Inside Sabertooth
Learn how Sabertooth uses 3ds Max to create 3D interactive projects, including HBO Go’s Game of Thrones interactive experience
  • 1/3
You are here: Forum Home / Autodesk 3ds® Max® / Autodesk 3ds Max / 3ds Max Design 2010 / 3dsmax design 2010 scanline renders 10 times slower than 2009!!!!!
  RSS 2.0 ATOM  
2 pages: 1.2 last

3dsmax design 2010 scanline renders 10 times slower than 2009!!!!!
Rate this thread
 
35851
 
Permlink of this thread  
avatar
  • sallo
  • Posted: 22 October 2009 03:08 AM
  • Total Posts: 23
  • Joined: 05 June 2009 03:52 AM

It happens to me that scanline rendering is very slow on max 2010 (with the same settings of 2009) - in practice it remains planted on the preparation lights (which “alas” always uses only one core ...),like 10 times slower.

I attach a simple test scene (created in 2009 with max so you can read the same file, same settings on max 2009 and 2010)

I get:
max2009 sp1+hotfix - in 00:16
max2010 sp1+hotfix - in 04:16

in practice 16 times slower.

This also happens to you???

I await enlightenment

Hello Thanks

configuration

PC#1
Win7 x64 - Q6600 @ 3200 - 8GB RAM
max 2009 64 + sp1
Max 2010 64 + sp1

PC#2
Vista SP2 x64 - Q6600 @ 3200 - 6GB RAM
max 2009 64 + sp1
Max 2010 64 + sp1



Attachment Attachment
Replies: 3
/userdata/avatar/avatar_20.jpg

Tested on my machine ( XP32 ) - and there is not such a difference - (17sec vs. 23 secs)

maybe other 64 bit users should jump in here and report… ?

Author: spacefrog

Replied: 22 October 2009 05:19 AM  
/img/forum/dark/default_avatar.png

17 vs 23 seconds is NOT a little difference it’s 35% slower !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Author: sallo

Replied: 25 October 2009 01:06 AM  
/img/forum/dark/default_avatar.png

Check to make sure that Motion Blur and Object Blur are turned off. They are turned on by default on 2010 for some idiotic reason.

Good Luck!!!

Author: lesmoore

Replied: 29 October 2009 02:54 AM  
avatar
  • Samab
  • Posted: 22 October 2009 05:58 AM

On XP x64.
With Max 2009,
rendering the first time takes 33sec, rendering the second time takes 30sec.
With Max 2010,
rendering the first time takes 35sec, rendering the second time takes 32sec.
Slower, but not much.

EDIT: You give the specs of 2 PCs, which are you running the test on? You are not comparing results from different machines, with different OS’s are you? As in 2009 is on the Win7 one with 8Gig and 2010 is on the Vista one with 6Gig.



Replies: 0
avatar
  • sallo
  • Posted: 22 October 2009 07:23 AM

same results in vista pc and win7 pc ....

not tested in xp ..... so maybe this is a vista sp2/win7 problem ?????

please test with vista/win7 64 bits systems please

thanks

Hey,are your 2009 and 2010 sp1 or not ???



Replies: 0
avatar
  • sallo
  • Posted: 23 October 2009 11:30 PM

a new test on xp sp3:

max 2009sp1 gets 29 seconds
max 2010sp1 gets 38 seconds

this is 30 % slower anyway!!! this is not so a little difference.

It’s not 10 times slower as with vistax64 or win7x64 but yes it’s slower

Some comments are welcome
bye



Replies: 0
avatar
  • sallo
  • Posted: 24 October 2009 12:54 AM

guys!!

I have an important update

I turned off aero (control panel- Advanced Settings - Visual Effects - check on-performance)

eeeee 2010 now changes from 4:16 to “only” 1:35!!

while 2009 is still 16 seconds with aero or not.

then I caught the first important clue: “probable conflict between drivers - os - max”

nb: sk NVIDIA gfx260 + the latest WHQL driver.

Still max remains more than six times slower than 16 times with aero.

I continue my investigation but also let me know if we are on the right track.

bye



Replies: 0
avatar
  • Location: West Midlands, England, UK
  • Total Posts: 14443
  • Joined: 06 August 2007 11:06 PM
  • Permlink of this post

System is in my sig, times are seconds.

2009 32 SP1+CE 34  33
2009 64 SP1
+CE 23  22
2010 32 SP1    41  39
2010 64 SP1    25  24

Conclusion. Vista sucks (but we all knew that anyway) and Win7 is based on Vista. Draw your own conclusions.



Max 4.2 through 2013.
XP-64 (SP2)
NVidia 9800GTX-512 (Driver 266.58).
Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz, 8Gb Ram, DX9.0c.

Replies: 0
avatar
  • sallo
  • Posted: 24 October 2009 04:27 AM

Finally i discovered that problem is the GUI of 3dsmax2010 and I think of the progress bar in renderer window.

I did this test: I started rendering and I immediately minimized 3dsmax2010 , I saw when the processor has stopped being used with the task manager and ... That’s it ! It was to only 21 seconds against the 4 minutes and 16 when application is open full window.

Therefore I think the problem is, as I said, the progress bar of the renderer that now, unlike before, uses all the graphic effects of vista/win7.

However even in this case, another thing is definitive: the rendering of scanline max2010 is minimum 20% slower than max2009 (ie as on Windows XP Pro)

greetings and kisses

the ball passes to Autodesk (if they can...) to correct one of the worst release ever made - imho <_ <

bye



Replies: 0
avatar
  • Location: West Midlands, England, UK
  • Total Posts: 14443
  • Joined: 06 August 2007 11:06 PM
  • Permlink of this post

No guarantees they will read this - these are peer-to-peer forums not a shortcut to Autodesk.

To report a bug, please use the Defect report submission form.



Max 4.2 through 2013.
XP-64 (SP2)
NVidia 9800GTX-512 (Driver 266.58).
Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz, 8Gb Ram, DX9.0c.

Replies: 0
avatar
  • Samab
  • Posted: 24 October 2009 05:36 AM

Conclusion. Vista sucks (but we all knew that anyway) and Win7 is based on Vista. Draw your own conclusions.

I’m agreeing with this, I think it’s more of a Vista thing than a Max2010 thing.
Does Vista/Win7 have an equivelent to the Performance Options in XP, where you can turn off the fancy UI effects for the benefit of those for whom their computer is a tool not a toy. I get the impression Vista has a lot of that kind of thing. May be worth lookin into.
I’m sticking with XP for as long as poss. By the time Max 201# doesn’t support XP I can leapfrog Vista and hopefully Win7 or whatever is out will have come of age by then and have a couple of SPs to put it straight.



Replies: 4
/img/forum/dark/default_avatar.png

Me too - only bought XP (just the one copy) because Max 2009 wouldn’t install on Win2K. I fully expect it to last a good few years yet.

Author: Steve_Curley

Replied: 24 October 2009 08:01 AM  
/img/forum/dark/default_avatar.png

Hey, I think it’s a related max2010-vista problem, and why 2009 is ok??? so It’s a max 2010 prob.

anyway max 2010 is 20% slower even on xp. THIS 20% sucks....
ciao

Author: sallo

Replied: 24 October 2009 09:14 AM  
/userdata/avatar/avatar_19031.jpg

“I’m sticking with XP for as long as poss.”

If I’m not wrong you can do it at least until 2014 and that’s a long time for this kind of business. Remember where we were 5 years ago, Max 5 was here, no Arch & Design, no Production Shaders what a lucky age… :)

Author: ivan iliev

Replied: 24 October 2009 09:21 AM  
/img/forum/dark/default_avatar.png

No no - I’m sticking with Win2K for as long as poss - I’ll move on from XP if and when it becomes necessary (for Max), but for most of my non max-related stuff 2k is just fine :)

Author: Steve_Curley

Replied: 24 October 2009 10:40 AM  
avatar
  • lesmoore
  • Posted: 29 October 2009 02:55 AM

Check to make sure that Motion Blur and Object Blur are turned off. They are turned on by default on 2010 for some idiotic reason.

Good Luck!!!



Replies: 0
avatar
  • sallo
  • Posted: 29 October 2009 04:27 AM

lesmoore 29 October 2009 09:55 AM

Check to make sure that Motion Blur and Object Blur are turned off. They are turned on by default on 2010 for some idiotic reason.

Good Luck!!!

There was no difference and as I explained before, the reason is connected to the OS graphics.

But motion and object blur is animation related no??
ok

Wait for a better solution, and yes I’ve sent a defective complain to autodesk

bye



Replies: 0
2 pages: 1.2 last