[Brian Jones]

the help has a bunch of useful info on GI – it depends on what you are lighting your scene with and the scene objects themselves what’s going to work. In general terms more samples is good (if a lot slower).
And it’s more complex now with reflectance materials etc. It would help to see the scene file

[Brian Jones]

it can be done with xpresso like this

12875_roundpointsposition.c4d.zip

two nulls with xpresso – one that will round the points of an object to whole numbers, one that will round to 1/4 values.
-Each setup so that anything dropped in as a child will have it’s points set to rounded values.
-Works only on editable objects but won’t break on parametric objects, just won’t do anything.
-The 1/4 round is done by multiplying by 4 rounding then dividing by 4.
-If you really meant round up to the next highest number and not round down if less than .5 or up if more than .5 then the equations in the Formula nodes should use Ceil(Value1) not Round(Value1) (or ceil/round – not case sensitive)

[Brian Jones]

that looks like a spline of the top shape(s) extruded would be a better choice than booles

[Brian Jones]

it renders here. At least as I opened it. In the viewport and in the picture viewer.

[Brian Jones]

can you post the scene file?

[Brian Jones]

make it the child of a null – then you can move the null along z and rotate the child without affecting the motion

[Brian Jones]

one way would be – go to Freeze Transformation in the Coord tab and click on Freeze R, then a move with the Z handle will move only in Z

[Brian Jones]

Steve or Adam likely have better insights but FWIW – what’s the single frame render time on one machine? 15-30 minutes? Longer? I assume GI, have you checked out the GI optimization techniques in the docs? Can you fake it without GI? I assume a different renderer is not in the cards now with a deadline already there.

[Brian Jones]

check the manual out here Cinema 4D/Cinema 4D Prime/Views and Viewports/View/Viewport – basically what’s in the OGL is not bad if the scene is lighted by a sky but if not it adds it’s own image to fake reflections and object to object reflections don’t work well at all unless it’s a floor or water (and only if Screen Space reflections are turned on).
This is intended to get a general idea of whether a surface has the right curves to catch the light the way you want but not a trust-able source of what the render will look like. I’d go with the render region with Progressive rendering on to give quicker feedback like in this GSG tute https://greyscalegorilla.com/tutorials/setup-an-interactive-render-window-in-cinema-4d-for-faster-feedback/

[Brian Jones]

that’s the method but it’s really designed so you can scrub backwards and forwards (or jump to frames directly) through sequences that otherwise have to be calculated frame by frame or they don’t work right (eg. dynamics). With a
deformer/effector you can already do that so the mograph cache isn’t really doing you any good. I’d have to guess you don’t have a fast enough machine to handle what you want quickly. What do you mean by “5000 point amount”? If that’s vertexes in an object that’s not high, if you mean your Voronoi Fracture has a source with 5000 points that’s a bunch but not a whole bunch (unless you have Detailing on – but you could turn off Activate in Viewport) – or do you mean something else? What are you running this on?