Nossgrr

Thanks for the discount link Ancient Regime, I'll let you guys know how the course was

To me ZBrush navigation and interface is like what Blender 3D was at version 2.4... They need to clean the interface up in ZB 5.0 and make navigation customizable.

So.. if you've been following this forum, you probably read about the AMD FuryX video card that just came out. It's ATI based so no CUDA, my question is.. Let's say I get a new ATI card, how much of a performance hit would I get in 3D-Coat with not having CUDA? Will Vulkan help remedy this situation for ATI cards? <- assuming it has a universal CUDA like framework. I'm currently running on a NVidia GT770GTX, my options are to get a FuryX or wait for NVidia's next gen that's using the HBM2 next year.. Lots of assumptions and guesses in this post, I'd just like to get your opinion.

Thanks Chingchong, got a couple of them, great deal!

That and price.. I have a feeling this wont be cheap.

Well even if we get half of the advertised speed increase, it'd be amazing! There talking 10x times faster, not percentages. http://wccftech.com/nvidia-pascal-gpu-gtc-2015/ They're going to be using the new HBM (3D Memory) like in the new AMD cards, NVidia NVLink to replace the PCI express bus it seems.. That's a huge leap in performance <- again, if it pans out. The other thing I'd like to know is 10x faster than what? They mention current gen Titan in the article but I'll have to do more reading on it. What do you guys think? They're slated for 2016, my GeForce 770GTX has to hold until these come out...

Having been on many large project, I can say that most end up like the picture above.. Last one I worked on was a $2.5 million for an enterprise app that we had 1.5 years to build, it spiraled out of control to 3.5 years for a total of 14 millions.. Management lost control... Weak requirement specs... <- that's really boring stuff, let's get back to 3D.. My brain is much happier in that world

Motion Builder on steroids.

There's so much stuff in Mudbox to integrate into Maya, I'm wondering if MB is truly dead? Sounds like it could take quite a while to have the level of functionality that MB already has now. Then there's licensing, Mudbox costs me $10.00 per month at the moment, absolutely love it and accessible.

Is this currently in Maya 2016 or it's something they're working on?

Very cool but that's the kind of tech I was hoping to see in Mudbox..

Thanks L'Ancient Regime, That's about the same as the Sneak Peek on CGPress, http://cgpress.org/archives/houdini-15-sneak-peek-video.html

Anyone knows when the full reveal for Houdini 15 is? Should be sometime this week right?

Crap! I really liked MB.. Do you have a link Abn?

I really liked the new proxy tracks options in the sequencer and also the cycles and sculpting improvements. I feel like I'm repeating myself every release... Solid release

Here's another review link, http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/06/amd-fury-x-reviews-show-strong-4k-performance-but-doesnt-beat-980-ti-overall/ The 1080p is all Geforce 980Ti, The 4k is a close call.

Put it this way, most Apple equivalent hardware cost about the same and has integrated Intel graphics

Yea I saw that blurb as well... The guy will have a follow up article with AA, I'll keep an eye on it.

Here's an article about how much memory your video card actually uses when playing various games. The benchmarks shows VRam usage for 1080P, 1440, 4K resolution. http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/89/much-vram-need-1080p-1440p-4k/index.html

Good chart Ancien Regime, One thing I'm noticing, there's not much difference between a 4GB HBM and 8GB/12GB DDR5 card performance wise. Look at the performance with the Fury X/CF and the Titan , impressive.. So far with what I've read and charts I've seen, I wouldnt be afraid to pluck down $$ on a Fury X. 4GB doesnt seem to be an issue at all. Everything is going to come down to price, I'll assume because they only have to put 4GB in it that it's going to help with cost? My 770GTX is not even on the chart. lol.

I dont know much about this, is 8GB actually used in most 3D apps / Games? They mentioned sli and 4k but for lets say, a regular 1920x1080 monitor, any benefit in having 8GB? I'm running on a 770 GTX and it's been keeping up so far.

A competition with an entry fee? It's all good, I'm no where near the caliber of what I'm seeing on ZBC Top row forums

Definitely could be, I'll send a false positive result report to Avast. Thanks for checking

I tried to d/l but Avast flagged it as a containing a virus, anyone else get a warning?

If you follow what's going on the OpenGL front, you'll see there's a strategy in place to have performance parity with DX12.. Or I should say the other way around since it all started with Mantle. Check out the new OpenGL tech called Vulkan, used to be called GLNext.. It's basically Mantle for all GPUs (NVidia, AMD..etc). You could call this OpenGL 5 but for compatibility reasons ( and the mess with OpenGL 4 and the cad industry ) they decided to create a new GL branch. This way the Cad industry will have their legacy code base safe with the standard OpenGL and other applications/games that require more up to date tech can use Vulkan. Vulkan includes all the GPU thread, draw calls load balancing...etc that you're seeing in DX12.. Like I mentioned above, Mantle shook the industry originally. Win/win if you ask me. Feel free to correct me on GL versions and whatnot, going from memory.