Page 2 of 2

Re: Speedcomparison maxwell

Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 4:37 pm
by face
Amplitude wrote:
I have rendered a 9000x9000 image using a tesla C1060...
that's interesting, do you mean that with your tesla Octane accepts to render above the 4096x4096 "wall" ?
I don´t think so.
Octane don´t accept values over 4096. All over becomes 4096.
At least in the Octane GUI and with the exporter.
Maybe it gives a other soulution...

face

Re: Speedcomparison maxwell

Posted: Fri Jun 04, 2010 8:21 pm
by GeorgoSK
I think he just meant with different engine

Re: Speedcomparison maxwell

Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 6:25 am
by mlody47
and I can render 25000X25000 with my cpu.. but this 9000X9000 was with octane?? it cant be .Face pointed the MAIN reason

Re: Speedcomparison maxwell

Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2010 6:34 pm
by nuverian
Well, I believe that for a better comparison, a bit more complex scene should be used but thanks for that anyway :-)

Re: Speedcomparison maxwell

Posted: Sun Jun 06, 2010 7:43 am
by Calico Jack
Interior scene with DOF! That shoud show the real speed gap. I've made couple interior comparisons between OR and MR and I must say that
OR is waaaaaaayyyyyyyy faster than MR. Even after 4 years I'm still pissed because I bought MR - waste of money. :evil:

Re: Speedcomparison maxwell

Posted: Sun Jun 06, 2010 10:12 am
by GeorgeR
I'd hope that in the future, you can do tiled renders with Octane, which would get around the 4096 limit.

Re: Speedcomparison maxwell

Posted: Sun Jun 06, 2010 12:20 pm
by kattkieru
Mach Studio is able to render pretty big images by rendering the image in pieces and then seaming it together... is that possible in Octane?