Page History

...

Chart

Rays	2.45	3.13	4.51	7.27	12.78	23.8	45.88	90.1
3Delight	0.0933142	0.0658266	0.0441248	0.0290439	0.0185575	0.0117566	0.00752546	0.00449892

Rays	0.678	3.26	10.8	43.4	173.6	694.5
Arnold	0.15699	0.100115	0.0501787	0.0242515	0.0117413	0.00693426

Rays	1.47	2.94	5.88	11.7	47.02	94.14	376.3	751.3
RenderMan	1	2	4	4.7	9	15.5	51.2	0.151125	0.121487	0.0953649	0.0728148	0.0728148	0.0265388	0.0138148	970.00854045

The following plot gives us a good idea the time required to achieve a certain quality. From the user perspective, this is an important quantity.

Chart

Time	5.72s	8	12.82	22.18	40.92	86.91	165.69	302.98
3Delight	0.0933142	0.0658266	0.0441248	0.0290439	0.0185575	0.0117566	0.00752546	0.00449892

Time	1	2	6	21	81	492
Arnold	0.15699	0.100115	0.0501787	0.0242515	0.0117413	0.00693426

Time	6.74	7.23	7.99	9.42	18.51	29.40	98.08	383.39
RenderMan	0.151125	0.121487	0.0953649	0.0728148	0.03738760728148	0.0265388	0.0138148	0.00854045

...

Chart

width	800
domainAxisUpperBound	300
title	Time to First Pixel vs. Samples
type	xyLine
yLabel	RMSE
domainAxisLowerBound	0
xLabel	Million Rays

Rays	2.45	3.13	4.51	7.27	12.78	23.8	45.88	90.1
3Delight	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3

Rays	0.678	3.26	10.8	43.4	173.6	694.5
Arnold	0	0.35	1.2	3.2	11	41

Rays	1.47	2.94	5.88	11.7	47.02	94.14	376.3	751.3
RenderMan	010	2	040	4.7	09	0	0	15.5	51.2	970

Conclusions

3Delight generates light samples that are algorithmically better than both Arnold and RenderMan. In short, for N samples:

...