PDA

View Full Version : Octane render and multiple GPU's question



Curly_01
09-16-2014, 12:23 PM
Hi,

What's the best way to setup multiple GPU's for Octane render? I've read somewhere that Windows 7 has problems when installing multiple gpu's. If you install multiple gpu's on one machine do you only need a rendernode license? Is there a latency when using GPU's on seperate computers with screamernet? What are the performance differences between multiple GPU's on one computer and GPU's installed on different computers?

Thanks in advance.

juanjgon
09-16-2014, 02:49 PM
It is always best to have 2, 3 or 4 GPUs on the same system (or even more if possible). I think that at least with 4 GPUs windows7 doesn't have any problem.

You can use all your GPUs in the same system with only one license. The other alternatives are use the Octane native network render or use LWSN to configure render nodes, but you are going to need an aditional Standalone licese for the native network render or an aditional combo license (Standalone+LW plugin) to use LWSN.

The Octane native network render is transparent to the user, it use all the local and remote GPUs to render the same image. The latency is low because the render begin with the local GPUs, and later the plugin adds the remote GPUs as soon as they are ready.

Rendering with LWSN is like rendering with the native LightWave engine, one frame on each node at the same time, and you can't use LWSN to render in the IPR window. LWSN is great for render animations, but not for the interactive rendering.

-Juanjo

thiyaguthree
03-22-2016, 12:37 AM
HI
If I replace my quadro 2000 into TITAN Z, how will be the performance with octane and lightwave?
I just installed Octane demo version with my Lightwave windows 7...It is very slow for rendering a decent equipement it taking 1 hour per frame.

Thanks
Thiyagu

sukardi
03-22-2016, 02:32 AM
Check out the Octane benchmark here https://render.otoy.com/octanebench/results.php?sort_by=avg&filter=&singleGPU=1

Titan Z is at least five times faster than Quadro K2200. I am really clueless with regard to the different Quadro versions.
From experience, I find the data here is pretty accurate.

erikals
03-22-2016, 05:12 AM
https://render.otoy.com/octanebench/results.php?sort_by=avg&filter=&singleGPU=1

i find it strange that a GTX 480 is just as fast as a GTX 590 (1024 cores)

any ideas?

... and GTX 480 (480 cores) beats the GTX 660Ti (1344 cores)

even stranger, GTX 580 (512 cores) beats GTX 590 (1024 cores)


isn't the 590 much better than the 580 ?

Norka
03-22-2016, 06:44 AM
GTX 590 is a dual-gpu card and OctaneBench counts 590 as two separate GPUs. 590 uses lower stock clocks, thus, 580 is faster. Also, 400/500 series are Fermi cores and 600/700 series are Kepler cores. In Kepler, they made each core weaker by 1/3 and tripled the number of cores (roughly). So a 580 with 512 cuda cores would be roughly as powerful as a Kepler GPU with 1536 cuda cores.

erikals
03-22-2016, 11:45 AM
Ah! thank you for nice explanation! http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/king.gif

might get a 590 tonight actually...

m.d.
03-22-2016, 12:14 PM
HI
If I replace my quadro 2000 into TITAN Z, how will be the performance with octane and lightwave?
I just installed Octane demo version with my Lightwave windows 7...It is very slow for rendering a decent equipement it taking 1 hour per frame.

Thanks
Thiyagu

I have a few quadros.....one of them a quadro 2000 as well
compared to a single gtx 470 a quadro 2000 is maybe 30% the speed in octane rendering, you can see it in the benchmarks way down at the bottom

a titan z will be equivalent to about 13 quadro 2000's

m.d.
03-22-2016, 12:20 PM
Ah! thank you for nice explanation! http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/king.gif

might get a 590 tonight actually...

I have a 590 ....sitting now dead
I replaced it with a 970 and found very little difference, a single 970 could possibly be faster

I know the benchmark doesn't show that, but I believe it is a little out of date with new octane architecture. I was disappointed when my 590 died, but I wouldnt switch back....
The 9 series draws maybe half the power as the 5/6 series.....my system with 2x 470 and a 590 was consuming about 1300+ watts while rendering. I would have to bypass my 1500 watt UPS as it couldnt handle the load (not sure why it is called a 1500 watt as it can only handle about 1000)

still if you can get it for cheap, its great bang for the buck performance.....not to mention single slot

THIBAULT
03-22-2016, 12:52 PM
A great rendering engine but also the rendering engine the most expensive in the world.
New power , minimum 4-8 TITAN to work seriously ... It's thinking !
In the studio, we have made ​​another choice.

erikals
03-22-2016, 01:02 PM
+ looks Fantastic for exteriors / interiors
+ 4 processors on 1 pc (less need for renderfarm)
+ no interpolated splotching (not talking flicker here)

- flicker (unless you use high settings)
- power consumption
- slow interior renders compared to alternatives ?

i'm still researching it, +forgot some of my previous conclusions... :/
lot's to do...

------------------------------


The 9 series draws maybe half the power as the 5/6 series.
yes, if i go for a 4x GPU solution in the future, i'd definitely go for the 9 series

------------------------------

another alternative is GarageFarm

m.d.
03-22-2016, 01:43 PM
A great rendering engine but also the rendering engine the most expensive in the world.
New power , minimum 4-8 TITAN to work seriously ... It's thinking !
In the studio, we have made ​​another choice.


Titan is overkill, and not necessary.... GTX's are fine....

that said a powerful setup is expensive, but to match with CPU power would require multiple computers, motherboards and processors....and that gets expensive too.

m.d.
03-22-2016, 01:48 PM
yes, if i go for a 4x GPU solution in the future, i'd definitely go for the 9 series

------------------------------

another alternative is GarageFarm

With the octane cloud coming online soon (possibly announcement in april) the need for multi-GPU setups may be diminishing. I maybe did 300 hours rendering last year on octane (mostly 1 project)....at that amount of hours the cloud more then pays for itself vs setting up a powerful expensive system....and its finished in 3 hours vs 300

Norka
03-22-2016, 06:06 PM
I'm sorry to disagree m.d., but I use Octane heavily, every day, and I can tell you, Octane Cloud will certainly be nice in a pinch, but uploading gigabytes to the cloud will not fly for most day-to-day production work. Power users like myself will always need multiple high-end GPUs, in our workstation, imho. Even if I had Google Fiber, I doubt I would use ORC much. My 980Ti(s) have already paid for themselves.

m.d.
03-22-2016, 07:35 PM
I'm sorry to disagree m.d., but I use Octane heavily, every day, and I can tell you, Octane Cloud will certainly be nice in a pinch, but uploading gigabytes to the cloud will not fly for most day-to-day production work. Power users like myself will always need multiple high-end GPUs, in our workstation, imho. Even if I had Google Fiber, I doubt I would use ORC much. My 980Ti(s) have already paid for themselves.


I have always run a minimum of 3 GPU's on my system, but realistically having the power of thousands of GPU's on tap compared to the time it takes to upload gigabytes of data is not really comparable.

Fluid sims and others may be a problem, I just did a turbulence sim with a cache of 600GB.....but for most other scenes the uploading penalty vs the rendering gain is a fraction of the time.

I recently did medical FX for a feature length documentary, and would have 70-90 hour renders for a 20 second shot. It's pretty hard to iterate scenes and make changes for directors when you have your system tied up rendering for 4 days.....the ORC could literally render that in 20 minutes.

thiyaguthree
03-23-2016, 03:49 AM
Hi Thanks for all your responses here. I compared and finally chose titan z but GTX 980 x 4 would be better by having multilple GPU's. For advanced rendering im moving to octane, as im new to octane i have to take a decision in that would better suit for my work flow. (example image attached).
Precision Workstation T 7500 Intel(R) Xenon(R) CPU E5520 @ 2.27 GHz 2.26GHz (2 Processors) 12GB RAM 64Bit OS.
If anyone working with this or equivalent specs in addition to thier GPU. kindly share. As the cost of investing in graphic card is high i should choose the right GPU for the right system. so that Can I go with GTX 980 X multiple? and that will be nice choice right.

The attached image would take atleast 2 minutes to render all the geometry without octane. And for more than 5400 frames it would consume 3 days with 3 nodes (screamernet). Now after installing the octane renderer and best GPU (?) can i reduce the time by half day or 1 day for entire project with high octane quality.

Thiyagu

133060

JonW
03-23-2016, 04:08 AM
I hope you have a large enough power supply to run 4 cards, & enough high pressure fans to push enough air through the computer to remove 1.5 kW of heat, & an air conditioned room.

cosbovfx
03-23-2016, 04:23 AM
I have a couple of dell t5500 dual e5520's that I got at auction, first thing I did was pull the cpu's and chuck them cause they are worthless. You can get 2 6core x5670's on ebay for about $150, that would make a significant improvement to your render time. My previous workstation was a dual x5680, and it was about twice as fast as the dual e5520.

thiyaguthree
03-24-2016, 12:20 AM
Hi
It means i can keep the same PC configuration with the changes only in GPU (4). I need flat answer that my lightwave render 5400 frames in 72 hours x 3 PC.
Can I get the same redering time if I use octance with GTX 980 x 2. I am not getting the answer straight away and for that I've been writing.

Thanks
Thiyagu

spherical
03-24-2016, 12:53 AM
Well, no one will be able to give you a flat answer. Too many variables: scene complexity, texturing complexity and methods, sheer poly count, extent of refractive/ reflective materials, lighting, etc. Will Octane be 4x faster with 4 cards? Nearly. Will it be 4x faster than a given CPU configuration? Perhaps. Some scenes render faster on CPU. It all depends. Juanjo can say better than any of us what the probability range may be but, even then, it's only an estimation until someone other than yourself can test the scene to see how it behaves.

thiyaguthree
03-24-2016, 03:11 AM
Yes. It's difficult to judge as it consists of 100 of millions of polygon - steel structural buildings, handrails, particles, equipments. I just give it to your guess, can you people look at the clips of CPU render and predict what would be the render time on octane. I have demo version of octane but it is not fine to judge with Quadro 2000. Fot atleast testing i need to buy any one GPU and test with octane and i dont want to disappoint once i have all the set up fine and if my rendering is slow. Before approval of purchasing I have to furnish these details to my IT department and to ensure the fulfilment of requirement. The same set up will be installed in other PC also.
133092133093

First I decided TITAN Z next GTX 980 x2 and now I have the doubt that, would I be taking any risk of purchasing these cards and adapt into my system.
Because no one is assuring strong confirmation of the rendering speed of Octane+with any processor.

Thanks
Thiyagu

THIBAULT
03-24-2016, 03:51 AM
Current test for interior scene Titan X vs I7 5960X. Response in the day.

Danner
03-24-2016, 03:53 AM
It's not that simple I'm afraid. Octane will probably be faster with a couple of GTX 980 than most CPU configurations except maybe the very latest dual xeon systems. It is easier to get good looking renders with octane, as their shaders are physically based but you have to set them up in octane, so you'll have to tweak existing scenes if they are not prepared for Octane. And there is also the RAM limitation of GPU rendering, They can only fit the geometry and textures that the card can hold in memory and even if they are very efficient in their usage of RAM it is limited. (I don't know if this has changed but it was talked about). The speed also depends on the quality setting, you could get really fast but somewhat noisy renders with Octane that you could clean up later in post with some denoising plugins for your compositing app.

JonW
03-24-2016, 03:57 AM
Hi
It means i can keep the same PC configuration with the changes only in GPU (4). I need flat answer that my lightwave render 5400 frames in 72 hours x 3 PC.
Can I get the same redering time if I use octance with GTX 980 x 2. I am not getting the answer straight away and for that I've been writing.

Thanks
Thiyagu

Before I do my final render on my farm (6 PCs) I will render every 10th frame. At the very least every 20th frame to check for problems. This also will give you a fairly good idea of how long the final render will take. Plus add about 30% margin minimum. No point doing a week of rendering to then find a problem.

While I am working on a job I will render overnight to get an idea of how long the final render will take. Sometimes rendering every frame at a small size & lower settings to check for certain things. Then another night every Xth frame to check for other things. In the morning you will know how quickly the final render is likely to take & at the same time most glitches should have been caught.

Using 2 nodes per computer (as long as you have enough ram for the scene) with Screamernet will save some time as one node is never 100% efficient, maybe around 80 - 90%, again depending on the complexity of the scene.

Also I would have nodes 1 & 4 on computer 1, nodes 2 & 5 on computer 2, nodes 3 & 6 on computer 3. Staggering the node numbers helps with CPU efficiency by loading frame numbers as far apart as possible as each frame is rendering the second is loading.

JonW
03-24-2016, 04:27 AM
Before approval of purchasing I have to furnish these details to my IT department and to ensure the fulfilment of requirement.

This is going about it the wrong way. When you have finished the scene you don't want to be waiting for computers to turn up, load software, network & so on. You should already have the computers!

Having already done overnight test renders across the network with the available computers you have at hand & be able to calculate how much extra GHz you need to make up the shortfall plus margin.

One should have pretty much worked out fairly early on what settings one is going to use to get the quality & rendering speed balance roughly right.

thiyaguthree
03-24-2016, 05:41 AM
Hi Thank you all for your responses. I go with with GTX 980 couple. Yes I understand that Octane needs to be its own textures to have render. I have many complicated scenes and layout that need to be tweaked for Octane. Well. That's the conclusion from the discussion.

Once installed, I will come up with the results. Thanks once again friends.


Thiyagu

thiyaguthree
03-29-2016, 03:59 AM
Hi friends! Thanks again for your suggestion and advises here. I just had discussion with the IT team that Dell (Precision T7500 workstation) company doesn't provide support for graphic cards other than Quadro and AMD. Normally my system is not for fully animation purpose but can handle all 3d softwares. while coming to production rendering, our IT guys advised that first they can test with the vendor k series type of card. so am waiting for this weekend to get that card and test initially. If something fails to execute the other option is to move for a new mutimedia set up PC, that starts with i7.
Now can you guys help me in choosing the best system set up considering fast rendering along with octane.

If you guys have any individual system with the best rendering set up also please share. I will proceed.

spherical
03-29-2016, 05:22 AM
Well, they're confusing the issue. Let's first get the terminology sorted out.

Quadro is a type of card made by NVidia.
AMD is a manufacturer, just like NVidia.

Now, if they mean manufacturers, it's NVidia and AMD and any type of card from those companies will be supported.
If they mean types of cards from those manufacturers, it's Quadro and FirePro respectively.

That said, to say that they "don't support anything other than a Quadro" is rubbish. Quadros are the same cards as GTX cards, except they have a few capabilities unique to CAD applications unlocked and running on the same chip that runs a GTX. If you know what you are doing, you can modify a GTX card and unlock those capabilities by adding capacitors, resistors and cutting a few traces on the board. They're the same down deep. Doesn't make economic sense to develop two completely different cards. Develop one and dumb-down the version that sells to the masses for a lower price. So, if they support one, they can support all. Besides, the "support" they are providing is ordering cards from manufacturers. They aren't going to fix it if it breaks. But, hey, if they want to spend all that extra cash for cards that aren't going to be used to their fullest, let 'em. :D

To put all that in concise terms, a Quadro or FirePro will make Modeler viewports more responsive. They'll both essentially be wasted on Layout.

JonW
03-29-2016, 05:26 AM
I always got my local computer shop to build my boxes. They are old now as I'm basically retired. They build 3 dual Xeon boxes over the years & 3 single CPU boxes & a dual Athlon AMD, to the specifications I wanted, with a few suggestions from them all at about 2/3 of the price of the big names, & with far more flexibility for changes & upgrades. My last box is still not too bad with it's 24 GB of ram SSD drives & a couple of graphic cards to run 2 monitors.

The best thing is when they were built I didn't have to waste money on things I didn't want.

Zerowaitstate
03-30-2016, 07:34 AM
interesting i did some training material for the mining industry 15 years back im looking to re approach them with VR. A longwall chock looks much more imposing when it is towering above you. Also built all the systems we used for rendering. Custom systems from GEL / HP can be pretty expensive,

Where are you based, you might be able to get a PC built cheaper and have it pre built on the web.

m.d.
03-30-2016, 11:13 AM
Well, they're confusing the issue. Let's first get the terminology sorted out.

Quadro is a type of card made by NVidia.
AMD is a manufacturer, just like NVidia.

Now, if they mean manufacturers, it's NVidia and AMD and any type of card from those companies will be supported.
If they mean types of cards from those manufacturers, it's Quadro and FirePro respectively.

That said, to say that they "don't support anything other than a Quadro" is rubbish. Quadros are the same cards as GTX cards, except they have a few capabilities unique to CAD applications unlocked and running on the same chip that runs a GTX. If you know what you are doing, you can modify a GTX card and unlock those capabilities by adding capacitors, resistors and cutting a few traces on the board. They're the same down deep. Doesn't make economic sense to develop two completely different cards. Develop one and dumb-down the version that sells to the masses for a lower price. So, if they support one, they can support all. Besides, the "support" they are providing is ordering cards from manufacturers. They aren't going to fix it if it breaks. But, hey, if they want to spend all that extra cash for cards that aren't going to be used to their fullest, let 'em. :D

To put all that in concise terms, a Quadro or FirePro will make Modeler viewports more responsive. They'll both essentially be wasted on Layout.

Agree with everything spherical said....

Dell probably only 'certifies' quadro or FirePro on their systems.....to much work to certify every other card. And it will usually be certified on a per application basis.....autocad etc. Quadros do have custom drivers for autocad and others....but none specifically for lightwave.
Also why offer a cheaper GTX when dell can mark up a Quadro for significantly more.

An older quadro which may technically be 'certified' may literally have 1/10th the performance even in OpenGL of a modern GTX that hasn't went through the certification process.

In my experience asking your IT department for technical assistance in picking a GPU is basically as useful as going over the lightwave license agreement with your corporate legal team before installing the software :)

thiyaguthree
04-01-2016, 12:32 AM
This is the point i wanted to come really to understand about quadro, GTX Firepro TITAN. I'm trying to understand the basics in selection of cards.
While we were discussing, Our IT team was not sure and not interested in buying GTX as our Dell supplliers and local support wont give a guarantee after fixing it. (for this particular machine dell precision T 7500 workstation - warranty is going to end shortly. so suggesting latest system to adopt our rendering work)
Also they have to answer if things not moving in our way. So i think dont want to rush now, just wait. because this is costly for us and also longtime investment.
I'm still in touch with the IT Department in getting their suggested quadro K series graphic cards to test
They are still having words with our Dell vendors and service person, once I test and understand the concept. i'll keep you posted.
Thank you very much spherical and md for your technical views. I'm sorry if i'm off track with your views or discussion.

Danner
04-01-2016, 02:19 AM
They are shooting themselves in the foot in my opinion. In trying to use "certified" cards and keeping things under warranty they are limiting themselves out of the cost effective GTX series. A similarly powerful Quadro is stupidly expensive..

Norka
04-01-2016, 03:25 PM
Plus, unless I am mistaken, a 980Ti or Titan X will smoke even the highest-end Quadros in Octane, which was built from the ground up specifically for GTX.

An you and your IT guys may want to hold off, until the 1080s come out in a couple months...

I have three 980Ti... they are the shizz.

thiyaguthree
04-07-2016, 02:16 AM
133316

Hi! Pl check the system details sent by dell. This system is selected for the software requirement that we have sent. (Lightwave 2015, Octane (future), Adobe Suite, Autodesk Design Suite 2015) I have come to know that they are providing only one card Quadro M4000 in this system. But I dont know how many cards (X M4000) may fit into the slot.
If only one card is admitted, then i will prefer a new quote for a system with quadro K6000 set up. The bench mark for M4000 is 55 and K6000 is 88 where as k6000 2.5x costlier than M4000. Also Quadro K6000 may fulfil my requirement. how many of your guys having multiple cards into your system and how does they function? many of you having assembled system or a complete set of branded machine?

Well. this discussion continues...

Lewis
04-07-2016, 04:00 AM
Single GPU in machine for display and GPU renderign isn't enough, that's not gonna be good for pro work since you'll have to set GPU to low priority to be able to render and navigate GUI.

also that Xeon is "very" weak CPU i.e. on 1.6GB 6 cores so you'd have faster CPU rendering with regular i7 CPU. Main thing is that if you aren't going to Dual Socket/CPU workstation there is no benefit to go with Xeon(s).
I have 4 GPUs in my machine and it's never enough :). I'll soon to put 5th GPU (it's arrived i just need to find time to put it in machine) :).

cheers

Norka
04-07-2016, 08:04 AM
Hey, for $5,000 you can get two Quadro K6000 and combined they will be a little more powerful than a single $650 980Ti... I say go for it! Take this tomfoolery to another level. Shoot for the moon. Hell, buy four K6000 for 10k!

erikals
04-07-2016, 07:52 PM
roadmap to OctaneRender 4.0
http://www.cgchannel.com/2016/04/otoy-reveals-the-future-of-octane/

http://www.cgchannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/160407_OctaneRender3.jpg



OctaneRender Cloud
Pricing starts at $9.99/month for 1,200 GPU minutes of render time.

...seems cool

thiyaguthree
04-07-2016, 09:17 PM
Lewis... 4 GPU not enough for your system..wondering! pls check your scene settings and the polygon counts. can you make a screen shot of your scene that you ve been rendering. might be something wrong.
Norka..Funny!!!!!!

spherical
04-07-2016, 10:59 PM
Lewis... 4 GPU not enough for your system..wondering! pls check your scene settings and the polygon counts. can you make a screen shot of your scene that you ve been rendering. might be something wrong.
Norka..Funny!!!!!!

Heh. That's rich.... Umm... Lewis is pretty darn accomplished. Have you seen his cars? The guy knows his stuff and teaches us a lot. Just sayin'.

Lewis
04-07-2016, 11:39 PM
Lewis... 4 GPU not enough for your system..wondering! pls check your scene settings and the polygon counts. can you make a screen shot of your scene that you ve been rendering. might be something wrong.
Norka..Funny!!!!!!

It's never enough, once you get on that bandwagon (of Octane/GPU rendering) you just want more and more so you throw in more GPUs, it's addictive, especially 'coz speedup is linear :).

thiyaguthree
04-11-2016, 03:01 AM
Lewis! Sorry for that behavior, i just responded to the person's quote. I just saw your work and realized. I was thinking on my way of work.
But how can you add GPU's once your requirement is not fulfilled. How man CPU do you have? How far you need to go for your rendering complex scenes, For a frame it's ok. But, like me more than 5000 frames how would you manage with Octane? (like the attached one my old project) the question am asking not only for you but commonly, Doesn't your system limited to no.of GPU.?

133385
The render here is not quiet realistic. we used to increase the passes for fine quality that consumed more time (144 hrs - xenon E5520 x 2). But I believe octane will do that. However, 5000 frames possible in minimum time? with a single quadro M6000 + Octane.

Lewis
04-11-2016, 03:36 AM
you can add 4 GPUs on most systems/motherboards nowdays and since GPUs are dual slot even if you have 6-7 PCI-E slots you can fit only 4 in conventional way. I'm using PCI-E extenders so i can add total 7 GPUs on my Dual Xeon motherboard directly but there is also external GPU boxes and then you can add 4 GPUs to single PCI-E slot. Also windows will not allow more than 7-8 GPUs (depend son system/MB). But Octane also can use network render so with octane 3.0 you can have 20 GPUs simultaneously. rendering 1 frame.

As for rendertimes that depend son scene and what's happening in scene, there is no direct translation (like with FPRIME) to native render vs Octane since you must convert materials to octane materials also but in bruteforce octane is much faster. I'v ehad external scenes which were rendering 5sec frame and i had some where i rendered 4 hours frame (Arch-Viz interiors) so it all depends what you need/want :).

Here is one quick test with octane 2.0 (3.0 is slightly faster)
https://www.dropbox.com/s/f6rccwgsvtp9qpk/VP_HDRI09_house.rar?dl=0

I was using 3 GPUs (780 GTX) and it took 9 seconds / frame.

thiyaguthree
04-12-2016, 02:34 AM
Thanks for everything Lewis. Lets hope for the best. You guided me in selecting the system. So yet to receive the quote. for quadro M6000 x 1, XEON E-2690 V3 x 2, 2 TB Hard Disk 32GB RAM.

THIBAULT
04-12-2016, 03:36 AM
Just bought this station in addition my first one. Total : 4 Titan X and one GTX 980 for Octane.

http://www.materiel.net/ordinateur/materiel-net-manticore-win10-pc-gamer-129433.html#FicheDesc

thiyaguthree
04-15-2016, 12:23 AM
It's heavy!
Hi! THI what kind of work that the sytem that you have been using for?

THIBAULT
04-15-2016, 12:31 AM
Hi Thiyaguthree,
Animation and 360 (web and Gear vr) for architecture. minimum rendering 8000 x 4000 px.
www.qualit-immo.fr/360/360_T4_COMBAREL

thiyaguthree
04-15-2016, 03:09 AM
Ok, Nice work Thibault!
How much time for interior Light settings rendering? Is it with octane?

THIBAULT
04-15-2016, 05:10 AM
5H in 8000 X 4000 px Pathtracing. First trying with Octane. 4 Titan X and 1 GTX 980 in two stations.
For comparaison, 20H with Corona and I7 5960X
I'm going to try two I7 5960X with Corona.