This deserves stating plainly, because it is the one place where a beautiful garden render can cost you real money. The image shows the garden at its best: mature planting, everything in flower at once, in the season the model chose. Real planting arrives small, flowers in sequence rather than simultaneously, and looks like the render in year three at the earliest.
It also shows plants without checking whether they will live where you live. The model has no idea about your hardiness zone, your rainfall, your soil pH, whether that bed is in full shade, or whether the species it drew is invasive in your region — and in some places planting the wrong thing is not merely a waste of money but actually prohibited.
The way to use it well is to treat the render as a description of structure and mood rather than a plant list. What it is genuinely reliable about is the shape of the space: where the beds should go, how wide the path wants to be, whether the seating belongs at the end or against the house, how much lawn is worth keeping, where a screen would help. Those are the decisions that are expensive to reverse, and they are exactly what a photograph of somebody else's garden cannot answer.
Take the image to a local nursery or a landscaper and ask them to substitute species that suit your conditions and give the same effect. That conversation is far quicker with a picture than with adjectives, and it is where the real value of the render actually lands.