You are being very simplistic in the way you compare your renderers. (And you should also post some images to back it up)nourvfx wrote:hello my frinds.vray is very faster than mr and arnold.i test it .i render 300000hair with GI in vray and render time just 1min50sec
but in arnols render time is 3min10sec with aasumples=3 and defulit sumples is=3 adn very bad quality.
after this .i chang AAsumples from 3 to 10 and render time in arnold is 27min.and even with this quality in arnold my vray result in 1m50sec very beter than arnold.arnold have nouise point and you must have uper aa sumples. vray is faster render than 3delight and mr and arnold and max well.i tested all of this render.
Arnold uses FIXED sampling and Vray uses Adaptive sampling (as default).
Arnold ALWAYS BruteForces GI which garantees your renders wont flick. Plus it has a bunch of hair optimizations you can use to reduce render times without loosing quality.
Also it is very difficult to compare renderers unless you are using exactly the same setup (geometry, shading models, light intensity, etc, etc, etc...). Like so: viewtopic.php?p=13737#p13737
Have in mind that even this kind of comparison will not reflect real production results, since textures make a big difference in Adaptive Samplers (because of the increased contrast, making them slow), and little difference in Fixed Samplers...