Page 3 of 5
Re: Version 4 - XB2.1 (Test2)
Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:40 am
by thodosplay998
Hello, Aoktar!
I have a question:
Can i use GTX 980 Ti 6Gb VRAM for render and GTX 760 2GB for denoising?
Or i will have only 2 GB available VRAM?
Re: Version 4 - XB2.1 (Test2)
Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2018 2:24 pm
by bepeg4d
neosystem.co.uk wrote:Hello, Aoktar!
I have a question:
Can i use GTX 980 Ti 6Gb VRAM for render and GTX 760 2GB for denoising?
Or i will have only 2 GB available VRAM?
Yes, you can use the GPU with less VRAM for denoising only, without reducing the available VRAM of the GPUs enabled for rendering.
Now AI denoising is independent from the frame buffer dimensions, and should need only ~450MB.
ciao Beppe
Re: Version 4 - XB2.1 (Test2)
Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2018 2:34 pm
by thodosplay998
bepeg4d wrote:neosystem.co.uk wrote:Hello, Aoktar!
I have a question:
Can i use GTX 980 Ti 6Gb VRAM for render and GTX 760 2GB for denoising?
Or i will have only 2 GB available VRAM?
Yes, you can use the GPU with less VRAM for denoising only, without reducing the available VRAM of the GPUs enabled for rendering.
Now AI denoising is independent from the frame buffer dimensions, and should need only ~450MB.
ciao Beppe
Yaaaayyyy!!!!
Thank you good Sir!
Such a nice news!
Re: Version 4 - XB2.1 (Test2)
Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2018 2:46 pm
by docphibs
should we be seeing scene loading speed increases in this build?
I'm just curious - I did a very quick test on an old scene with some pretty dense geometry and didn't really notice any speed increase in the scene loading into the live viewer. I haven't tested this side by side with v3.08 (which i should when i have time). I'm simply basing the speed from my recollection of how long it took to load a few months ago. So of course I could be wrong.
Thanks
Re: Version 4 - XB2.1 (Test2)
Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2018 2:49 pm
by aoktar
docphibs wrote:should we be seeing scene loading speed increases in this build?
I'm just curious - I did a very quick test on an old scene with some pretty dense geometry and didn't really notice any speed increase in the scene loading into the live viewer. I haven't tested this side by side with v3.08 (which i should when i have time). I'm simply basing the speed from my recollection of how long it took to load a few months ago. So of course I could be wrong.
Thanks
Yes on core parts for geometries. "Updating...." message is up to this section.
Re: Version 4 - XB2.1 (Test2) - Metal Material Not Working?
Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2018 6:33 am
by NC17z
Hello, Has anyone had any difficulty getting the Metal Material to work? I can't seem to make a metal material using the default octane material in this Test 2 Release.
Re: Version 4 - XB2.1 (Test2) - Metal Material Not Working?
Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:06 am
by aoktar
NC17z wrote:Hello, Has anyone had any difficulty getting the Metal Material to work? I can't seem to make a metal material using the default octane material in this Test 2 Release.
Could you explain what's difficulty you have?
Re: Version 4 - XB2.1 (Test2) - Metal Material Not Working?
Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2018 7:39 am
by bepeg4d
NC17z wrote:Hello, Has anyone had any difficulty getting the Metal Material to work? I can't seem to make a metal material using the default octane material in this Test 2 Release.
Hi,
as a starting point, try with this library of metal materials with correct RGB IOR:
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=67519
You can place tham in the LocalDB, or import one by one via
Live View/File/Import Orbx command:
ciao Beppe
Re: Version 4 - XB2.1 (Test2)
Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2018 12:53 pm
by NC17z
Thank you so much! These are Awesome.
Re: Version 4 - XB2.1 (Test2)
Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2018 5:52 pm
by Studio21
hi ahmet,
u mentioned on the fb group u going to add the rest of the X-particles missing channel in the API (DISTANCE TRAVELED, LIFE ETC) to the instance id node. any timeframe on that?
thx,
Guy