Photorealistic rendering seems unreasonably slow and memory hungry
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2019-02-27
02:38 PM
- last edited on
2023-05-11
11:36 AM
by
Noemi Balogh
I'm working on a particular scene for one of our architects, he uses an iMac with a 4 core processor and 32GB RAM. I launched the render on his machine on Thursday evening and it didn't finish until Monday morning, roughly 100 hours. Admittedly he chose a resolution of roughly 5000x3000 but it finished eventually.
I tried to run the same render on my computer with a 16 core processor and 16GB of RAM but it consistently failed with the out of memory error. I tried dropping to 3840x2160 but still no dice - the render would only complete at a maximum resolution of 1920x1080. I've tried adjusting the memory usage slider, it seems to make no difference.
So, I bought an extra 16GB of RAM for my machine bringing it up to 32GB total, and relaunched a render at 3840x2160. This time, it failed faster, complaining it had run out of memory, and the Cinerender plugin also crashed.
So, what am I doing wrong? Why does this render at 5000x3000 complete successfully (but slowly) on a Mac with 32GB RAM, but won't complete on Windows at 3840x2160 with 32GB RAM? How much memory do I need to complete a 3840x2160 render? Why does ArchiCAD try to use more memory than the system has available? It seems like a pretty basic problem. A 4K render is not particularly extreme these days, and this is a fairly powerful machine.
edit: for the 4K render, render quality and shadow quality are on low. At 1920x1080 the render took just over a minute.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2019-02-28 05:23 AM
16 or 32 Gb of RAM is not much memory for 3D visualisation, the artist that has been producing some graphics for one of my offices projects has 256Gb RAM in his workstation and the render farm he uses has more than 2000Gb RAM
To reduce your memory usage you will need to look at surfaces definitions, what channels are being used, amount of reflections, transparency, bump, displacement etc etc and also the rendering settings.
Sorry not much of an answer but 3D visualisation really is a ‘trip down the rabbit hole’
Scott

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2019-02-28 09:11 AM
We render most of our impressions at 300 dpi 195x135 mm. This still prints out fine at full size on A4 paper (assuming you have a decent enough printer).
It's also slightly larger than HD, so will look fine on screen too.
If it's something that's ok to run for hours over night and you aren't too bothered with those hours, then of course you can go all out.
However, I would consider having a setup that also allows you to output exterior renders in under 5 minutes and interior renders in about 10 minutes.
My workstation has much worse specs and pulls this off, by starting off with the 'fast' physical render presets and just adjusting a few settings.
www.leloup.nl
ArchiCAD 9-26NED FULL
Windows 10 Pro
Adobe Design Premium CS5
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2019-02-28 09:37 AM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2019-02-28 09:39 AM
Erwin wrote:Out of interest, why do you go with a physical preset? If I understood correctly it tried to replicate an image from a real camera, with options for aperture/shutter speed/DoF etc - I've usually found this slower than the non-physical option.
by starting off with the 'fast' physical render presets and just adjusting a few settings.

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2019-02-28 10:39 AM
Kieran wrote:Yes, physical renderer yields better results and some of the settings are like a camera, so if you know your photography, it's easy to set up.
Erwin wrote:Out of interest, why do you go with a physical preset? If I understood correctly it tried to replicate an image from a real camera, with options for aperture/shutter speed/DoF etc - I've usually found this slower than the non-physical option.
by starting off with the 'fast' physical render presets and just adjusting a few settings.
The preset scenes for 'medium' and 'final' will take very long to render.
Are you using the grass effect, by the way? A large surface trying to create grass (or other displacements) will potentially make the render fail.
If you are doing interior rendering, let me know, and I'll try to write up how I've gotten those down to max. 10 minutes.
www.leloup.nl
ArchiCAD 9-26NED FULL
Windows 10 Pro
Adobe Design Premium CS5
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2019-02-28 11:09 AM
Regards
Scott
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
2019-03-04 09:45 AM
Anyway, I've got some good ideas for next time!