>>898682
Redshift>Arnold~V-Ray>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>A scanline renderer from the 90s>>>>>>>>>>Drawing frames by hand>>>>>>>>>>Not rendering at all>Mantra>Cycles

Also whoever made your pic is retarded.
You can achieve each look in each renderer by simply tweaking the color ramps in the volume shader.

Maxwell, obviously.

>>898682
Which one is the fastest raytracer?

>A scanline renderer from the 90s

I know 3DS Max and Maya's scanline renderers don't have any advanced features. but they are very fast. I couldn't render my animations fast enough with Vray.

arnold.

Arnold and Renderman look the best imo.

>>898684
elaborate

>>898745
He hates blender. Nothing more.

Also, where are corona vros

>HEY GUYS WHAT IS BEST?
>HHEY GUYS! SOFTWARE XY VS SOFTWARE XZ??
>ELABORATE
>OMG YOU OUTED YOURSELF AS A BEGINNER WITH NO EXPERIENCE.
>BLENDER IS BEST SHOULD I GET BLENDER
kill yourself
/thread

If you have to ask it means your renders will look like shit no matter what you use.

>>898692
Based

>>898745
Redshift:
>still the cheapest top-tier commercial renderer around, even after Maxon's subscription-only bullshit
>can still renew old permanent licenses up to 2023
>the OG GPU renderer, stupidly fast on consumer hardware
>single-handedly makes RTX not a meme, hardware raytracing will speed your renders up by 30%.
>no CPU mode

Arnold:
>Autodesk
>CPU renderer, GPU mode has limited functionality and is noisier
>comes included with Maya, but no batch mode
>otherwise expensive, subscription only

V-Ray:
>the OG go-to high-end ray-tracer
>used to be the undiscussed champion of commercially available renderers 20 years ago, now it's just one of many equally valid ones
>CPU renderer with GPU mode bolt-on like Arnold, although arguably better implemented
>originally born to satisfy archviz/product design needs, traditionally geared towards 3DS Max/Rhino users, there's even a SketchUp plugin
>expensive, subscription only

Renderman:
>famously the Pixar renderer
>used to come with a barebones configuration (literally just the ray trace engine) and you were basically required to code all shaders yourself from scratch
>non-commercial, non-watermarked version is available for free
>still offers perpetual licenses
>arguably one of the better choices for a big studio with internal R&D teams and giant renderfarms, may be overkill for a solo indie

Mantra:
>default Houdini renderer
>CPU-based
>supports literally everything that Houdini handles, for obvious reasons, and you can come up with pretty wacky shit in Houdini that you can wire into shaders for some interesting effects
>slow
>sooooooooo fucking slow, holy shit, it's ridiculous

Cycles:
>default Blender renderer
>CPU/GPU mode available
>slow
>sooooooooo fucking slow, holy shit, it's ridiculous
>but unlike the Houdini crowd for Mantra, the Blender crowd will tell you Cycles is the best thing ever
>no wacky shit you can wire into shaders in Blender neither

>>898766

>redshift
Why is this piece of shit hard to crack? I hate cycles and arnold kek This is why I stick to marmoset.

>>898766
Redshift has a CPU mode now. The fact that still don't have randomwalk SSS is hilarious though.

I think called Arnold GPU "limited" is a bit unfair. Most users won't miss the stuff that's missing. Noisier isn't much of a bit deal seeing as how much faster it is than CPU.

>>898766
The bottom line is that GPU rendering is much more scalable as a solo indie working on a single node (i.e. you and your local machine) rather than CPU, even more so now with RTX available.
Buy a single RTX 3090 today and your rendering needs are satisfied for the next 15 years. When was the last time one of your scenes took up more than 24 gigs of memory?
In GPU rendering your bottleneck is VRAM, and the RTX GPU with most VRAM available is the Quadro RTX 8000, with 48GB, at $6k a pop.
Up to small-studio-size, GPU VRAM amounts available today will suffice, but memory requirements quickly outstrip those the higher-end you go, so having nodes with 64-core CPUs and 512GB of RAM and rendering on CPUs is better scalable for bigger studios, the slower rendering speed offset by the sheer amount of cores and rendering nodes they can deploy.

Why does /3/ hate Mantra?

>>898766
>Redshift
>the OG GPU renderer
That's Octane you retard.

>>898772
It's just slow, mang. it's fine if you've got access to a farm but if you just want to kick some frames out at home it's just not competitive.
Karma XPU 1.0 cannot come soon enough.

>>898773
That's true, I remember when it first came out and how much they shilled the GPU thing.
However, they wanted to bank on the GPU meme so hard that it just fell behind Redshift, it also costs 3 times as much, kek

>>898775
>it also costs 3 times as much,
Redshift costs €23 a month and Octane costs €16.50 a month.

>>898776
I bought Redshift permanent in 2020 for $300 discounted, spent $250 in maintenance so far and plan on renewing it again for $250, for as long as I can keep my permanent license going.

Octane costs €700 first year then €200 each year which used to be something like $770 and $220, not anymore I guess, kek

>>898766
>sooooooooo fucking slow, holy shit, it's ridiculous
It is much faster on the GPU than it is on the CPU, by around a factor of 100x. V-Ray on the other hand has a speed differential of only a few times. So if you tried it on just the CPU, you might be biased.

>>898812
I am talking about Cycles.

3Delight is great CPU renderer, fastest of the CPU renderers IMHO. It also comes with free option (although limited to 12 cores / threads). It gives very nice results, very fast (in some cases almost as fast as GPU renderers).

>>898767
harder than octane.
but answer is simple - they shut down anyone who tries to hack, or steal internal SDK, code.
> otoy CEO - urbach
> a fucking kike, forcing beeple and nft faggotry on twitter
same with maxon.

Octane > All

>>898770
> When was the last time one of your scenes took up more than 24 gigs of memory?
your scenes must fucking suck. Jesus, man.

Where does Keyshot fit into this battle? How does it compare with the others?

>>901728
Anyone?

>>898682

>>898766
I am by no means a blender fanboy, but I've been led to believe that cycles (at least after the 'cycles x' update) can compete with the big names in terms of speed. Is this not true even with the latest version of cycles?