Cinema 4D's legacy render engine is deprecated, CPU only and outdated. It is replaced by Redshift.
As pointed out earlier, Cinema 4D provides good modeling features, just like any of the other options in that top list.
I have done this type of testing before, comparing 3d DCCs, and the two core benchmarks would be
[1] viewport performance: the speed (frames per second) that a scene or object can be displayed at and worked with. This type of test is easy to prepare for direct comparison between DCCs.
Typical scenarios to test for are:
- raw single object display speed (no editing) orbiting, transforming, panning FPS. The object to test with would be a high density poly mesh without any texturing. A 3d scanned object is a good candidate.
- a scene comprised of thousands of singular mesh objects without textures to test how well a DCC handles a scenario with many individual objects. One scene with low poly object, one with medium complex poly objects.
- A medium-size production scene, fully textured with a heavy load of PBR textures. Test display quality modes between different DCCs.
- a heavy landscape scene with millions of instances (trees, for example).
- a raw single object edit speed performance: editing a high poly mesh is very different from merely panning and orbiting around it. Measure typical transformation edits: grabbing a single polygon and moving it. Select a larger group of polygons and move these.
These tests will tell a lot about how a DCC handles realtime display and memory management during daily work.
[2] render speed: the time it takes to render a scene. This is much MUCH harder to compare between DCCs and different render engines, if it can be compared at all. There are too many variables and differences between render technologies.
The only thing that can be absolutely compared are rendering speeds of the same render engine using the same scene on different hardware, either CPU, GPU or a combination of both.
It is possible to create identical scenes between render engines though, for a subjective measure how well a render engine copes with different types of scenes.
Typical scenes to test for are:
- a typical architectural indoor scene
- a typical architectural outdoor scene with trees, etc.
- a typical character animation production scene, rendering a full animation sequence
- a typical production quality heavy environment scene with loads of instances that would tax very high end machines and test if a render engine/DCC can handle the rendering. For example: https://www.disneyanimation.com/resources/moana-island-scene/
Aside from these specific things like caustics could be tested for as well. Preparing these scenes takes a lot of effort and knowledge of each DCC and render engine. Each render engine and scene can be optimized in various ways, and that requires someone who is very familiar and experienced with each render engine.
Your list amended:
| 3D modeling software | 3D rendering software |
- Blender
- Cinema 4D
- Maya
- Houdini
- Zbrush
- 3dCoat
- Modo
- LightWave*
|
- Cinebench (C4d benchmarking)
- V-Ray
- Octane
- Redshift
- Cycles
- Corona
- Karma/Mantra
- Arnold
- AMD Pro
- Pixar Renderman
- Eevee (realtime)
- Unreal (realtime)
|
* LightWave was resurrected from development hiatus the other day, so I felt inclined to include it.
How could I search the post. Sorry I can not find it
forums.unrealengine.com
