Octane vs Arnold vs Physical – What Renderer is Right for You?
In this video I examine my three favorite renderers at the moment, Physical, Arnold, and Octane. One of the most common questions I get asked by C4D artists these days is, “What renderer should I use?” Well, hopefully this video and it’s clever analogy will help clear that up for you. This video runs through some of my favorite (and not so favorite) features of these renderers.
Let me start by saying that I deliberately did not include some renderers that you may have been hoping for. I chose these three because they are, in my opinion the most exciting. Although, I am watching Redshift very closely and anxious to see their C4D plugin. Also, these are MY opinions and I’m guessing there will be artists that do not agree or have their own set of likes/dislikes. I encourage everyone to share their opinions in the comments, but remember to keep it professional.
My Top 3 List for Each:
Physical (CPU Based) – Sedan
- No additional cost
- Full integration has benefits
- Free team/net rendering (with exception to command line)
Arnold (CPU Based) – SUV
- IPR window/RT feature – huge timesaver
- Works well on both Mac & PC
- Node Based Material Editor
Octane (GPU Based) – Formula One
- Insanely fast (if you have the GPU hardware)
- IPR/RT window feature – huge timesaver
- Crazy fast SSS, DOF, and Motion Blur
My System Specs:
- Custom AVA Direct PC Build – Windows 10 Pro
- 2 x INTEL Xeon E5-2640 Eight Core Processors 3.4GHz
- 32gigs of RAM
- 4 x EVGA GeForce GTX 980ti Cards