What is the best rendering
engine for architects? Well, it’s not that straightforward
of an answer… But that’s what this video is all about. This is the Ultimate
Render Engine comparison. A full guide to help you discover what’s
the best tool for your current workflow. But before a winner is chosen I need to present you with some data. I’m going to be as impartial
as I can on this comparison. And I’ll try to not give my
opinion as much as possible. And I have even asked the community
to help me out with this, so we do this as a collaborative process. We’ve got images from the same scene,
interior and exterior, from all different engines done by architects
and artists all around the world. I’ve also passed around a survey
to give us some more info. Okay so let’s begin setting
the stage for this discussion. Here are the main render engines
I considered for this comparison. Vray, Lumion, Twinmotion, Enscape,
D5, Unreal Engine, Corona with 3ds Max, and Cycles with Blender. These are the ones I know
are most used by all of you. And here we’re talking more specifically
about Architects or architecture students who do visualization as
part of their day-to-day tasks. But it’s not necessarily their main focus. I know there are a lot more software,
but for the sake of maximizing this comparison, these are the most
used in the architecture industry. Feel free to add the one you use
down in the comments below to help more people know about it. Let’s lay out some important data
so you can start seeing the biggest differences between the engines, and
later in the video, I’ll show you the exterior and interior image comparison. Based on the survey I have
put up, these are the results on render engine popularity. Which is not a surprise
to me, to be honest. We’ve got Twinmotion with a slight
edge here, but following not too far behind is Lumion, Enscape, and Vray. And with D5 included, those are what most
fit into a typical architectural workflow. Where you need to design and
visualize at the same time. More advanced engines like Corona,
Unreal Engine, and Cycles are more powerful with complex tools and
allow a ton of procedural stuff. I’d personally separate them
into different categories with very distinctive user bases. And remember here I’m trying to take
into account the whole world and its diverse architectural practices, okay? So don’t come saying in the comments
that “Rhino, Revit, and this X render engine is the professional standard
and using any other software is just dumb” because Europe and North
America aren’t the whole world okay? You see, when it comes to pure
architectural visualization [no design workflow involved], we know
that 3ds max with Corona dominates the market across the globe. However the learning curve is much steeper
than a typical architecture engine. Not to mention the complex UI and
technical viewing are not ideal for that back-and-forth design iteration that is
much needed when designing a building. In that sense, I’d group
the engines this way: Lumion, Enscape, D5, and Twinmotion are
easy to learn, easy to master and you can get fairly decent results in no time. Vray is slightly to the side with a
slightly steeper learning curve and more complex UI, but then also allows you
more flexibility and complex results. And then you may go to Unreal engine,
Corona with 3ds max and Cycles on Blender. They are much more advanced software
that can get incredible results. But again, it demands much more
skills and often a lot more time invested to extract the best results. And again it’s clear that a pure
arch viz program is not ideal for the typical architectural workflow with
iterations, plan creation, and so on. Now… Some would say that pricing is what
really matters when deciding what render engine is the best fit for your practice. I don’t know if that’s true when the
difference is so little when we’re talking about professional-level software. Maybe for students or recent grads…
still, we got to compare pricing plans. First up we have free options. Blender with Cycles is
completely free to use. It has a GPL. General Public License. That is one of the many
reasons it has gained tons of traction these past few years. Unreal Engine is essentially
free to use as well. It has a paid annual plan, but
for architectural purposes, it doesn’t really matter. Then we have D5 with
only $38 dollars a month. Corona for $53.90. Then Twinmotion has a
different pricing structure. You buy a perpetual license for $749
dollars, then only pay after a year annually to get the upgrade for $199. Then Vray for Sketchup for $78.90 a month. Next up is Enscape for $84.90 and finally
most expensive of them all is Lumion. And here I’m not considering the
standard plan, because it has a ton of limitations that in my point of
view don’t justify going for it. The pro version is at a
whopping 1499 euros annually. I know they say €124 per month,
but in reality, if you’re a solo or small team, you’re realistically
looking at the big number here. Larger offices can take that investment
annually and won’t even bother. So then... it might be fair to compare them
in an annual method of payment. And this is how it goes. Some go down drastically giving you more
discount for this full payment upfront, which is always important to consider. Oh worth mentioning, but I
think Twinmotion has some sort of purchasing power parity. It sometimes shows me the price
with local currency, which is lower than their standard rate. So that’s nice! Talking about pricing is not that simple. We shouldn’t look at just the render
engine pricing as you often need a 3d modeler software, or it would be the BIM
software you already use and pay for. But lays a good foundation
for this specific comparison. If we take a look at this
chart here based on the survey. This is how each engine user
feels about price fairness. Quite interesting to see how
this directly relates to the price structure of each engine. Now if you’re a student you
shouldn’t really pay, right? Well… from the paid engines, only
Twinmotion and D5 have a real free version that is easy to get hands on. Lumion does have a full educational
free version, but it’s a bit more difficult to get, apparently, you
need to go through a local reseller. Now Enscape, Vray, and Corona which
are all owned by the same group [Chaos] require students to pay. And if that wasn’t bad enough its
only payment option is annually. I’m trying not to be biased here, just
give you plain data for a fair comparison. But honestly, I feel that
this is such a mistake. You see, the whole idea of an engine
being massively adopted by the industry, regions, or market can be hugely impacted
by students learning it and then knowing they can achieve consistent results
with the tool later in their careers. If there are amazing engines like D5
and Twinmotion that are completely free for students without limitations
and easy to get your hands on. This just makes others seem not worth it. But let me know what you
think in the comments below. And I’d think that it’s not like they
are really making a huge profit by charging $149 a year from students. But it is indeed a ton of money
to pay as a student, especially if you’re from developing countries. Data and technical info are
important and we have a lot more to explore in this video, but it
shows only part of this comparison. We’ll go back to the data in a second,
but I want to show you the images created with each one of these engines. The ideal scenario would be for me to
have the skills to achieve the best result with each engine to show you and then
you get to decide which one looks better. But that’s obviously not the case. So to not add my influence over
engines I’m proficient at, I asked over Instagram for the community to join in. And we have some incredible submissions. I gave all participants the same briefing
for an interior and exterior scene. I’ll show you the images without
commenting specifically on them. So without bias, you analyze the
images by looking at reflections, textures, lighting, vegetation, and
all of that good stuff that you know is essential when creating a rendering. In no particular order,
let’s start with Lumion. Mayck, with a 2023 Lumion version and he
explored both with and without RayTracing. D5. Beltran did 2 different options. And Ibsa used D5 the
free community version. Enscape. Byron. And Tristan. Twinmotion. With Ewings’ work. Vray. With my good friend Tony from TN3D Studio. Which by the way has
some fantastic tutorials. Then Unreal Engine. With Kalhiq Corona 3ds Max
from Mustafa’s submission. And lastly Cycles Blender with Léon. I honestly loved seeing these results. It adds an extra layer
to this whole comparison. But please keep in mind that despite
each artist following the brief I gave, their skill levels can vary. And different intentions with the image
atmosphere can also impact the result. And I know how important post-production
is in image creation, however, I asked them not to do any post-production so we
could look at the engine’s raw results. Okay, now back to data and specs. Let’s take a look at features. There are a ton we could cover
here to compare them all... effects, material settings, asset library,
post-production capabilities, and so on. Overall the survey shows that users
are mostly satisfied with their current rendering engine of choice,
averaging at around 8 out of 10. We all know that there’s no perfect
engine that has every feature to everyone. But this just confirms that. Now, I feel that a good library of
assets is one of the features that can not only save you a massive amount of
time when visualizing a project but also help you achieve high-quality results. Often paid models such as vegetation
can get pricey and not always easy to implement into every workflow. So those engines that are providing
an extensive library of resources certainly have an edge on the comparison. Vray and Corona can use Chaos Cosmos
which is a complete ready-to-use library. Enscape has its own asset library as
well, but being in the chaos group and having the integration with Vray
can also take advantage of this, thus expanding the options even more. Lumion is widely known for its
complete library with even options for animated assets and fine detail. Twinmotion has got its own extensive
library, plus access to Quixel Megascans, which some would say is what makes
Twinmotion ahead of the competition. D5 has a huge library as well, also with
detailed objects and animated assets. And that’s pretty much it, we
can then group the engines into “built-in library” and “no library” You can get access to free libraries
of assets with Unreal Engine and Cycles [Blender], but for this specific use
case with vetted and reliable resources, they go into the second category. Still on the topic of features. Compatibility is a big
factor to be considered. It’s no use to have an outstanding
engine that is not compatible with your design workflow. That being BIM, CAD, or something else. Some of these engines are plugins that
overlay onto the 3d software, and others are a stand-alone type of programs. Here’s how they classify. Plugins that work with all major BIM
[Revit, Archicad, and others] or 3D software [Sketchup, Rhino, and so on] Standalone applications with some sort
of live connection between the engine and 3d software [modeler or BIM]. Or "independent" that is the
3D software that has an engine that only works between the two. Each of these options comes with
a pro and con and will be a better fit depending on your workflow. Other features we could compare them... The most important may be PBR workflow. The ability to create realistic
and complex materials. All of them have this taken care of. I know this is the bare minimum haha But... Some allow you much more control
and extra settings, such as adding layers of smudges, adjustments, noise
maps, procedural stuff, and more. For me, a deal breaker is Render
Elements [Render Channels]. All of them have this option,
again some with even more control. But it’s hard to believe that Twinmotion
does not allow you to export channels. If you’re serious about arch viz
this can be hard to overcome. I wouldn’t say it takes Twinmotion out
of the race entirely because Twinmotion does have a really good engine with Path
Tracer, and just as I’m recording this video apparently Lumen from Unreal Engine
has been implemented into Twinmotion. Which is to show you that
it has a ton of potential. But it is something vital to be
considered in this comparison for sure. On the same note of
Post-production capabilities. All of them have some sort of
built-in tool that allows you to tweak a bit of exposure, color
correction, bloom, warmth, and so on. Some engines more and some less. Personally, I never relied on
these to correct anything on the render as Photoshop is much
more powerful to work with it. But it can be interesting to tweak
some things on the render engine before it bakes in all of the effects. A much less important item for
most people, but that often gets me and now I’m thinking more
specifically about students overall. Is the ability to work with parallel
projection or create diagrams in some way. Vray with Sketchup especially is
super strong when talking about that. It gives you a ton of flexibility to
export Isometrics both in line files to then work in Adobe Illustrator,
create clay render to spice it up even more, or even explore
a full physical model solution. All of the engines do have a Parallel
Projection option, apart from D5. Recently I wanted to do a diagram
for a competition I joined and couldn’t use D5 for this. All of them can in a way do Clay Renders
or simulate a Physical Model, which then I’ll give a slight edge to Cycles
[Blender] and Corona [3ds Max] for having a powerful 3d modeler associated with it. There are many many other aspects
that we could add to this comparison. Things that could be a decision-making
factor for you, but that I might not have covered in the video. This comparison could
honestly be a full hour. We could look at Operating
system they can run. Mac users usually have fewer
options to choose from. Or what’s the rendering type? Like real-time, cpu,
gpu, ray-tracing or not. System requirements. And many other things. I tried to include what I
thought to be the most important for you to take into account. So the best rendering
engine actually depends. We looked at so many variables here
and it’s not reasonable to say one is better than the other 7 here. Because it needs to fit your needs. Let me give you some examples
of what I consider to be the best engine for each scenario. If you don’t care too much about
visualization and just want to get a good result with very little work. Go for Twinmotion, D5, Lumion or Enscape. But then if you’re on a budget
at the moment, D5 might be the best solution out of the four. If you’re a student and need more
creative flexibility to create different styles of renderings or diagrams, and
also don’t have a powerful machine. Vray can be a great alternative. It has always been my favorite
when I was in architecture school. If you only think about architectural
visualization and isn’t really designing or iterating, you may want to look
at Corona, Unreal Engine, or Cycles. Out of these three, if you want to
work for an archviz studio, 3ds Max with Corona might be the safest bet. But if you want to explore new
technology and look at what might be the new step of archviz, Unreal,
and Blender is the way to go. Now, if you don’t want to get out
of a BIM software to visualize, then an engine that works directly with
Archicad or Revit is the answer. A solution that eliminates any extra
step in the middle and gives your BIM model a realistic visualization. You see where this is going? Personally, I believe that if
you learn how architectural visualization works, at its core. It doesn’t really matter
what tool you’re using. You can easily migrate to another
engine if it has better pricing, better compatibility, or extra
tools you need, and so on. That’s why often an annual
plan is tough to commit to. I actually want to hear from you now. Which rendering engine do you think
is the best one at the moment? Let me know in the comments below and
we can continue this conversation there.
