4
$\begingroup$

I am currently using Sheep It! to render my blend (built on v2.68c) on multiple computers, and I noticed something rather strange. According to the log on-site, the frames rendered from other people's blends were completing in 3 to 4 minutes. This was on an 4 core i5. My main rig (with an 8 core i7) was completing frames in no less than half an hour. How is this possible?

To clarify, these people's frames are very complex, often with very detailed textures. I have 2 objects in my blend. Below are the options I changed for my blend:

  • Aspect Ratio: 1000px x 1000px
  • Output: PNG
  • Clamp Indirect: 0.98
  • Render Sampling: 128
  • Min Light Bounces: 0
  • Max Light Bounces: 4
  • Cycles Render

Is there something in there that I should change to make it go faster? I can't really comprehend how it's going to quickly.

EDIT: To answer what @Duarte asked...

  • System Specs: i7-920, 3GB DDR3, GT 630, Windows 10
  • I have two circles, extended to form a sort of coin with a star on it. It is not complex at all.
  • I have Firefox and Steam running in the background, but not actively. I've been away from the computer for 8 hours and noticed this behavior. (I am running Blender from Steam.)
  • I made sure when I began rendering that the blend was set for CPU rendering.
  • Screenshots

enter image description here

enter image description here

enter image description here

And to answer what @pycoder asked, yes, I am using Cycles Render.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ So you changed from Blender Render to Cycles Render? $\endgroup$
    – Jake Dube
    Commented Mar 22, 2017 at 0:16
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ What are your system specs? How is your scene setup? What objects do you have? Could you post some screenshots? What are your computer specs? What processor do you have, under which operating system? Are you comparing CPU vs GPU rendering by mistake? What other application are running in the backgroud? $\endgroup$
    – Duarte Farrajota Ramos ♦
    Commented Mar 22, 2017 at 0:16

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
6
$\begingroup$

You have Square Samples ticked under your Sampling render settings. It squares whatever sample value you have setup.

You have 128 samples specified so 128^2 = 16384 so you are basically attempting to render with 16384 samples which is a lot.

enter image description here

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ I thought that was for making the render tiles square... thank you, friend $\endgroup$
    – Isaac Corbrey
    Commented Mar 22, 2017 at 0:48
  • $\begingroup$ That would be named something like "Square Buckets" or "Square Tiles". Anyway you can control tile sizes from the Performance>Tiles settings; they are already square @16x16 pixels size. $\endgroup$
    – Duarte Farrajota Ramos ♦
    Commented Mar 22, 2017 at 0:55
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, I saw a post about optimal tile sizes for CPU rendering that said 16px was the best size for 8 cores. I never thought to look back at the sampling. What really confused me was that the realtime rendering took place so quickly, and it couldn't have taken that much more time to sample 4x more. $\endgroup$
    – Isaac Corbrey
    Commented Mar 22, 2017 at 1:02

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .