out there. Also in GPUz my GPU varied from 0 to 7 to 19 % mostly around 0 to 7.
Title: Re: turbocad 2016 vs 21 deluxe redsdk vs lightworks
Post by: Tim Stewart on May 15, 2016, 08:56:43 AM
Jeff I just ran that benchmark and got 74 seconds to save the JPG at 100%. just rendering took without saving took 50 seconds in view_1. that's in turbocad pro platinum 2016. using the trial. turbocad deluxe 2016 didn't display the model properly, missing open door and hinge parts.
using AMD fx8350 8 core 4 ghz and AMD Radeon HD 7950 OC boost, 16 gb 1866 memory 1 tb Samsung Evo ssd. when I went into render sytles I selected use gpu radio button in global illumination fine raytrace setting and rerendered and got 50 seconds. So I saved a whole 2 seconds. I'm not sure if I did anything useful by selecting the gpu radio button but just wanted to put that out there. Also in GPUz my GPU varied from 0 to 7 to 19 % mostly around 0 to 7.

The majority of this, I would suggest, is down to just display work, not rendering.  If the GPU was doing the rendering, instead of the CPU, the GPU would run at much nearer 100% capacity, otherwise, what is the point of using it?

Regards Tim