Octane 2.0 = Less VRAM needed?

Fri May 02, 2014 4:42 am

Hi Paul (& everyone),

I am still shopping for the right video card (yeah, that old chestnut).
I loved the speed of the 590 I had, and never hit the memory limit (with the textures I was using) - although I came close quite a few times.
My work is pretty humble - but I am progressing; more detailed geom, & the extra textures with it.

Just wondering if the new stuff for Rhino in 2.0 (Instancing, region rendering, passes, etc) should help me continue to improve outputs while reducing VRAM requirements.. I'm pretty much settled on either a 690 or a 780Ti - pending your comments; affirmative or otherwise.

I also notice you use 1gb card, and there are other here that use 1gb cards and get great results...

Fri May 02, 2014 5:10 am

The proposed off-loading of texturemaps into VRAM in 2.x will potentially help you, however I think 1GB is not really enough anymore, unless you are prepared to be very cautious with resource use. Also - Rhino grabs some of that VRAM (depending on your Rhino view settings) - so I'd go with 2-6GB RAM.

Paul

Fri May 02, 2014 7:43 am

face_off wrote:The proposed off-loading of texturemaps into VRAM in 2.x will potentially help you, however I think 1GB is not really enough anymore, unless you are prepared to be very cautious with resource use. Also - Rhino grabs some of that VRAM (depending on your Rhino view settings) - so I'd go with 2-6GB RAM.

Paul

I have a K600 for display - its golden - rarely get above 650mb (viewport only) even on super complex stuff (the most complex I work with) - I'm convinced quadro for display is the way, so I'll get a second hand OEM k2000 if the 600 isn't enough one day...

Thanks for the advice though - I think I'll hunt for a 780Ti - overclocked its very close to the 690 on boost anyway...