Mostly to avoid cores idling, with large tile sizes you could really be wasting time, especially for something that only occupies a small part of the image, or a really detailed patch that's left to last running on a single core after everything else is finished. But it's part of my optimization routine, so occasionally I increase the size. Never heard of the extra sampling issue, can't imagine it would over-shadow the 1:8 ratio of cores rendering simultaneously though, unless it's a scene with extremely even detail level.
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Ed Manning <etmth...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Arvid Björn <arvidbj...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Sure, use unified sampling, min 1, max 100, quality 2 (in this case), >> enable FG (default settings in this case), 16px tilesize, spiral pattern. >> Use Architectural material on everything, set all samples everywhere to >> 1. Enable AO in Architectural, set AO shadow color to black. >> >> > Hi Arvid -- > > Why tile size 16? I ask because I often use this setting (all the time > for previews, often for renders) in order to minimize the amount of idle > proc time while the last couple buckets finish, but have been told lately > that it's actually a time-waster since the renderer has to resample all the > bucket edges. I'm not sure which helps/hurts more, although I guess maybe > there'd be a way to figure out a rule of thumb based on bucket time vs. > number of cores... >
