Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Tim Leydecker]

What I´m deducing is that buswidth and amount of RAM are related and 
allow to

predict the probable amounts of video RAM for a series of cards of the same
generation.

After looking at the 6xx to 9xx range of cards, I conclude that when 
going from
256bit in the 6xx card range to 384bit in the 7xx range, there was no 
increase

to 512bit in the 9xx range for bus width.

This means, in terms of what to expect in video ram amounts from a 9xx 
series,
that there will probably not be an increase to 16 GB of RAM for 
something like
a Titan X Black edition type of card, unless this card will already use 
a next gen,

e.g. 10xx type card layout with probably a 512bit bus.

Don´t be such a bully, biting my ankles.

I give a rat´s ass about wether bus follows RAM or the other way around, 
it´s not the point,
especially when I´m deducing that bus width hasn´t been adjusted to 
allow convenient
adressing of RAM and conclude that nvidia probably found this not 
neccessary, re-using

the 7xx card layout instead.

I take bus width only as an indicator for what to expect from the 9xx 
card generation.


Probably no 16GB card version, unless a new, modified card layout is 
introduced as
part of a Titan X Black edition with a possible card layout already 
taken from a 10xx

type card generation.

Cheers,

tim


P.S: Regarding Softimage and the 970 cards, I hope it´s just a driver 
issue that´ll go away.










Am 03.06.2015 um 23:08 schrieb Raffaele Fragapane:


If they need 512 they can probably do it without issue. What you're 
saying is that you would have liked to make cards with more ram, the 
bus width is irrelevant, it gets sized as needed, not the other way 
around.


On 4 Jun 2015 5:33 am, "Tim Leydecker" > wrote:




Am 03.06.2015 um 08:32 schrieb Raffaele Fragapane:

Huh?
The width is whatever is required for the controllers to address
the RAM.
If they have 12GB over 6 32bit controllers as that manufacturing
specs max why would they have more than 384?



I was hoping for nVidia to bring the bus width up to 512bit,
making 2,4,8,16,32,64 GB Ram likely because that
would go well together with such a bus width (or even just a
256bit width bus).

Of course, if all you have is 384bit, 12 GB is what is convenient
to connect, not 16GB (as in AMD´s current 512bit bus cards)

My point.

Looking at previous release/development cycles of nVidia, one
could now expect to see a Titan Z Black edition coming
to close off the 9xx series, with some sort of shrunk production
process, more cores or a little bit of higher clocking
but unlikely to have a wider bus to adress video RAM in the 16GB
range.

Such a thing will probably not come before the next generation of
cards, in pseudo naming, the 10xx series.

Not before next year.

This gives AMD 1 year to try and get customers looking for lot´s
of video ram for their editing, comp, etc.

tim











Also, what the architecture and the proposed manufacturing
guidelines allow in terms of addressing width isn't the same as
what's out in the current card of the month.

The 980 is the same in most regards but only has 256bit in
example because al it needs to address is 8GB.

If they need to address more It's very likely the width can be
pushed a good deal further.

The bottleneck isn't currently measured in bus width, the
throughput is an issue, and it's got little to do with the width
of addressing stacks, and it's why things like NVLink and new PCI
bus specs and so on are being looked into.

There are a lot other design issues that are being worked on by
more than just a company, the addressing width across the bus
isn't particularly symptomatic of any of those AFAIK.


On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Tim Leydecker mailto:bauero...@gmx.de>> wrote:

The 980ti (starting at EUR 735,-) is a good opportunity
compared to the gtx980 (starting at EUR 500,-)
but it is annoying to know that Video-RAM will soon become a
bottleneck because more and more
applications start to utilize GPU performance to their
benefit, either when caching out like in Nuke for
huge environment images or a GPU renderer like Redshift3D
having to optimize, e.g. limit it´s
cache sizes to fit into a smaller than desireable meomory
footprint.

All that on top of what a 4k display would demand for it´s
share of available video memory to start with.

I think Nvidia missed an opportunity there, not just for
quadro cards.
They are pulling an Intel in terms of price tags but they
didn´t make sure their base is safe for the future.

I had hoped for a wider than 384bit bus, e.g. something more
like a 512bit bandwidth which would
have made power of two steps in video ram more likely, e.g.

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Raffaele Fragapane]

If they need 512 they can probably do it without issue. What you're saying
is that you would have liked to make cards with more ram, the bus width is
irrelevant, it gets sized as needed, not the other way around.
On 4 Jun 2015 5:33 am, "Tim Leydecker"  wrote:

>
>
> Am 03.06.2015 um 08:32 schrieb Raffaele Fragapane:
>
>  Huh?
> The width is whatever is required for the controllers to address the RAM.
> If they have 12GB over 6 32bit controllers as that manufacturing specs max
> why would they have more than 384?
>
>
> I was hoping for nVidia to bring the bus width up to 512bit, making
> 2,4,8,16,32,64 GB Ram likely because that
> would go well together with such a bus width (or even just a 256bit width
> bus).
>
> Of course, if all you have is 384bit, 12 GB is what is convenient to
> connect, not 16GB (as in AMD´s current 512bit bus cards)
>
> My point.
>
> Looking at previous release/development cycles of nVidia, one could now
> expect to see a Titan Z Black edition coming
> to close off the 9xx series, with some sort of shrunk production process,
> more cores or a little bit of higher clocking
> but unlikely to have a wider bus to adress video RAM in the 16GB range.
>
> Such a thing will probably not come before the next generation of cards,
> in pseudo naming, the 10xx series.
>
> Not before next year.
>
> This gives AMD 1 year to try and get customers looking for lot´s of video
> ram for their editing, comp, etc.
>
> tim
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  Also, what the architecture and the proposed manufacturing guidelines
> allow in terms of addressing width isn't the same as what's out in the
> current card of the month.
>
>  The 980 is the same in most regards but only has 256bit in example
> because al it needs to address is 8GB.
>
>  If they need to address more It's very likely the width can be pushed a
> good deal further.
>
>  The bottleneck isn't currently measured in bus width, the throughput is
> an issue, and it's got little to do with the width of addressing stacks,
> and it's why things like NVLink and new PCI bus specs and so on are being
> looked into.
>
>  There are a lot other design issues that are being worked on by more
> than just a company, the addressing width across the bus isn't particularly
> symptomatic of any of those AFAIK.
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Tim Leydecker  wrote:
>
>>  The 980ti (starting at EUR 735,-) is a good opportunity compared to the
>> gtx980 (starting at EUR 500,-)
>> but it is annoying to know that Video-RAM will soon become a bottleneck
>> because more and more
>> applications start to utilize GPU performance to their benefit, either
>> when caching out like in Nuke for
>> huge environment images or a GPU renderer like Redshift3D having to
>> optimize, e.g. limit it´s
>> cache sizes to fit into a smaller than desireable meomory footprint.
>>
>> All that on top of what a 4k display would demand for it´s share of
>> available video memory to start with.
>>
>> I think Nvidia missed an opportunity there, not just for quadro cards.
>> They are pulling an Intel in terms of price tags but they didn´t make
>> sure their base is safe for the future.
>>
>> I had hoped for a wider than 384bit bus, e.g. something more like a
>> 512bit bandwidth which would
>> have made power of two steps in video ram more likely, e.g. cards with
>> 4GB, 8GB, 12GB, 16GB, etc.
>>
>> To me, it seems the gtx9xx bus width comes directly from the gtx7xx
>> range, which was already starting
>> to show limits in buswidth back then.
>>
>> All that said and taking tax laws and such for wrting off hardware into
>> account, I´d probably have to go
>> with a Titan, using it 2-3 years and finding myself wanting more video
>> ram soon anyway...
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> tim
>>
>
>

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Tim Leydecker]

Am 03.06.2015 um 08:32 schrieb Raffaele Fragapane:

Huh?
The width is whatever is required for the controllers to address the RAM.
If they have 12GB over 6 32bit controllers as that manufacturing specs 
max why would they have more than 384?




I was hoping for nVidia to bring the bus width up to 512bit, making 
2,4,8,16,32,64 GB Ram likely because that
would go well together with such a bus width (or even just a 256bit 
width bus).


Of course, if all you have is 384bit, 12 GB is what is convenient to 
connect, not 16GB (as in AMD´s current 512bit bus cards)


My point.

Looking at previous release/development cycles of nVidia, one could now 
expect to see a Titan Z Black edition coming
to close off the 9xx series, with some sort of shrunk production 
process, more cores or a little bit of higher clocking

but unlikely to have a wider bus to adress video RAM in the 16GB range.

Such a thing will probably not come before the next generation of cards, 
in pseudo naming, the 10xx series.


Not before next year.

This gives AMD 1 year to try and get customers looking for lot´s of 
video ram for their editing, comp, etc.


tim










Also, what the architecture and the proposed manufacturing guidelines 
allow in terms of addressing width isn't the same as what's out in the 
current card of the month.


The 980 is the same in most regards but only has 256bit in example 
because al it needs to address is 8GB.


If they need to address more It's very likely the width can be pushed 
a good deal further.


The bottleneck isn't currently measured in bus width, the throughput 
is an issue, and it's got little to do with the width of addressing 
stacks, and it's why things like NVLink and new PCI bus specs and so 
on are being looked into.


There are a lot other design issues that are being worked on by more 
than just a company, the addressing width across the bus isn't 
particularly symptomatic of any of those AFAIK.



On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Tim Leydecker > wrote:


The 980ti (starting at EUR 735,-) is a good opportunity compared
to the gtx980 (starting at EUR 500,-)
but it is annoying to know that Video-RAM will soon become a
bottleneck because more and more
applications start to utilize GPU performance to their benefit,
either when caching out like in Nuke for
huge environment images or a GPU renderer like Redshift3D having
to optimize, e.g. limit it´s
cache sizes to fit into a smaller than desireable meomory footprint.

All that on top of what a 4k display would demand for it´s share
of available video memory to start with.

I think Nvidia missed an opportunity there, not just for quadro cards.
They are pulling an Intel in terms of price tags but they didn´t
make sure their base is safe for the future.

I had hoped for a wider than 384bit bus, e.g. something more like
a 512bit bandwidth which would
have made power of two steps in video ram more likely, e.g. cards
with 4GB, 8GB, 12GB, 16GB, etc.

To me, it seems the gtx9xx bus width comes directly from the
gtx7xx range, which was already starting
to show limits in buswidth back then.

All that said and taking tax laws and such for wrting off hardware
into account, I´d probably have to go
with a Titan, using it 2-3 years and finding myself wanting more
video ram soon anyway...

Cheers,

tim

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Raffaele Fragapane]

Huh?
The width is whatever is required for the controllers to address the RAM.
If they have 12GB over 6 32bit controllers as that manufacturing specs max
why would they have more than 384?

Also, what the architecture and the proposed manufacturing guidelines allow
in terms of addressing width isn't the same as what's out in the current
card of the month.

The 980 is the same in most regards but only has 256bit in example because
al it needs to address is 8GB.

If they need to address more It's very likely the width can be pushed a
good deal further.

The bottleneck isn't currently measured in bus width, the throughput is an
issue, and it's got little to do with the width of addressing stacks, and
it's why things like NVLink and new PCI bus specs and so on are being
looked into.

There are a lot other design issues that are being worked on by more than
just a company, the addressing width across the bus isn't particularly
symptomatic of any of those AFAIK.


On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Tim Leydecker  wrote:

>  The 980ti (starting at EUR 735,-) is a good opportunity compared to the
> gtx980 (starting at EUR 500,-)
> but it is annoying to know that Video-RAM will soon become a bottleneck
> because more and more
> applications start to utilize GPU performance to their benefit, either
> when caching out like in Nuke for
> huge environment images or a GPU renderer like Redshift3D having to
> optimize, e.g. limit it´s
> cache sizes to fit into a smaller than desireable meomory footprint.
>
> All that on top of what a 4k display would demand for it´s share of
> available video memory to start with.
>
> I think Nvidia missed an opportunity there, not just for quadro cards.
> They are pulling an Intel in terms of price tags but they didn´t make sure
> their base is safe for the future.
>
> I had hoped for a wider than 384bit bus, e.g. something more like a 512bit
> bandwidth which would
> have made power of two steps in video ram more likely, e.g. cards with
> 4GB, 8GB, 12GB, 16GB, etc.
>
> To me, it seems the gtx9xx bus width comes directly from the gtx7xx range,
> which was already starting
> to show limits in buswidth back then.
>
> All that said and taking tax laws and such for wrting off hardware into
> account, I´d probably have to go
> with a Titan, using it 2-3 years and finding myself wanting more video ram
> soon anyway...
>
> Cheers,
>
> tim
>

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Tim Leydecker]

The 980ti (starting at EUR 735,-) is a good opportunity compared to the 
gtx980 (starting at EUR 500,-)
but it is annoying to know that Video-RAM will soon become a bottleneck 
because more and more
applications start to utilize GPU performance to their benefit, either 
when caching out like in Nuke for
huge environment images or a GPU renderer like Redshift3D having to 
optimize, e.g. limit it´s

cache sizes to fit into a smaller than desireable meomory footprint.

All that on top of what a 4k display would demand for it´s share of 
available video memory to start with.


I think Nvidia missed an opportunity there, not just for quadro cards.
They are pulling an Intel in terms of price tags but they didn´t make 
sure their base is safe for the future.


I had hoped for a wider than 384bit bus, e.g. something more like a 
512bit bandwidth which would
have made power of two steps in video ram more likely, e.g. cards with 
4GB, 8GB, 12GB, 16GB, etc.


To me, it seems the gtx9xx bus width comes directly from the gtx7xx 
range, which was already starting

to show limits in buswidth back then.

All that said and taking tax laws and such for wrting off hardware into 
account, I´d probably have to go
with a Titan, using it 2-3 years and finding myself wanting more video 
ram soon anyway...


Cheers,

tim






Am 03.06.2015 um 05:29 schrieb Raffaele Fragapane:
Apologies, yeag the Ti has 256 less CUDA cores, which is less than a 
9% drop, same clock and all though. Texture units are coupled, so you 
only need to look at CUDA cores when you compare. ROPs remain the same.


You'd be pretty hard pressed to notice the difference IMO. Even at 75% 
the price, instead of the 65% it seems to be here and in the USA going 
by current announcements, it's far from being a bad deal.


On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Mario Reitbauer 
mailto:cont...@marioreitbauer.at>> wrote:


Sorry for spamming...
Texture Unit Cound and Core Count is different between those cards
actually.

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Raffaele Fragapane]

Apologies, yeag the Ti has 256 less CUDA cores, which is less than a 9%
drop, same clock and all though. Texture units are coupled, so you only
need to look at CUDA cores when you compare. ROPs remain the same.

You'd be pretty hard pressed to notice the difference IMO. Even at 75% the
price, instead of the 65% it seems to be here and in the USA going by
current announcements, it's far from being a bad deal.

On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Mario Reitbauer 
wrote:

> Sorry for spamming...
> Texture Unit Cound and Core Count is different between those cards
> actually.
>
>

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Mario Reitbauer]

Sorry for spamming...
Texture Unit Cound and Core Count is different between those cards actually.

2015-06-03 1:29 GMT+02:00 Mario Reitbauer :

> Prices right now are 1050€ for the TitanX and 750€ for the 980TI
>  (cheapest available for both cards)
>
> 2015-06-03 1:25 GMT+02:00 Mario Reitbauer :
>
>> I took the prices from this comparison table.
>> If actual prices are different then never mind what I said ;)
>>
>> http://www.anandtech.com/show/9306/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-review
>>
>> 2015-06-03 0:44 GMT+02:00 Raffaele Fragapane > >:
>>
>>> You say 350 cheaper without looking at the actual percentages.
>>>
>>> The 980ti is announced to be a 650-750 card with tit for tat the same
>>> specs of a Titan, the Titan is 1180-1350.
>>> At the worst, if you go for a premium ti and compare it to the cheapest
>>> X on offer somewhere, you still end up with a 62-65% of the price of a
>>> Titan.
>>>
>>> You pay almost half the price when the only thing that's half is the
>>> memory. Unit count, number crunching, controllers, everything is the same
>>> as the double-the-price sibling.
>>>
>>> How is the 980ti a bad deal?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Mario Reitbauer <
>>> cont...@marioreitbauer.at> wrote:
>>>
 Actually I find it a quite bad deal compared to the Titan X.
 "only" 350 cheaper but only half the memory.
 If I would spend 650 for a card already, there wouldn't be any question
 that I would directly go for the Titan X with double memory.

 2015-06-02 19:33 GMT+02:00 Andres Stephens :

>  That card is a great deal.
>
>
> *From:* Cristobal Infante 
> *Sent:* ‎Monday‎, ‎June‎ ‎1‎, ‎2015 ‎14‎:‎07‎:‎40‎ ‎
> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>
> 980ti is out for anyone shopping for a 6gig card
>
> http://www.anandtech.com/show/9306/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-review
>
>
> On Sunday, 31 May 2015, Raffaele Fragapane <
> raffsxsil...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> I remember that to be the case for one batch of 2xx drivers ages ago.
>> Thought it would have been long gone, but fair enough, certainly worth
>> trying if that's still there.
>> On 30 May 2015 04:32, "Luc-Eric Rousseau" 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> intuitively you'd think adding the .exe in the nvidia panel has no
>>> effect, but I'm not 100% sure about that, because the drivers do have
>>> "hard coded" app-specific code certain apps including Softimage and
>>> there is a possibly that this could enable them.  Would need to be
>>> verified.
>>>
>>> On 29 May 2015 at 02:47, Raffaele Fragapane <
>>> raffsxsil...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> > That's usually the quadro cards, I don't know of the gtx driver
>>> branch
>>> > offering the AD apps as one you can pick. Maybe it changed and I
>>> didn't
>>> > notice though.
>>> >
>>> > Adding the exe though simply changes the (subset of per app)
>>> settings for
>>> > that app, changing them globally sorts the same effect.
>>>
>>


 --
 --
 cont...@marioreitbauer.com
 0049 (0)157 86272215
 Professor-Brix-Weg 9
 22767 Hamburg
 --

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it
>>> and let them flee like the dogs they are!
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> cont...@marioreitbauer.com
>> 0049 (0)157 86272215
>> Professor-Brix-Weg 9
>> 22767 Hamburg
>> --
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> cont...@marioreitbauer.com
> 0049 (0)157 86272215
> Professor-Brix-Weg 9
> 22767 Hamburg
> --
>



-- 
--
cont...@marioreitbauer.com
0049 (0)157 86272215
Professor-Brix-Weg 9
22767 Hamburg
--

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Mario Reitbauer]

Prices right now are 1050€ for the TitanX and 750€ for the 980TI  (cheapest
available for both cards)

2015-06-03 1:25 GMT+02:00 Mario Reitbauer :

> I took the prices from this comparison table.
> If actual prices are different then never mind what I said ;)
>
> http://www.anandtech.com/show/9306/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-review
>
> 2015-06-03 0:44 GMT+02:00 Raffaele Fragapane 
> :
>
>> You say 350 cheaper without looking at the actual percentages.
>>
>> The 980ti is announced to be a 650-750 card with tit for tat the same
>> specs of a Titan, the Titan is 1180-1350.
>> At the worst, if you go for a premium ti and compare it to the cheapest X
>> on offer somewhere, you still end up with a 62-65% of the price of a Titan.
>>
>> You pay almost half the price when the only thing that's half is the
>> memory. Unit count, number crunching, controllers, everything is the same
>> as the double-the-price sibling.
>>
>> How is the 980ti a bad deal?
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Mario Reitbauer <
>> cont...@marioreitbauer.at> wrote:
>>
>>> Actually I find it a quite bad deal compared to the Titan X.
>>> "only" 350 cheaper but only half the memory.
>>> If I would spend 650 for a card already, there wouldn't be any question
>>> that I would directly go for the Titan X with double memory.
>>>
>>> 2015-06-02 19:33 GMT+02:00 Andres Stephens :
>>>
  That card is a great deal.


 *From:* Cristobal Infante 
 *Sent:* ‎Monday‎, ‎June‎ ‎1‎, ‎2015 ‎14‎:‎07‎:‎40‎ ‎
 *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com

 980ti is out for anyone shopping for a 6gig card

 http://www.anandtech.com/show/9306/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-review


 On Sunday, 31 May 2015, Raffaele Fragapane 
 wrote:

> I remember that to be the case for one batch of 2xx drivers ages ago.
> Thought it would have been long gone, but fair enough, certainly worth
> trying if that's still there.
> On 30 May 2015 04:32, "Luc-Eric Rousseau"  wrote:
>
>> intuitively you'd think adding the .exe in the nvidia panel has no
>> effect, but I'm not 100% sure about that, because the drivers do have
>> "hard coded" app-specific code certain apps including Softimage and
>> there is a possibly that this could enable them.  Would need to be
>> verified.
>>
>> On 29 May 2015 at 02:47, Raffaele Fragapane <
>> raffsxsil...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> > That's usually the quadro cards, I don't know of the gtx driver
>> branch
>> > offering the AD apps as one you can pick. Maybe it changed and I
>> didn't
>> > notice though.
>> >
>> > Adding the exe though simply changes the (subset of per app)
>> settings for
>> > that app, changing them globally sorts the same effect.
>>
>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> cont...@marioreitbauer.com
>>> 0049 (0)157 86272215
>>> Professor-Brix-Weg 9
>>> 22767 Hamburg
>>> --
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it
>> and let them flee like the dogs they are!
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> cont...@marioreitbauer.com
> 0049 (0)157 86272215
> Professor-Brix-Weg 9
> 22767 Hamburg
> --
>



-- 
--
cont...@marioreitbauer.com
0049 (0)157 86272215
Professor-Brix-Weg 9
22767 Hamburg
--

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Mario Reitbauer]

I took the prices from this comparison table.
If actual prices are different then never mind what I said ;)

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9306/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-review

2015-06-03 0:44 GMT+02:00 Raffaele Fragapane :

> You say 350 cheaper without looking at the actual percentages.
>
> The 980ti is announced to be a 650-750 card with tit for tat the same
> specs of a Titan, the Titan is 1180-1350.
> At the worst, if you go for a premium ti and compare it to the cheapest X
> on offer somewhere, you still end up with a 62-65% of the price of a Titan.
>
> You pay almost half the price when the only thing that's half is the
> memory. Unit count, number crunching, controllers, everything is the same
> as the double-the-price sibling.
>
> How is the 980ti a bad deal?
>
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Mario Reitbauer  > wrote:
>
>> Actually I find it a quite bad deal compared to the Titan X.
>> "only" 350 cheaper but only half the memory.
>> If I would spend 650 for a card already, there wouldn't be any question
>> that I would directly go for the Titan X with double memory.
>>
>> 2015-06-02 19:33 GMT+02:00 Andres Stephens :
>>
>>>  That card is a great deal.
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Cristobal Infante 
>>> *Sent:* ‎Monday‎, ‎June‎ ‎1‎, ‎2015 ‎14‎:‎07‎:‎40‎ ‎
>>> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>>>
>>> 980ti is out for anyone shopping for a 6gig card
>>>
>>> http://www.anandtech.com/show/9306/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-review
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sunday, 31 May 2015, Raffaele Fragapane 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I remember that to be the case for one batch of 2xx drivers ages ago.
 Thought it would have been long gone, but fair enough, certainly worth
 trying if that's still there.
 On 30 May 2015 04:32, "Luc-Eric Rousseau"  wrote:

> intuitively you'd think adding the .exe in the nvidia panel has no
> effect, but I'm not 100% sure about that, because the drivers do have
> "hard coded" app-specific code certain apps including Softimage and
> there is a possibly that this could enable them.  Would need to be
> verified.
>
> On 29 May 2015 at 02:47, Raffaele Fragapane <
> raffsxsil...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > That's usually the quadro cards, I don't know of the gtx driver
> branch
> > offering the AD apps as one you can pick. Maybe it changed and I
> didn't
> > notice though.
> >
> > Adding the exe though simply changes the (subset of per app)
> settings for
> > that app, changing them globally sorts the same effect.
>

>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> cont...@marioreitbauer.com
>> 0049 (0)157 86272215
>> Professor-Brix-Weg 9
>> 22767 Hamburg
>> --
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it
> and let them flee like the dogs they are!
>



-- 
--
cont...@marioreitbauer.com
0049 (0)157 86272215
Professor-Brix-Weg 9
22767 Hamburg
--

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Raffaele Fragapane]

You say 350 cheaper without looking at the actual percentages.

The 980ti is announced to be a 650-750 card with tit for tat the same specs
of a Titan, the Titan is 1180-1350.
At the worst, if you go for a premium ti and compare it to the cheapest X
on offer somewhere, you still end up with a 62-65% of the price of a Titan.

You pay almost half the price when the only thing that's half is the
memory. Unit count, number crunching, controllers, everything is the same
as the double-the-price sibling.

How is the 980ti a bad deal?

On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Mario Reitbauer 
wrote:

> Actually I find it a quite bad deal compared to the Titan X.
> "only" 350 cheaper but only half the memory.
> If I would spend 650 for a card already, there wouldn't be any question
> that I would directly go for the Titan X with double memory.
>
> 2015-06-02 19:33 GMT+02:00 Andres Stephens :
>
>>  That card is a great deal.
>>
>>
>> *From:* Cristobal Infante 
>> *Sent:* ‎Monday‎, ‎June‎ ‎1‎, ‎2015 ‎14‎:‎07‎:‎40‎ ‎
>> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>>
>> 980ti is out for anyone shopping for a 6gig card
>>
>> http://www.anandtech.com/show/9306/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-review
>>
>>
>> On Sunday, 31 May 2015, Raffaele Fragapane 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I remember that to be the case for one batch of 2xx drivers ages ago.
>>> Thought it would have been long gone, but fair enough, certainly worth
>>> trying if that's still there.
>>> On 30 May 2015 04:32, "Luc-Eric Rousseau"  wrote:
>>>
 intuitively you'd think adding the .exe in the nvidia panel has no
 effect, but I'm not 100% sure about that, because the drivers do have
 "hard coded" app-specific code certain apps including Softimage and
 there is a possibly that this could enable them.  Would need to be
 verified.

 On 29 May 2015 at 02:47, Raffaele Fragapane <
 raffsxsil...@googlemail.com> wrote:
 > That's usually the quadro cards, I don't know of the gtx driver branch
 > offering the AD apps as one you can pick. Maybe it changed and I
 didn't
 > notice though.
 >
 > Adding the exe though simply changes the (subset of per app) settings
 for
 > that app, changing them globally sorts the same effect.

>>>
>
>
> --
> --
> cont...@marioreitbauer.com
> 0049 (0)157 86272215
> Professor-Brix-Weg 9
> 22767 Hamburg
> --
>



-- 
Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it
and let them flee like the dogs they are!

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Mario Reitbauer]

I still find the 970 is really good for its price and for me it worked
really well so far.
But for rendering / high end I guess the Titan X would be the way to go.

2015-06-02 20:47 GMT+02:00 Andres Stephens :

>  Actually… true. I guess I was just evaluating the clockspeed and cores.
>
>
>
> *From:* Mario Reitbauer 
> *Sent:* ‎Tuesday‎, ‎June‎ ‎2‎, ‎2015 ‎13‎:‎41‎:‎17‎ ‎
> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>
> Actually I find it a quite bad deal compared to the Titan X.
> "only" 350 cheaper but only half the memory.
> If I would spend 650 for a card already, there wouldn't be any question
> that I would directly go for the Titan X with double memory.
>
> 2015-06-02 19:33 GMT+02:00 Andres Stephens :
>
>>  That card is a great deal.
>>
>>
>> *From:* Cristobal Infante 
>> *Sent:* ‎Monday‎, ‎June‎ ‎1‎, ‎2015 ‎14‎:‎07‎:‎40‎ ‎
>> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>>
>> 980ti is out for anyone shopping for a 6gig card
>>
>> http://www.anandtech.com/show/9306/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-review
>>
>>
>> On Sunday, 31 May 2015, Raffaele Fragapane 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I remember that to be the case for one batch of 2xx drivers ages ago.
>>> Thought it would have been long gone, but fair enough, certainly worth
>>> trying if that's still there.
>>> On 30 May 2015 04:32, "Luc-Eric Rousseau"  wrote:
>>>
 intuitively you'd think adding the .exe in the nvidia panel has no
 effect, but I'm not 100% sure about that, because the drivers do have
 "hard coded" app-specific code certain apps including Softimage and
 there is a possibly that this could enable them.  Would need to be
 verified.

 On 29 May 2015 at 02:47, Raffaele Fragapane <
 raffsxsil...@googlemail.com> wrote:
 > That's usually the quadro cards, I don't know of the gtx driver branch
 > offering the AD apps as one you can pick. Maybe it changed and I
 didn't
 > notice though.
 >
 > Adding the exe though simply changes the (subset of per app) settings
 for
 > that app, changing them globally sorts the same effect.

>>>
>
>
> --
> --
> cont...@marioreitbauer.com
> 0049 (0)157 86272215
> Professor-Brix-Weg 9
> 22767 Hamburg
> --
>



-- 
--
cont...@marioreitbauer.com
0049 (0)157 86272215
Professor-Brix-Weg 9
22767 Hamburg
--

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Andres Stephens]

Actually… true. I guess I was just evaluating the clockspeed and cores. 











From: Mario Reitbauer
Sent: ‎Tuesday‎, ‎June‎ ‎2‎, ‎2015 ‎13‎:‎41‎:‎17‎ ‎
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com





Actually I find it a quite bad deal compared to the Titan X.
"only" 350 cheaper but only half the memory.

If I would spend 650 for a card already, there wouldn't be any question that I 
would directly go for the Titan X with double memory.



2015-06-02 19:33 GMT+02:00 Andres Stephens :




That card is a great deal. 










From: Cristobal Infante
Sent: ‎Monday‎, ‎June‎ ‎1‎, ‎2015 ‎14‎:‎07‎:‎40‎ ‎
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com






980ti is out for anyone shopping for a 6gig card



http://www.anandtech.com/show/9306/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-review





On Sunday, 31 May 2015, Raffaele Fragapane  wrote:


I remember that to be the case for one batch of 2xx drivers ages ago. Thought 
it would have been long gone, but fair enough, certainly worth trying if that's 
still there.

On 30 May 2015 04:32, "Luc-Eric Rousseau"  wrote:

intuitively you'd think adding the .exe in the nvidia panel has no
effect, but I'm not 100% sure about that, because the drivers do have
"hard coded" app-specific code certain apps including Softimage and
there is a possibly that this could enable them.  Would need to be
verified.

On 29 May 2015 at 02:47, Raffaele Fragapane  wrote:
> That's usually the quadro cards, I don't know of the gtx driver branch
> offering the AD apps as one you can pick. Maybe it changed and I didn't
> notice though.
>
> Adding the exe though simply changes the (subset of per app) settings for
> that app, changing them globally sorts the same effect.






-- 



--

cont...@marioreitbauer.com

0049 (0)157 86272215

Professor-Brix-Weg 9

22767 Hamburg

--

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Mario Reitbauer]

Actually I find it a quite bad deal compared to the Titan X.
"only" 350 cheaper but only half the memory.
If I would spend 650 for a card already, there wouldn't be any question
that I would directly go for the Titan X with double memory.

2015-06-02 19:33 GMT+02:00 Andres Stephens :

>  That card is a great deal.
>
>
> *From:* Cristobal Infante 
> *Sent:* ‎Monday‎, ‎June‎ ‎1‎, ‎2015 ‎14‎:‎07‎:‎40‎ ‎
> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>
> 980ti is out for anyone shopping for a 6gig card
>
> http://www.anandtech.com/show/9306/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-review
>
>
> On Sunday, 31 May 2015, Raffaele Fragapane 
> wrote:
>
>> I remember that to be the case for one batch of 2xx drivers ages ago.
>> Thought it would have been long gone, but fair enough, certainly worth
>> trying if that's still there.
>> On 30 May 2015 04:32, "Luc-Eric Rousseau"  wrote:
>>
>>> intuitively you'd think adding the .exe in the nvidia panel has no
>>> effect, but I'm not 100% sure about that, because the drivers do have
>>> "hard coded" app-specific code certain apps including Softimage and
>>> there is a possibly that this could enable them.  Would need to be
>>> verified.
>>>
>>> On 29 May 2015 at 02:47, Raffaele Fragapane 
>>> wrote:
>>> > That's usually the quadro cards, I don't know of the gtx driver branch
>>> > offering the AD apps as one you can pick. Maybe it changed and I didn't
>>> > notice though.
>>> >
>>> > Adding the exe though simply changes the (subset of per app) settings
>>> for
>>> > that app, changing them globally sorts the same effect.
>>>
>>


-- 
--
cont...@marioreitbauer.com
0049 (0)157 86272215
Professor-Brix-Weg 9
22767 Hamburg
--

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Andres Stephens]

That card is a great deal. 










From: Cristobal Infante
Sent: ‎Monday‎, ‎June‎ ‎1‎, ‎2015 ‎14‎:‎07‎:‎40‎ ‎
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com




980ti is out for anyone shopping for a 6gig card



http://www.anandtech.com/show/9306/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-review





On Sunday, 31 May 2015, Raffaele Fragapane  wrote:


I remember that to be the case for one batch of 2xx drivers ages ago. Thought 
it would have been long gone, but fair enough, certainly worth trying if that's 
still there.

On 30 May 2015 04:32, "Luc-Eric Rousseau"  wrote:

intuitively you'd think adding the .exe in the nvidia panel has no
effect, but I'm not 100% sure about that, because the drivers do have
"hard coded" app-specific code certain apps including Softimage and
there is a possibly that this could enable them.  Would need to be
verified.

On 29 May 2015 at 02:47, Raffaele Fragapane  wrote:
> That's usually the quadro cards, I don't know of the gtx driver branch
> offering the AD apps as one you can pick. Maybe it changed and I didn't
> notice though.
>
> Adding the exe though simply changes the (subset of per app) settings for
> that app, changing them globally sorts the same effect.

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Cristobal Infante]

980ti is out for anyone shopping for a 6gig card

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9306/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-review


On Sunday, 31 May 2015, Raffaele Fragapane 
wrote:

> I remember that to be the case for one batch of 2xx drivers ages ago.
> Thought it would have been long gone, but fair enough, certainly worth
> trying if that's still there.
> On 30 May 2015 04:32, "Luc-Eric Rousseau"  > wrote:
>
>> intuitively you'd think adding the .exe in the nvidia panel has no
>> effect, but I'm not 100% sure about that, because the drivers do have
>> "hard coded" app-specific code certain apps including Softimage and
>> there is a possibly that this could enable them.  Would need to be
>> verified.
>>
>> On 29 May 2015 at 02:47, Raffaele Fragapane > > wrote:
>> > That's usually the quadro cards, I don't know of the gtx driver branch
>> > offering the AD apps as one you can pick. Maybe it changed and I didn't
>> > notice though.
>> >
>> > Adding the exe though simply changes the (subset of per app) settings
>> for
>> > that app, changing them globally sorts the same effect.
>>
>

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Raffaele Fragapane]

I remember that to be the case for one batch of 2xx drivers ages ago.
Thought it would have been long gone, but fair enough, certainly worth
trying if that's still there.
On 30 May 2015 04:32, "Luc-Eric Rousseau"  wrote:

> intuitively you'd think adding the .exe in the nvidia panel has no
> effect, but I'm not 100% sure about that, because the drivers do have
> "hard coded" app-specific code certain apps including Softimage and
> there is a possibly that this could enable them.  Would need to be
> verified.
>
> On 29 May 2015 at 02:47, Raffaele Fragapane 
> wrote:
> > That's usually the quadro cards, I don't know of the gtx driver branch
> > offering the AD apps as one you can pick. Maybe it changed and I didn't
> > notice though.
> >
> > Adding the exe though simply changes the (subset of per app) settings for
> > that app, changing them globally sorts the same effect.
>

RE: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Panagiotis Zompolas]

Hello,

 

We typically recommend going for the GPUs with the most VRAM. So, if I had to 
choose between the two, I’d go for the old Titan. Or, alternatively, I’d wait a 
little while longer and see how the 980Ti 6GB pans out. Even though the old 
Titan cannot use more than 4GB out of its 6GB for the geo cache, the remaining 
2GB can still be used for rays, particles, a larger texture cache as well as 
prevent memory management headaches when other apps (which also use VRAM) are 
running. Apps like Chrome or the Softimage OpenGL viewport itself!

 

Furthermore, both the old and new Titans can use the new TCC (Tesla Compute 
Cluster) driver mode which can increase rendering performance. That mode has a 
few pros and cons – you can find more details about this in our forums.

 

Hope this helps

 

-Panos

 

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leoung O'Young
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 10:53 AM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

 

Panos,

So if I was going to buy a second hand card, it better go with a GTX 980 with 
4gb instead of a old Titan with 6gb
since the the 980 uses less power, since these cards have a 4gb geo cache limit?

Leoung

On 29/05/2015 12:47 PM, Panagiotis Zompolas wrote:

Hey guys, Panos from Redshift here.

 

Just wanted to clarify that the TitanX (as well as any future compute 
capability 5.2 cards with more than 4GB) does not have a 4GB geo cache limit. 
The 4GB limit only applies to earlier-generation videocards, including the old 
Titans/Quadros.

 

Kind regards,

 

-Panos

 

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Tim Crowson
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 9:33 AM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

 

The Titan X is actually a really great value though, especially if you're a 
Redshift user. 12GB on a $1,000 card? Once they lift the hard-coded 4GB geo 
cache limit (which they really should do sooner than later), that 12GB is going 
to translate into not only faster renders, but a much better ability to handle 
dense scenes with millions of instances. I broke past 1 quadrillion triangles 
with a Titan Black (cramming in 32M+ instances), and I hope I get to run that 
test again with a Titan X someday.

-Tim

On 5/29/2015 10:28 AM, Leoung O'Young wrote:

Hi Tim,

You could be right.
We had a gtx 570 with only 1.5gb and it was performing better than the 970 with 
4gb.
Soft is probably using the .5 of very slow memory.

Things are really slow only when we have the camera window open.

We are quite happy with the 970's in Redshift.
Would love to get our hands on the Titan X with 12gb but they are rather 
expensive.

We have a gtx 670 4gb and a gtx 690 4gb but it is really 2 card in one.
We will do some testing with those cards and report back.

Thanks,
Leoung


On 29/05/2015 10:17 AM, Tim Crowson wrote:

Yeah this could possibly be happening, but indeed the scene would have to be 
pretty dense. Fire up GPU-Z and see how many vram XSI uses. I know that for 
Redshift, the devs had to add a patch just for the 970 to actually ignore the 
500MB of slow memory that Nvidia put on the 970. Or something like that. I 
suppose if that section of memory is being accessed by XSI, and since it's much 
slower than the rest of the on-board memory, perhaps that could have an effect 
like this? I'm talking a bit out of my area though

(backstory: When Nvidia shipped the 970, they got a lot of backlash the 970 
technically does have 4GB of memory, but 500MB of that operates at a speed that 
makes it virtually unusable for things like rendering (and other stuff), and 
indeed early on caused dramatic performance problems and slow-downs. So in 
reality, we only have 3.5GB of usable memory to render with on that card. I do 
hope they don't pull that crap again.)

-Tim




On 5/28/2015 8:51 PM, Raffaele Fragapane wrote:

If your "heavy" scene is truly heavy, past the 3.5GB mark, you might be bumping 
into a known design limitation of the 970 that basically craps itself if memory 
usage exceeds the 3.5 mark (even if you have 4 on board).

 

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Leoung O'Young  wrote:

No, thanks for the suggestion. 



On 28/05/2015 7:46 PM, Sven Constable wrote:

Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards, nvidia usually performes 
well. Did you add the xsi.exe in the nvidia control panel?

sven

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leoung O'Young
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
To: xsi
Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's, they preforms 
quite well rendering in Redshift.
A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggi

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Luc-Eric Rousseau]

intuitively you'd think adding the .exe in the nvidia panel has no
effect, but I'm not 100% sure about that, because the drivers do have
"hard coded" app-specific code certain apps including Softimage and
there is a possibly that this could enable them.  Would need to be
verified.

On 29 May 2015 at 02:47, Raffaele Fragapane  wrote:
> That's usually the quadro cards, I don't know of the gtx driver branch
> offering the AD apps as one you can pick. Maybe it changed and I didn't
> notice though.
>
> Adding the exe though simply changes the (subset of per app) settings for
> that app, changing them globally sorts the same effect.

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Leoung O'Young]

Panos,

So if I was going to buy a second hand card, it better go with a GTX 980 
with 4gb instead of a old Titan with 6gb
since the the 980 uses less power, since these cards have a 4gb geo 
cache limit?


Leoung

On 29/05/2015 12:47 PM, Panagiotis Zompolas wrote:

Signature

Hey guys, Panos from Redshift here.

Just wanted to clarify that the TitanX (as well as any future compute 
capability 5.2 cards with more than 4GB) does /not/ have a 4GB geo 
cache limit. The 4GB limit only applies to earlier-generation 
videocards, including the old Titans/Quadros.


Kind regards,

-Panos

*From:*softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Tim 
Crowson

*Sent:* Friday, May 29, 2015 9:33 AM
*To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
*Subject:* Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

The Titan X is actually a really great value though, especially if 
you're a Redshift user. 12GB on a $1,000 card? Once they lift the 
hard-coded 4GB geo cache limit (which they really should do sooner 
than later), that 12GB is going to translate into not only faster 
renders, but a much better ability to handle dense scenes with 
millions of instances. I broke past 1 quadrillion triangles with a 
Titan Black (cramming in 32M+ instances), and I hope I get to run that 
test again with a Titan X someday.


-Tim

On 5/29/2015 10:28 AM, Leoung O'Young wrote:

Hi Tim,

You could be right.
We had a gtx 570 with only 1.5gb and it was performing better than
the 970 with 4gb.
Soft is probably using the .5 of very slow memory.

Things are really slow only when we have the camera window open.

We are quite happy with the 970's in Redshift.
Would love to get our hands on the Titan X with 12gb but they are
rather expensive.

We have a gtx 670 4gb and a gtx 690 4gb but it is really 2 card in
one.
We will do some testing with those cards and report back.

Thanks,
Leoung


On 29/05/2015 10:17 AM, Tim Crowson wrote:

Yeah this could possibly be happening, but indeed the scene
would have to be pretty dense. Fire up GPU-Z and see how many
vram XSI uses. I know that for Redshift, the devs had to add a
patch just for the 970 to actually ignore the 500MB of slow
memory that Nvidia put on the 970. Or something like that. I
suppose if that section of memory is being accessed by XSI,
and since it's much slower than the rest of the on-board
memory, perhaps that could have an effect like this? I'm
talking a bit out of my area though

(backstory: When Nvidia shipped the 970, they got a lot of
backlash the 970 technically does have 4GB of memory, but
500MB of that operates at a speed that makes it virtually
unusable for things like rendering (and other stuff), and
indeed early on caused dramatic performance problems and
slow-downs. So in reality, we only have 3.5GB of usable memory
to render with on that card. I do hope they don't pull that
crap again.)

-Tim

On 5/28/2015 8:51 PM, Raffaele Fragapane wrote:

If your "heavy" scene is truly heavy, past the 3.5GB mark,
you might be bumping into a known design limitation of the
970 that basically craps itself if memory usage exceeds
the 3.5 mark (even if you have 4 on board).

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Leoung O'Young
mailto:digim...@digimata.com>> wrote:

No, thanks for the suggestion.



On 28/05/2015 7:46 PM, Sven Constable wrote:

Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards,
nvidia usually performes well. Did you add the xsi.exe in
the nvidia control panel?

sven

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>] On
Behalf Of Leoung O'Young
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
    To: xsi
Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX
970's, they preforms quite well rendering in Redshift.
A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very
sluggish manipulating heavy geometry scenes inside
Softimage 2915.
What is a better option?

Thanks,
Leoung




-- 


Our users will know fear and cower before our software!
Ship it! Ship it and let them flee like the dogs they are!

-- 


*Tim Crowson
*/Lead CG Artist/

*Magnetic Dreams, Inc.
 

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Tim Crowson]

Awesome! Wasn't sure. Thanks for clarifying, Panos!  :-D
-Tim

On 5/29/2015 11:47 AM, Panagiotis Zompolas wrote:

Signature

Hey guys, Panos from Redshift here.

Just wanted to clarify that the TitanX (as well as any future compute 
capability 5.2 cards with more than 4GB) does /not/ have a 4GB geo 
cache limit. The 4GB limit only applies to earlier-generation 
videocards, including the old Titans/Quadros.


Kind regards,

-Panos

*From:*softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Tim 
Crowson

*Sent:* Friday, May 29, 2015 9:33 AM
*To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
*Subject:* Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

The Titan X is actually a really great value though, especially if 
you're a Redshift user. 12GB on a $1,000 card? Once they lift the 
hard-coded 4GB geo cache limit (which they really should do sooner 
than later), that 12GB is going to translate into not only faster 
renders, but a much better ability to handle dense scenes with 
millions of instances. I broke past 1 quadrillion triangles with a 
Titan Black (cramming in 32M+ instances), and I hope I get to run that 
test again with a Titan X someday.


-Tim

On 5/29/2015 10:28 AM, Leoung O'Young wrote:

Hi Tim,

You could be right.
We had a gtx 570 with only 1.5gb and it was performing better than
the 970 with 4gb.
Soft is probably using the .5 of very slow memory.

Things are really slow only when we have the camera window open.

We are quite happy with the 970's in Redshift.
Would love to get our hands on the Titan X with 12gb but they are
rather expensive.

We have a gtx 670 4gb and a gtx 690 4gb but it is really 2 card in
one.
We will do some testing with those cards and report back.

Thanks,
Leoung


On 29/05/2015 10:17 AM, Tim Crowson wrote:

Yeah this could possibly be happening, but indeed the scene
would have to be pretty dense. Fire up GPU-Z and see how many
vram XSI uses. I know that for Redshift, the devs had to add a
patch just for the 970 to actually ignore the 500MB of slow
memory that Nvidia put on the 970. Or something like that. I
suppose if that section of memory is being accessed by XSI,
and since it's much slower than the rest of the on-board
memory, perhaps that could have an effect like this? I'm
talking a bit out of my area though

(backstory: When Nvidia shipped the 970, they got a lot of
backlash the 970 technically does have 4GB of memory, but
500MB of that operates at a speed that makes it virtually
unusable for things like rendering (and other stuff), and
indeed early on caused dramatic performance problems and
slow-downs. So in reality, we only have 3.5GB of usable memory
to render with on that card. I do hope they don't pull that
crap again.)

-Tim

On 5/28/2015 8:51 PM, Raffaele Fragapane wrote:

If your "heavy" scene is truly heavy, past the 3.5GB mark,
you might be bumping into a known design limitation of the
970 that basically craps itself if memory usage exceeds
the 3.5 mark (even if you have 4 on board).

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Leoung O'Young
mailto:digim...@digimata.com>> wrote:

No, thanks for the suggestion.



On 28/05/2015 7:46 PM, Sven Constable wrote:

Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards,
nvidia usually performes well. Did you add the xsi.exe in
the nvidia control panel?

sven

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>] On
Behalf Of Leoung O'Young
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
To: xsi
Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX
970's, they preforms quite well rendering in Redshift.
A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very
sluggish manipulating heavy geometry scenes inside
Softimage 2915.
What is a better option?

Thanks,
Leoung




-- 


Our users will know fear and cower before our software!
Ship it! Ship it and let them flee like the dogs they are!

-- 


*Tim Crowson
*/Lead CG Artist/

*Magnetic Dreams, Inc.
*2525 Lebanon Pike, Bldg C, Suite 101, Nashville, TN 37214
*Ph*  615.885.6801 | *Fax*  615.889.4768 |
www.magneticdre

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Leoung O'Young]

Hi Panos,

Thanks for the info.
I assumed this applies to the 980ti with 6gb to be released soon in Canada
Just want to say we just completed a project  and would have never  been 
possible without Redshift.

Keep up with the great work.

Thanks,
Leoung

On 29/05/2015 12:47 PM, Panagiotis Zompolas wrote:

Signature

Hey guys, Panos from Redshift here.

Just wanted to clarify that the TitanX (as well as any future compute 
capability 5.2 cards with more than 4GB) does /not/ have a 4GB geo 
cache limit. The 4GB limit only applies to earlier-generation 
videocards, including the old Titans/Quadros.


Kind regards,

-Panos

*From:*softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Tim 
Crowson

*Sent:* Friday, May 29, 2015 9:33 AM
*To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
*Subject:* Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

The Titan X is actually a really great value though, especially if 
you're a Redshift user. 12GB on a $1,000 card? Once they lift the 
hard-coded 4GB geo cache limit (which they really should do sooner 
than later), that 12GB is going to translate into not only faster 
renders, but a much better ability to handle dense scenes with 
millions of instances. I broke past 1 quadrillion triangles with a 
Titan Black (cramming in 32M+ instances), and I hope I get to run that 
test again with a Titan X someday.


-Tim

On 5/29/2015 10:28 AM, Leoung O'Young wrote:

Hi Tim,

You could be right.
We had a gtx 570 with only 1.5gb and it was performing better than
the 970 with 4gb.
Soft is probably using the .5 of very slow memory.

Things are really slow only when we have the camera window open.

We are quite happy with the 970's in Redshift.
Would love to get our hands on the Titan X with 12gb but they are
rather expensive.

We have a gtx 670 4gb and a gtx 690 4gb but it is really 2 card in
one.
We will do some testing with those cards and report back.

Thanks,
Leoung


On 29/05/2015 10:17 AM, Tim Crowson wrote:

Yeah this could possibly be happening, but indeed the scene
would have to be pretty dense. Fire up GPU-Z and see how many
vram XSI uses. I know that for Redshift, the devs had to add a
patch just for the 970 to actually ignore the 500MB of slow
memory that Nvidia put on the 970. Or something like that. I
suppose if that section of memory is being accessed by XSI,
and since it's much slower than the rest of the on-board
memory, perhaps that could have an effect like this? I'm
talking a bit out of my area though

(backstory: When Nvidia shipped the 970, they got a lot of
backlash the 970 technically does have 4GB of memory, but
500MB of that operates at a speed that makes it virtually
unusable for things like rendering (and other stuff), and
indeed early on caused dramatic performance problems and
slow-downs. So in reality, we only have 3.5GB of usable memory
to render with on that card. I do hope they don't pull that
crap again.)

-Tim

On 5/28/2015 8:51 PM, Raffaele Fragapane wrote:

If your "heavy" scene is truly heavy, past the 3.5GB mark,
you might be bumping into a known design limitation of the
970 that basically craps itself if memory usage exceeds
the 3.5 mark (even if you have 4 on board).

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Leoung O'Young
mailto:digim...@digimata.com>> wrote:

No, thanks for the suggestion.



On 28/05/2015 7:46 PM, Sven Constable wrote:

Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards,
nvidia usually performes well. Did you add the xsi.exe in
the nvidia control panel?

sven

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>] On
Behalf Of Leoung O'Young
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
    To: xsi
Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX
970's, they preforms quite well rendering in Redshift.
A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very
sluggish manipulating heavy geometry scenes inside
Softimage 2915.
What is a better option?

Thanks,
Leoung




-- 


Our users will know fear and cower before our software!
Ship it! Ship it and let them flee like the dogs they are!

-- 


*Tim Crowson
*/Lead CG Artist/

   

RE: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Panagiotis Zompolas]

Hey guys, Panos from Redshift here.

 

Just wanted to clarify that the TitanX (as well as any future compute 
capability 5.2 cards with more than 4GB) does not have a 4GB geo cache limit. 
The 4GB limit only applies to earlier-generation videocards, including the old 
Titans/Quadros.

 

Kind regards,

 

-Panos

 

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Tim Crowson
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 9:33 AM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

 

The Titan X is actually a really great value though, especially if you're a 
Redshift user. 12GB on a $1,000 card? Once they lift the hard-coded 4GB geo 
cache limit (which they really should do sooner than later), that 12GB is going 
to translate into not only faster renders, but a much better ability to handle 
dense scenes with millions of instances. I broke past 1 quadrillion triangles 
with a Titan Black (cramming in 32M+ instances), and I hope I get to run that 
test again with a Titan X someday.

-Tim

On 5/29/2015 10:28 AM, Leoung O'Young wrote:

Hi Tim,

You could be right.
We had a gtx 570 with only 1.5gb and it was performing better than the 970 with 
4gb.
Soft is probably using the .5 of very slow memory.

Things are really slow only when we have the camera window open.

We are quite happy with the 970's in Redshift.
Would love to get our hands on the Titan X with 12gb but they are rather 
expensive.

We have a gtx 670 4gb and a gtx 690 4gb but it is really 2 card in one.
We will do some testing with those cards and report back.

Thanks,
Leoung


On 29/05/2015 10:17 AM, Tim Crowson wrote:

Yeah this could possibly be happening, but indeed the scene would have to be 
pretty dense. Fire up GPU-Z and see how many vram XSI uses. I know that for 
Redshift, the devs had to add a patch just for the 970 to actually ignore the 
500MB of slow memory that Nvidia put on the 970. Or something like that. I 
suppose if that section of memory is being accessed by XSI, and since it's much 
slower than the rest of the on-board memory, perhaps that could have an effect 
like this? I'm talking a bit out of my area though

(backstory: When Nvidia shipped the 970, they got a lot of backlash the 970 
technically does have 4GB of memory, but 500MB of that operates at a speed that 
makes it virtually unusable for things like rendering (and other stuff), and 
indeed early on caused dramatic performance problems and slow-downs. So in 
reality, we only have 3.5GB of usable memory to render with on that card. I do 
hope they don't pull that crap again.)

-Tim



On 5/28/2015 8:51 PM, Raffaele Fragapane wrote:

If your "heavy" scene is truly heavy, past the 3.5GB mark, you might be bumping 
into a known design limitation of the 970 that basically craps itself if memory 
usage exceeds the 3.5 mark (even if you have 4 on board).

 

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Leoung O'Young  wrote:

No, thanks for the suggestion. 



On 28/05/2015 7:46 PM, Sven Constable wrote:

Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards, nvidia usually performes 
well. Did you add the xsi.exe in the nvidia control panel?

sven

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leoung O'Young
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
To: xsi
Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's, they preforms 
quite well rendering in Redshift.
A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggish manipulating 
heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage 2915.
What is a better option?

Thanks,
Leoung




 





 

-- 

Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it and 
let them flee like the dogs they are!

 

-- 

 

Tim Crowson
Lead CG Artist

Magnetic Dreams, Inc.
2525 Lebanon Pike, Bldg C, Suite 101, Nashville, TN 37214
Ph  615.885.6801 | Fax  615.889.4768 | www.magneticdreams.com
tim.crow...@magneticdreams.com

Confidentiality Notice: This email, including attachments, is confidential and 
should not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient(s). If 
you have received this e-mail in error please inform the sender and delete it 
from your mailbox or any other storage mechanism. Magnetic Dreams, Inc cannot 
accept liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and 
not expressly made on behalf of Magnetic Dreams, Inc or one of its agents.

 

 

 

-- 

 

 

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Mirko Jankovic]

Actually as I'm aware of Redshift already removed that so it can use all
ram already.
Could help to check but I think I remember that being mentioned

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 6:32 PM, Tim Crowson  wrote:

>  The Titan X is actually a really great value though, especially if you're
> a Redshift user. 12GB on a $1,000 card? Once they lift the hard-coded 4GB
> geo cache limit (which they really should do sooner than later), that 12GB
> is going to translate into not only faster renders, but a much better
> ability to handle dense scenes with millions of instances. I broke past 1
> quadrillion triangles with a Titan Black (cramming in 32M+ instances), and
> I hope I get to run that test again with a Titan X someday.
>
> -Tim
>
>
> On 5/29/2015 10:28 AM, Leoung O'Young wrote:
>
> Hi Tim,
>
> You could be right.
> We had a gtx 570 with only 1.5gb and it was performing better than the 970
> with 4gb.
> Soft is probably using the .5 of very slow memory.
>
> Things are really slow only when we have the camera window open.
>
> We are quite happy with the 970's in Redshift.
> Would love to get our hands on the Titan X with 12gb but they are rather
> expensive.
>
> We have a gtx 670 4gb and a gtx 690 4gb but it is really 2 card in one.
> We will do some testing with those cards and report back.
>
> Thanks,
> Leoung
>
>
> On 29/05/2015 10:17 AM, Tim Crowson wrote:
>
> Yeah this could possibly be happening, but indeed the scene would have to
> be pretty dense. Fire up GPU-Z and see how many vram XSI uses. I know that
> for Redshift, the devs had to add a patch just for the 970 to actually
> ignore the 500MB of slow memory that Nvidia put on the 970. Or something
> like that. I suppose if that section of memory is being accessed by XSI,
> and since it's much slower than the rest of the on-board memory, perhaps
> that could have an effect like this? I'm talking a bit out of my area
> though
>
> (backstory: When Nvidia shipped the 970, they got a lot of backlash
> the 970 technically does have 4GB of memory, but 500MB of that operates at
> a speed that makes it virtually unusable for things like rendering (and
> other stuff), and indeed early on caused dramatic performance problems and
> slow-downs. So in reality, we only have 3.5GB of usable memory to render
> with on that card. I do hope they don't pull that crap again.)
>
> -Tim
>
>
> On 5/28/2015 8:51 PM, Raffaele Fragapane wrote:
>
> If your "heavy" scene is truly heavy, past the 3.5GB mark, you might be
> bumping into a known design limitation of the 970 that basically craps
> itself if memory usage exceeds the 3.5 mark (even if you have 4 on board).
>
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Leoung O'Young 
> wrote:
>
>> No, thanks for the suggestion.
>>
>>
>> On 28/05/2015 7:46 PM, Sven Constable wrote:
>>
>>> Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards, nvidia usually
>>> performes well. Did you add the xsi.exe in the nvidia control panel?
>>>
>>> sven
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
>>> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leoung O'Young
>>> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
>>> To: xsi
>>> Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970
>>>
>>> We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's, they
>>> preforms quite well rendering in Redshift.
>>> A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggish
>>> manipulating heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage 2915.
>>> What is a better option?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Leoung
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>  --
> Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it
> and let them flee like the dogs they are!
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
> *Tim Crowson **Lead CG Artist*
>
>
> *Magnetic Dreams, Inc. *2525 Lebanon Pike, Bldg C, Suite 101, Nashville,
> TN 37214
> *Ph*  615.885.6801 | *Fax*  615.889.4768 | www.magneticdreams.com
> tim.crow...@magneticdreams.com
>
> *Confidentiality Notice: This email, including attachments, is
> confidential and should not be used by anyone who is not the original
> intended recipient(s). If you have received this e-mail in error please
> inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage
> mechanism. Magnetic Dreams, Inc cannot accept liability for any statements
> made which are clearly the sender's own and not expressly made on behalf of
> Magnetic Dreams, Inc or one of its agents.*
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Tim Crowson]

The Titan X is actually a really great value though, especially if 
you're a Redshift user. 12GB on a $1,000 card? Once they lift the 
hard-coded 4GB geo cache limit (which they really should do sooner than 
later), that 12GB is going to translate into not only faster renders, 
but a much better ability to handle dense scenes with millions of 
instances. I broke past 1 quadrillion triangles with a Titan Black 
(cramming in 32M+ instances), and I hope I get to run that test again 
with a Titan X someday.


-Tim

On 5/29/2015 10:28 AM, Leoung O'Young wrote:

Hi Tim,

You could be right.
We had a gtx 570 with only 1.5gb and it was performing better than the 
970 with 4gb.

Soft is probably using the .5 of very slow memory.

Things are really slow only when we have the camera window open.

We are quite happy with the 970's in Redshift.
Would love to get our hands on the Titan X with 12gb but they are 
rather expensive.


We have a gtx 670 4gb and a gtx 690 4gb but it is really 2 card in one.
We will do some testing with those cards and report back.

Thanks,
Leoung


On 29/05/2015 10:17 AM, Tim Crowson wrote:
Yeah this could possibly be happening, but indeed the scene would 
have to be pretty dense. Fire up GPU-Z and see how many vram XSI 
uses. I know that for Redshift, the devs had to add a patch just for 
the 970 to actually ignore the 500MB of slow memory that Nvidia put 
on the 970. Or something like that. I suppose if that section of 
memory is being accessed by XSI, and since it's much slower than the 
rest of the on-board memory, perhaps that could have an effect like 
this? I'm talking a bit out of my area though


(backstory: When Nvidia shipped the 970, they got a lot of 
backlash the 970 technically does have 4GB of memory, but 500MB 
of that operates at a speed that makes it virtually unusable for 
things like rendering (and other stuff), and indeed early on caused 
dramatic performance problems and slow-downs. So in reality, we only 
have 3.5GB of usable memory to render with on that card. I do hope 
they don't pull that crap again.)


-Tim


On 5/28/2015 8:51 PM, Raffaele Fragapane wrote:
If your "heavy" scene is truly heavy, past the 3.5GB mark, you might 
be bumping into a known design limitation of the 970 that basically 
craps itself if memory usage exceeds the 3.5 mark (even if you have 
4 on board).


On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Leoung O'Young 
mailto:digim...@digimata.com>> wrote:


No, thanks for the suggestion.


On 28/05/2015 7:46 PM, Sven Constable wrote:

Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards, nvidia
usually performes well. Did you add the xsi.exe in the
nvidia control panel?

sven

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>] On Behalf
Of Leoung O'Young
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
To: xsi
Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX
970's, they preforms quite well rendering in Redshift.
A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very
sluggish manipulating heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage
2915.
What is a better option?

Thanks,
Leoung







--
Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! 
Ship it and let them flee like the dogs they are!


--
Signature

*Tim Crowson
*/Lead CG Artist/

*Magnetic Dreams, Inc.
*2525 Lebanon Pike, Bldg C, Suite 101, Nashville, TN 37214
*Ph*  615.885.6801 | *Fax*  615.889.4768 | www.magneticdreams.com
tim.crow...@magneticdreams.com

/Confidentiality Notice: This email, including attachments, is 
confidential and should not be used by anyone who is not the original 
intended recipient(s). If you have received this e-mail in error 
please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other 
storage mechanism. Magnetic Dreams, Inc cannot accept liability for 
any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not 
expressly made on behalf of Magnetic Dreams, Inc or one of its agents./






--
Signature

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Leoung O'Young]

Hi Tim,

You could be right.
We had a gtx 570 with only 1.5gb and it was performing better than the 
970 with 4gb.

Soft is probably using the .5 of very slow memory.

Things are really slow only when we have the camera window open.

We are quite happy with the 970's in Redshift.
Would love to get our hands on the Titan X with 12gb but they are rather 
expensive.


We have a gtx 670 4gb and a gtx 690 4gb but it is really 2 card in one.
We will do some testing with those cards and report back.

Thanks,
Leoung


On 29/05/2015 10:17 AM, Tim Crowson wrote:
Yeah this could possibly be happening, but indeed the scene would have 
to be pretty dense. Fire up GPU-Z and see how many vram XSI uses. I 
know that for Redshift, the devs had to add a patch just for the 970 
to actually ignore the 500MB of slow memory that Nvidia put on the 
970. Or something like that. I suppose if that section of memory is 
being accessed by XSI, and since it's much slower than the rest of the 
on-board memory, perhaps that could have an effect like this? I'm 
talking a bit out of my area though


(backstory: When Nvidia shipped the 970, they got a lot of 
backlash the 970 technically does have 4GB of memory, but 500MB of 
that operates at a speed that makes it virtually unusable for things 
like rendering (and other stuff), and indeed early on caused dramatic 
performance problems and slow-downs. So in reality, we only have 3.5GB 
of usable memory to render with on that card. I do hope they don't 
pull that crap again.)


-Tim


On 5/28/2015 8:51 PM, Raffaele Fragapane wrote:
If your "heavy" scene is truly heavy, past the 3.5GB mark, you might 
be bumping into a known design limitation of the 970 that basically 
craps itself if memory usage exceeds the 3.5 mark (even if you have 4 
on board).


On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Leoung O'Young 
mailto:digim...@digimata.com>> wrote:


No, thanks for the suggestion.


On 28/05/2015 7:46 PM, Sven Constable wrote:

Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards, nvidia
usually performes well. Did you add the xsi.exe in the nvidia
control panel?

sven

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>] On Behalf
Of Leoung O'Young
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
    To: xsi
Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's,
they preforms quite well rendering in Redshift.
A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggish
manipulating heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage 2915.
What is a better option?

Thanks,
Leoung







--
Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship 
it and let them flee like the dogs they are!


--
Signature

*Tim Crowson
*/Lead CG Artist/

*Magnetic Dreams, Inc.
*2525 Lebanon Pike, Bldg C, Suite 101, Nashville, TN 37214
*Ph*  615.885.6801 | *Fax*  615.889.4768 | www.magneticdreams.com
tim.crow...@magneticdreams.com

/Confidentiality Notice: This email, including attachments, is 
confidential and should not be used by anyone who is not the original 
intended recipient(s). If you have received this e-mail in error 
please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other 
storage mechanism. Magnetic Dreams, Inc cannot accept liability for 
any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not 
expressly made on behalf of Magnetic Dreams, Inc or one of its agents./

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Leoung O'Young]

It is worth a try.

Thanks,
Leoung

On 29/05/2015 1:46 AM, Tim Leydecker wrote:
Another thing worth a shot is going to microsoft.com and finding the 
latest directX installer,
trying to install it won´t hurt if something newer is already 
installed but directx was something

i found was missing in machines giving sluggish performance in the past.

it sounds far fetched but it makes sense, kind of.

cheers,

tim

Am 29.05.2015 um 07:19 schrieb Sven Constable:


The standard (global) settings are different from the softimage 
settings provided by nvidia. I had selection problems on nvidia based 
workstations and after I changed to the softimage settings, problems 
are gone.  Even it not applies to that heavy geo problem, it doesn't 
hurt.


*From:*softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of 
*Raffaele Fragapane

*Sent:* Friday, May 29, 2015 6:33 AM
*To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
*Subject:* Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

Unless you need to have separate configurations for different apps 
why would you do that?


On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Sven Constable 
mailto:sixsi_l...@imagefront.de>> wrote:


Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards, nvidia usually 
performes well. Did you add the xsi.exe in the nvidia control panel?


sven


-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com> 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>] On Behalf Of Leoung 
O'Young

Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
To: xsi
Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's, they 
preforms quite well rendering in Redshift.
A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggish 
manipulating heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage 2915.

What is a better option?

Thanks,
Leoung



--

Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship 
it and let them flee like the dogs they are!

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Leoung O'Young]

Thanks, I will give that a try.

On 29/05/2015 1:06 AM, Sven Constable wrote:

Open up Nvidia control panel. Under 3D Settings->Manage 3d settings->Program 
settings.
CLick add.Choose the xsi.exe  (C:\Program Files\Autodesk\Softimage 2015 
SP1\Application\bin\)

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leoung O'Young
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 6:24 AM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

Hi Sven,

Where do you add xsi.exe in the nvidia control panel?

Thanks,
Leoung

On 28/05/2015 7:46 PM, Sven Constable wrote:

Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards, nvidia usually performes 
well. Did you add the xsi.exe in the nvidia control panel?

sven

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leoung O'Young
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
To: xsi
Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's, they preforms 
quite well rendering in Redshift.
A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggish manipulating 
heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage 2915.
What is a better option?

Thanks,
Leoung

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Tim Crowson]

Yeah this could possibly be happening, but indeed the scene would have 
to be pretty dense. Fire up GPU-Z and see how many vram XSI uses. I know 
that for Redshift, the devs had to add a patch just for the 970 to 
actually ignore the 500MB of slow memory that Nvidia put on the 970. Or 
something like that. I suppose if that section of memory is being 
accessed by XSI, and since it's much slower than the rest of the 
on-board memory, perhaps that could have an effect like this? I'm 
talking a bit out of my area though


(backstory: When Nvidia shipped the 970, they got a lot of backlash 
the 970 technically does have 4GB of memory, but 500MB of that operates 
at a speed that makes it virtually unusable for things like rendering 
(and other stuff), and indeed early on caused dramatic performance 
problems and slow-downs. So in reality, we only have 3.5GB of usable 
memory to render with on that card. I do hope they don't pull that crap 
again.)


-Tim


On 5/28/2015 8:51 PM, Raffaele Fragapane wrote:
If your "heavy" scene is truly heavy, past the 3.5GB mark, you might 
be bumping into a known design limitation of the 970 that basically 
craps itself if memory usage exceeds the 3.5 mark (even if you have 4 
on board).


On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Leoung O'Young 
mailto:digim...@digimata.com>> wrote:


No, thanks for the suggestion.


On 28/05/2015 7:46 PM, Sven Constable wrote:

Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards, nvidia
usually performes well. Did you add the xsi.exe in the nvidia
control panel?

sven

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>] On Behalf Of
Leoung O'Young
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
        To: xsi
Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's,
they preforms quite well rendering in Redshift.
A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggish
manipulating heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage 2915.
What is a better option?

Thanks,
Leoung







--
Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship 
it and let them flee like the dogs they are!


--
Signature

*Tim Crowson
*/Lead CG Artist/

*Magnetic Dreams, Inc.
*2525 Lebanon Pike, Bldg C, Suite 101, Nashville, TN 37214
*Ph*  615.885.6801 | *Fax*  615.889.4768 | www.magneticdreams.com
tim.crow...@magneticdreams.com

/Confidentiality Notice: This email, including attachments, is 
confidential and should not be used by anyone who is not the original 
intended recipient(s). If you have received this e-mail in error please 
inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage 
mechanism. Magnetic Dreams, Inc cannot accept liability for any 
statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not expressly 
made on behalf of Magnetic Dreams, Inc or one of its agents./

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Raffaele Fragapane]

That's usually the quadro cards, I don't know of the gtx driver branch
offering the AD apps as one you can pick. Maybe it changed and I didn't
notice though.

Adding the exe though simply changes the (subset of per app) settings for
that app, changing them globally sorts the same effect.

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Sven Constable 
wrote:

> The standard (global) settings are different from the softimage settings
> provided by nvidia. I had selection problems on nvidia based workstations
> and after I changed to the softimage settings, problems are gone.  Even it
> not applies to that heavy geo problem, it doesn't hurt.
>
>
>
> *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Raffaele Fragapane
> *Sent:* Friday, May 29, 2015 6:33 AM
> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> *Subject:* Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970
>
>
>
> Unless you need to have separate configurations for different apps why
> would you do that?
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Sven Constable 
> wrote:
>
> Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards, nvidia usually
> performes well. Did you add the xsi.exe in the nvidia control panel?
>
> sven
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leoung O'Young
> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
> To: xsi
> Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970
>
> We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's, they
> preforms quite well rendering in Redshift.
> A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggish manipulating
> heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage 2915.
> What is a better option?
>
> Thanks,
> Leoung
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it
> and let them flee like the dogs they are!
>



-- 
Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it
and let them flee like the dogs they are!

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Tim Leydecker]

Another thing worth a shot is going to microsoft.com and finding the 
latest directX installer,
trying to install it won´t hurt if something newer is already installed 
but directx was something

i found was missing in machines giving sluggish performance in the past.

it sounds far fetched but it makes sense, kind of.

cheers,

tim

Am 29.05.2015 um 07:19 schrieb Sven Constable:


The standard (global) settings are different from the softimage 
settings provided by nvidia. I had selection problems on nvidia based 
workstations and after I changed to the softimage settings, problems 
are gone.  Even it not applies to that heavy geo problem, it doesn't hurt.


*From:*softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of 
*Raffaele Fragapane

*Sent:* Friday, May 29, 2015 6:33 AM
*To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
*Subject:* Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

Unless you need to have separate configurations for different apps why 
would you do that?


On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Sven Constable 
mailto:sixsi_l...@imagefront.de>> wrote:


Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards, nvidia usually 
performes well. Did you add the xsi.exe in the nvidia control panel?


sven


-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com> 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>] On Behalf Of Leoung 
O'Young

Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
To: xsi
Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's, they 
preforms quite well rendering in Redshift.
A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggish 
manipulating heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage 2915.

What is a better option?

Thanks,
Leoung



--

Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship 
it and let them flee like the dogs they are!

RE: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Sven Constable]

The standard (global) settings are different from the softimage settings 
provided by nvidia. I had selection problems on nvidia based workstations and 
after I changed to the softimage settings, problems are gone.  Even it not 
applies to that heavy geo problem, it doesn't hurt.

 

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Raffaele Fragapane
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 6:33 AM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

 

Unless you need to have separate configurations for different apps why would 
you do that?

 

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Sven Constable  
wrote:

Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards, nvidia usually performes 
well. Did you add the xsi.exe in the nvidia control panel?

sven


-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leoung O'Young
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
To: xsi
Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's, they preforms 
quite well rendering in Redshift.
A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggish manipulating 
heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage 2915.
What is a better option?

Thanks,
Leoung







 

-- 

Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it and 
let them flee like the dogs they are!

RE: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Sven Constable]

Open up Nvidia control panel. Under 3D Settings->Manage 3d settings->Program 
settings.
CLick add.Choose the xsi.exe  (C:\Program Files\Autodesk\Softimage 2015 
SP1\Application\bin\)

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leoung O'Young
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 6:24 AM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

Hi Sven,

Where do you add xsi.exe in the nvidia control panel?

Thanks,
Leoung

On 28/05/2015 7:46 PM, Sven Constable wrote:
> Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards, nvidia usually performes 
> well. Did you add the xsi.exe in the nvidia control panel?
>
> sven
>
> -Original Message-
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
> [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leoung O'Young
> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
> To: xsi
> Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970
>
> We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's, they preforms 
> quite well rendering in Redshift.
> A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggish manipulating 
> heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage 2915.
> What is a better option?
>
> Thanks,
> Leoung
>
>
>

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Raffaele Fragapane]

Unless you need to have separate configurations for different apps why
would you do that?

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Sven Constable 
wrote:

> Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards, nvidia usually
> performes well. Did you add the xsi.exe in the nvidia control panel?
>
> sven
>
> -Original Message-
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leoung O'Young
> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
> To: xsi
> Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970
>
> We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's, they
> preforms quite well rendering in Redshift.
> A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggish manipulating
> heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage 2915.
> What is a better option?
>
> Thanks,
> Leoung
>
>
>


-- 
Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it
and let them flee like the dogs they are!

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Leoung O'Young]

Hi Sven,

Where do you add xsi.exe in the nvidia control panel?

Thanks,
Leoung

On 28/05/2015 7:46 PM, Sven Constable wrote:

Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards, nvidia usually performes 
well. Did you add the xsi.exe in the nvidia control panel?

sven

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leoung O'Young
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
To: xsi
Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's, they preforms 
quite well rendering in Redshift.
A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggish manipulating 
heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage 2915.
What is a better option?

Thanks,
Leoung

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Raffaele Fragapane]

If your "heavy" scene is truly heavy, past the 3.5GB mark, you might be
bumping into a known design limitation of the 970 that basically craps
itself if memory usage exceeds the 3.5 mark (even if you have 4 on board).

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Leoung O'Young 
wrote:

> No, thanks for the suggestion.
>
>
> On 28/05/2015 7:46 PM, Sven Constable wrote:
>
>> Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards, nvidia usually
>> performes well. Did you add the xsi.exe in the nvidia control panel?
>>
>> sven
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
>> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leoung O'Young
>> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
>> To: xsi
>> Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970
>>
>> We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's, they
>> preforms quite well rendering in Redshift.
>> A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggish
>> manipulating heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage 2915.
>> What is a better option?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Leoung
>>
>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it
and let them flee like the dogs they are!

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Leoung O'Young]

No, thanks for the suggestion.

On 28/05/2015 7:46 PM, Sven Constable wrote:

Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards, nvidia usually performes 
well. Did you add the xsi.exe in the nvidia control panel?

sven

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leoung O'Young
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
To: xsi
Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's, they preforms 
quite well rendering in Redshift.
A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggish manipulating 
heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage 2915.
What is a better option?

Thanks,
Leoung

RE: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Sven Constable]

Manipulating heavy geo was a problem with ATI cards, nvidia usually performes 
well. Did you add the xsi.exe in the nvidia control panel?

sven

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leoung O'Young
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 1:20 AM
To: xsi
Subject: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's, they preforms 
quite well rendering in Redshift.
A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggish manipulating 
heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage 2915.
What is a better option?

Thanks,
Leoung

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Leoung O'Young]

Sorry, typo, need new glasses.

On 28/05/2015 7:31 PM, Greg Punchatz wrote:

"inside Softimage 2915"

Apparently softimage rises from the ashes, but in a far distant future ;)

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Leoung O'Young > wrote:


We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's, they
preforms quite well rendering in Redshift.
A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggish
manipulating heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage 2915.
What is a better option?

Thanks,
Leoung

Re: Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Greg Punchatz]

"inside Softimage 2915"

Apparently softimage rises from the ashes, but in a far distant future ;)

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Leoung O'Young 
wrote:

> We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's, they
> preforms quite well rendering in Redshift.
> A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggish manipulating
> heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage 2915.
> What is a better option?
>
> Thanks,
> Leoung
>

Heavy scenes with the GTX 970

[Leoung O'Young]

We have switched some of our workstation using the GTX 970's, they 
preforms quite well rendering in Redshift.
A good bang for the buck. But we find the it is very sluggish 
manipulating heavy geometry scenes inside Softimage 2915.

What is a better option?

Thanks,
Leoung