The Debate of CPUs Versus GPUs as The Preferred 3D Rendering Tool

Advanced motion graphics and 3D animation can be done with high degree of accuracy and effectiveness but these operations demand computing power in copious amounts. A large numbers of computer processors (CPU) are tapped to render out complex 3D scenes today but there is a huge price tag attached to the facility. Add to it the complex and substantial maintenance and heat issues and you can have a major problem on your hands. That’s precisely why relevant businesses are constantly seeking more efficient methods to produce the complex cinematic animation that works faster and is easy on the pocket too.

Rendering using CPU is efficient and cache-friendly but the process is highly tedious, painstaking and long drawn. Every path must be converted into screen space and scan line rasterized. The scan lines must be further intersected with the active edge list which must be scanned left to right. For CPUs, the tasks can be massive but for GPU-accelerated 3D graphics these are routine processes that can be achieved without much difficulty and decidedly faster than CPUs.

They seem to have found just what they are looking for in Graphic Processor Units (GPU). These units are not new. In fact they are being used for over a decade to provide real time 3D rendering for video games and even for video decompressions. The latest advancements in GPU rendering show incredible results as they are able to provide near real-time renders of amazing quality and at a much lower cost.

The increase in speed is primarily due to the way different processors handle jobs. In a CPU, the core processor on a motherboard is adept at dealing with complex calculations. In a GPU however, the whole unit works in a show of strength; creating a wonderful synergy. Individually their calculation abilities may not amount to much but as a team they can easily handle complex tasks without getting stressed. As most of the rendering tasks are driven by power, GPUs are better placed to deliver results than CPUs as it is right up their alley.

Another reason why GPUs are preferred for rendering is that several of them can be lined in one computer which can make rendering much faster than CPUs. An unconventional approach to GPU-accelerating path rendering is cleverly encoding path content into GPU memory, typically as a texture. A programmable shader is used to decode the path. There are many interesting advantages of this method such as such as being able to directly texture map 3D geometry with path rendered content, the need to pre-process a static path into texture encoding may be a drawback.

Apart from this, numerous rendering approximations and authoring limitations are necessary to make vector texture schemes workable. CPU-based path rendering systems involves maintaining about 16 coverage samples per pixel although the details may vary. This can create a challenge for GPU-based rendering processes because GPUs generally support one, 2, 4, or 8 samples per pixel through multisampling.

There is a need to weigh the pros and cons of using CPUs or GPUs for rendering. According to experts, the best way to fast rendering and yet enjoy the advanced features of CPU rendering is to use solutions offered by Rayvision, the 3D rendering experts known for their advanced CPU rendering.

Media Contact
Company Name: Rayvision Inc.
Email: Send Email
Phone: +86 755-82556877
Country: China
Website: http://www.rayvision.com/en/cloud-rendering.php


Source: www.abnewswire.com

Data & News supplied by www.cloudquote.io
Stock quotes supplied by Barchart
Quotes delayed at least 20 minutes.
By accessing this page, you agree to the following
Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.