Network Render License Options Poll Tweet

[geo_n]

There's a lot of threads asking about network render licensing.
Since they will bring out a "pro" version and a "cloud" version its clear that the current version is "semi-pro" version
I don't mind. I'm sure the pro and cloud will be way higher in price. Maybe more expensive than vray and arnold licenses.
It would be nice if otoy finally decides to implement what they originally said which was limited network nodes without having to buy extras. No standalone license for each node, no cheaper render node license. Thats what they planned before anyway and I'm pretty sure its a matter of decision about money now since network works already and its easy enough to just lock the standalone version to make it simply a render node version.
Lets put this on a poll curious what people think.
For this current version it would be nice to have extra 2 render nodes with each having 6 gpu limit. That's probably fair to both parties. Octane has a good price now but not with network rendering.

[grimm]

I was thinking about a slightly different take on this than the options you have in the poll. I don't know how well it would work with the current licensing scheme, but here is what I would like to see for the network licensing. The first standalone license allows the use of a specific number of GPU's, lets just say that it is the current limit of 12 like it is now. The network demons are not licensed at all and the number of GPUs are tracked by the master computer (the one that has the standalone licensed). When the number of GPUs reaches the limit (12) then any additional GPUs are ignored and not used. To use additional GPUs you then have to purchase another block of 12 more GPUs. This price could be the same as standalone or could be reduced? This scheme allows the greatest flexibility I think as it wouldn't matter if you have 6 computers with 2 GPUs each or 4 computers with 3, etc.

[pegot]

That's an interesting take on the above options Grimm. Could the poster modify this pole to include that as one of the choices?

[gabrielefx]

today you can configure these gpu based workstations:
8 gpus on Tyan barebones: 8 Teslas or 8 Titan black edition.
8 gpus on Nvidia grids, same of Tyan barebones.
4 gpus on several semi pro motherboards: 4 Titan Z by EVGA water cooled
many of these systems are certified by Nvidia.
external expansions aren't certified.

the Otoy licenses should handle all the possible gpu physically installed on each node. No matter if you install 1 or 8 gpus

In theory I could have 3 Tyan barebones and 24 gpus.
I don't know if Octane 2.0 will handle the process of 3 networked gpu based barebones.

regards

[geo_n]

Adding grimms suggestion to the poll reset the current votes. Lol. Anyway its there.

[Seekerfinder]

I was thinking about a slightly different take on this than the options you have in the poll. I don't know how well it would work with the current licensing scheme, but here is what I would like to see for the network licensing. The first standalone license allows the use of a specific number of GPU's, lets just say that it is the current limit of 12 like it is now. The network demons are not licensed at all and the number of GPUs are tracked by the master computer (the one that has the standalone licensed). When the number of GPUs reaches the limit (12) then any additional GPUs are ignored and not used. To use additional GPUs you then have to purchase another block of 12 more GPUs. This price could be the same as standalone or could be reduced? This scheme allows the greatest flexibility I think as it wouldn't matter if you have 6 computers with 2 GPUs each or 4 computers with 3, etc.

I agree with Grimm. This is also a very simple solution.

I am really disappointed by Otoy's 12GPU network limit while we could already run 8 GPU's with a standalone license. It's almost like what's the point? And, like I said elsewhere, the idea of a 'professional' version gives me the shivers. I am not againt license tiering as such - that's the developr's prerogative of course - but don't lock out the individual artists, small studios and architects. Grimm's solution seems to address this.

Perhaps Otoy should also run a poll on this since network rendering, local or cloud, is the future.

Best,
Seeker

[SimonJM]

To begin with let me state that for me this is a (expensive!) hobby for me and that there is no way I'd ever run a render farm, etc. On that basis the way I'd like to see Otoy go is to produce network render nodes that are 'headless' in that they can ONLY work as the 'other end' of a network render system. Each of those render nodes would support up to X GPUs and multiple nodes could co-exist and cooperate on a single system (if need be). Each such node would retail for a price of around 25% of a full licence.
The rationale behind this is to provide revenue for Otoy (they, and their families do need to eat, after all!) whilst providing a decent deal to users, both hobbyist level and professional, whilst not 'allowing' a cheap 'workaround' of getting 1 full licence (to run on a small machine) and getting a raft load of 'network licencing' for dead cheap to run on the real work-horses chock-full of multi-GPU render machines. What 'X' would be would be open to discussion but a value that'd average out to the equivalent of 2 high-end, current, gfx cards would seem reasonable.

[geo_n]

I agree with Grimm. This is also a very simple solution.

Is it really simple? Its dynamic licensing that probably needs to be developed more than a simple lockdown of the current network rendering feature.
I put the idea in the poll because Grimms option is the most flexible for users but probably not the best for Otoy.

[grimm]

I don't have any idea how Otoy has set up the render demons for network renders, so yes, my views on how to do this might not work for them at all. My view is the same as the "floating license" servers we run here at the University. A pool of licenses is managed by a server, when someone wants to run a software package, the package queries the license server to see if there is a free license. Of course this should be over a secure link with something like SSH or the equivalent. If there is a free license the server passes it on to the client and the software runs. If there is no more licenses to give out, the server refuses the request and the user can not run the software.

The other advantage to the floating license servers is that one license can have multiple features that can be enabled or disabled by the company issuing the license. So on one license you could have standalone, plus plugins, and demons (or number of GPUs to allow).

I can see where Otoy might want to license each demon, it's much more secure, but more difficult for the user to manage. One solution might be to secure the demons with the same key as standalone to unlock them, but still have standalone manage the number of GPUs. It might make licensing easier for Otoy because they only have to keep track of one license instead of a whole bunch of them (one for each demon + standalone + plugins).

[dionysiusmarquis]

"License per GPU" sounds great! It's a very dynamic and scaleable model. Another Monthly Payment model for big farm installations is imaginable.