Not sure what you expect. That's just how conventional 3D rendering works - an algorithm chugging through every pixel and evaluating the properties as the imaginary light rays travel through the scene and depending on the kinds of shadows, materials, reflections, transparencies, antialaising etc. this can require millions of rays per pixel. Only getting a beefier computer will accelerate such stuff, but then you will also have to upgrade your software to the full Cinema 4D, where actually those advanced render settings are available to improve performance and even then it will take time to build up the experince on how to tweak things.
thanks for the first answer. What I expect: how can I accelerate the preview/rendering? Could the GPU used for that? If so, how can I use the GPU (Nvidia Quadro K2000) for that tasks? Would a better GPU solve taht issue? Is it only a netter CPU that solves that issue.
As so far I understood, that the
A) full version of Cinema 4d (is it the Studio line?) and/or
B) a better CPU
would provide better render settings to accelerate that tasks.
Would the Nvidia Quadro P4000 be also an option to improve the situation?
Which of the solutions you would prefer in terms of best benefit-cost-relation?
1 person found this helpful
Cinema 4D has no GPU rendering (short of buying commercial third-party renderers like Cycles 4D, Redshift, Octane etc.). That's an utterly moot point at the moment. Everything else hinges on having indeed better/ more CPUs at hand.
thank you very much for your answer - now I check to improve the CPU.
Yeah, well, don't hold your breath. I hate to know people have expired from lack of oxygen.
If Adobe plans to stay relevant, then they'll implement GPU rendering on the 3D engine front at some point. These 3rd party GPU renderers have quickly become a standard expectation, outside of Arnold, which hangs on mostly because of legacy popularity with the upper market - but even then, Arnold knows its days are numbered, and they're working on a GPU solution of their own.