Advanced Member geo_n Posted July 30, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 So any update with the issue for the 400 series cards? I'm thinking of picking up the mid range gtx460 for 3dcoat and octane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taros Posted July 30, 2010 Report Share Posted July 30, 2010 Solved since some versions (about a month or so). Just look into the support threads, please. -> Read me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member geo_n Posted August 1, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted August 1, 2010 Solved since some versions (about a month or so). Just look into the support threads, please. -> Read me Ah thanks. So anyone using a 8800gts gfx card that has access to a gtx460? How much performance gain for 3dcoat? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted August 1, 2010 Author Report Share Posted August 1, 2010 I own an 8800gts. While I have not tried any of the gtx400 series I plan to soon so I've been looking into them. It seems to me that there would be a fairly large improvement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member splodge Posted August 1, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted August 1, 2010 Ah thanks. So anyone using a 8800gts gfx card that has access to a gtx460? How much performance gain for 3dcoat? It'll mean smoother movement when rotating around your model. I would rather Andrew give us the cheaper option of having our model temporarily drop down to lower resolution when being rotated. It's silly to have to keep upgrading our video cards just for sake of smoother movement when a much cheaper software solution could be implemented. My answer to the above problem was to not bother modeling in 3D Coat. I'm still on a 8800 GTX and I box model in a old school poly modeler at 100 fps. I use 3D Coat just for painting. Although not sure for how long as I've recently found some nasty killer bugs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted August 1, 2010 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted August 1, 2010 It'll mean smoother movement when rotating around your model. I would rather Andrew give us the cheaper option of having our model temporarily drop down to lower resolution when being rotated. It's silly to have to keep upgrading our video cards just for sake of smoother movement when a much cheaper software solution could be implemented. My answer to the above problem was to not bother modeling in 3D Coat. I'm still on a 8800 GTX and I box model in a old school poly modeler at 100 fps. I use 3D Coat just for painting. Although not sure for how long as I've recently found some nasty killer bugs. Since v3 came out I've had an ATI 4850, an Nvidia GTS 250, and a GTX 275. I've had no trouble with getting smooth rotation any of those models. The only hardware limitations I've seen is RAM, and that is the case on any system. It takes a good bit of RAM to get the most out of 3DC.The extra 240+ cores on a GTX 480 should provide a pretty noticeable difference from a GTX 200 series with CUDA usage (voxel sculpting speed) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member splodge Posted August 1, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted August 1, 2010 since v3 came out I've had an ATI 4850, an Nvidia GTS 250, and a GTX 275. I've had no trouble with getting smooth rotation around any of those models. nice... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted August 2, 2010 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted August 2, 2010 nice... I was just pointing out that I went through those models (now using the 275), and had no problems with them. So perhaps just one more upgrade will be the cat's meow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Javis Posted August 2, 2010 Report Share Posted August 2, 2010 You know, I figured it would be a really intense increase as well, but at the hotel during Siggraph I mentioned wanting a new 400 series, but than he said the increase was almost null compared to a 200 series (though drastic between a 240 and a 275). Just something to consider of course, maybe Andrew could chime in more on the subject. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member splodge Posted August 2, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted August 2, 2010 I was just pointing out that I went through those models (now using the 275), and had no problems with them. So perhaps just one more upgrade will be the cat's meow. But there isn't really a "cat's meow". It all depends on how large and how detailed a model is. Simple fact is that in 3D Coat the detail of a model is currently limited by the video card's rendering speed. This isn't the case in other sculpting programs. 3D Coat user: "I need more detail around the eye..umm.. Okay, I best go buy a new video card." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted August 2, 2010 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted August 2, 2010 But there isn't really a "cat's meow". It all depends on how large and how detailed a model is. Simple fact is that in 3D Coat the detail of a model is currently limited by the video card's rendering speed. This isn't the case in other sculpting programs. 3D Coat user: "I need more detail around the eye..umm.. Okay, I best go buy a new video card." I just have not seen this limitation you're referring to, and I've used it on 20-40+ mill poly models...I've not experienced it even on a measly laptop (which has video cards that are lame compared to their desktop counterparts). I think perhaps you may be confusing memory limitations with a lack of Video Card performance. When you approach 80-90% of your RAM limit, you will start to see some lag in everything, not just navigation. ZBrush is the only application that I'm aware of that doesn't need a relatively new system to get a lot out of it (it's still 32 bit, so it is not going to take advantage of more memory anyway). Please don't slam the application because you're using a card that is now 3 generations old (3yrs+). Just to keep things in perspective here, Voxel sculpting only came out in v3 in June of last year. The 8800 was already 2 generations old then. The ATI 4850 I mentioned earlier; purchased months prior to that release, was only $150, and it was on the same level as the GTX 260. So, it's not like you HAVE to spend an arm and a leg on a card that works well with 3DC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member splodge Posted August 2, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted August 2, 2010 I don't know about ZBrush, but you have to have a good video card in Mudbox as well, not to mention the major application the model will eventually be exported to. I just have not seen this limitation you're referring to, Well obviously there's a limitation. A video card can only draw so many polygons in a given amount of time. 3D Coat's rendering performance is exactly what I would expect. It can render a model just as fast as any other sculpting program out there. The difference is that when the poly count increases and the frame rate drops then the other programs can temporarily display a low poly version of the model when rotating the model. It's not about my machine's performance vs your machines's performance, it's about 3D Coat not having a backup plan if rendering performance drops below a certain level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted August 2, 2010 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted August 2, 2010 Well obviously there's a limitation. A video card can only draw so many polygons in a given amount of time. 3D Coat's rendering performance is exactly what I would expect. It can render a model just as fast as any other sculpting program out there. The difference is that when the poly count increases and the frame rate drops then the other programs can temporarily display a low poly version of the model when rotating the model. It's not about my machine's performance vs your machines's performance, it's about 3D Coat not having a backup plan if rendering performance drops below a certain level. That is something Andrew could do now that Multi-Res is implemented, but I'm not sure where that falls in his list of priorities, as....yet again....if you have a newer card, you have NO issues smoothly navigating around your model. A GTS 250 (essentially a re-worked 9800 GTX) worked fine, and you can find one of those for less than a $100. It's no different than Mudbox, in that regard. The models I export to 3ds Max, even with it decimated quite low, nearly choke on the poly's. 3DC handles them fairly well, as does the other sculpting applications. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member splodge Posted August 2, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted August 2, 2010 That is something Andrew could do now that Multi-Res is implemented, but I'm not sure where that falls in his list of priorities, as....yet again....if you have a newer card, you have NO issues smoothly navigating around your model. A GTS 250 (essentially a re-worked 9800 GTX) worked fine, and you can find one of those for less than a $100. It's no different than Mudbox, in that regard. Not sure what you mean when you say "It's no different than Mudbox". I just tried Mudbox. First time in years. And wow, very impressive. 33 million polys at 100 fps! And it's quite easy to see how it's managing this. When the user zooms out then a lower poly version of the model is being displayed. And when zoomed in the rest of the model that isn't in view seems to be ignored. So the frame rate stays high constantly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted August 2, 2010 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted August 2, 2010 Not sure what you mean when you say "It's no different than Mudbox". I just tried Mudbox. First time in years. And wow, very impressive. 33 million polys at 100 fps! And it's quite easy to see how it's managing this. When the user zooms out then a lower poly version of the model is being displayed. And when zoomed in the rest of the model that isn't in view seems to be ignored. So the frame rate stays high constantly. Mudbox still has fairly recent hardware requirements, and that is what I meant. I have both programs as well, and I understand what you're saying...but I don't have ANY trouble smoothly navigating around in 3DC....so I don't know how much of a priority Andrew will place on the request when only a select few, such as yourself would benefit from it. He has bigger fish to fry at the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member splodge Posted August 2, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted August 2, 2010 Mudbox still has fairly recent hardware requirements, and that is what I meant. I have both programs as well, and I understand what you're saying...but I don't have ANY trouble smoothly navigating around in 3DC....so I don't know how much of a priority Andrew will place on the request when only a select few, such as yourself would benefit from it. He has bigger fish to fry at the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Rich_Art Posted September 23, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted September 23, 2010 How does the CUDA behave with the latest release of 3DCoat? I read in earlier posts that the CUDA is a bit buggy at the moment. I'm planning to buy the Nvidia Asus ENGTX470. (I can't afford the bigger 480 brother) So if the CUDA is not very stable, I better should concentrate on a cheaper GFX card and save some more money for a new MoBo, proc and Ram. Peace, Rich_Art. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted September 23, 2010 Author Report Share Posted September 23, 2010 I occasionally have a problem with CUDA but that's very rare, only a couple of times a month maybe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Rich_Art Posted September 23, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted September 23, 2010 Ok thanks. And what kind of problems? just freezing up or something? If it occasionally occurs, well then it should not be a big problem. This will be fixed in an upcoming bug release I may hope. Peace, Rich_Art. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted September 23, 2010 Author Report Share Posted September 23, 2010 Sometimes it's crashes, sometimes the pen starts erasing big chunks of geometry instead of sculpting. It looks just like using the Cell Hide tool, except you can't unhide it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Rich_Art Posted September 23, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted September 23, 2010 aha ok, that sounds not so cool. Lets hope they go on bug hunt asap. Peace, Rich_Art. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted September 23, 2010 Author Report Share Posted September 23, 2010 Well like I said, this is pretty rare. I also have a pretty old video card, one of the earliest CUDA models, so it may not do it as much with newer cards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advanced Member Rich_Art Posted September 23, 2010 Advanced Member Report Share Posted September 23, 2010 or maybe a driver problem. I buy the Nvidia 470. Should be ok for the time being. Peace, Rich_Art. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contributor Tony Nemo Posted September 23, 2010 Contributor Report Share Posted September 23, 2010 or maybe a driver problem. I buy the Nvidia 470. Should be ok for the time being. Peace, Rich_Art. A significant difference between the 2 cards, 470 wants a 550 watt PU and 480 needs 600 watts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted September 23, 2010 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted September 23, 2010 A significant difference between the 2 cards, 470 wants a 550 watt PU and 480 needs 600 watts. I have a Galaxy GTX 275, and even though it's overclocked, I have noticed no problems whatsoever with CUDA. I've encountered plenty of bugs in the past several months and reported them to Andrew (they got fixed pretty quickly too, I should mention...thanks Andrew) and none of them were related to CUDA. I think you'll be perfectly happy with the card. CUDA doesn't make as much difference on the older NVidia cards, as the Manual states that CUDA performance scales in relation to the number of cores on the card. If you only have 64, it says you won't see any improvement over a quad-core CPU. But the 470 has about 448 cores and almost 1.3GB of VRAM, so you should notice a pretty big difference. You'll probably giggle the moment you have it installed and test it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member G-Rom84 Posted September 25, 2010 Member Report Share Posted September 25, 2010 Interesting to know how fast/slow 470GTX would be in comparisson to 460GTX with 2Gb Ram, And would it be noticable loss in performance for 460gtx which has less amount of cuda cores in 3D Coat? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Robert G Posted October 10, 2010 Member Report Share Posted October 10, 2010 Interesting to know how fast/slow 470GTX would be in comparisson to 460GTX with 2Gb Ram, And would it be noticable loss in performance for 460gtx which has less amount of cuda cores in 3D Coat? Yes, me too. I was thinking about buying a dell studio-xps 8100, it comes with a nVidia GTX460. I dont know if its a good idea, maybe it would be better to have one custom made? Anyone having some insights in this matter? I have very little! Regards, Robert Studio XPS 8100 - Intel Core i7 Processor 870 (2,93 GHz, 8 MB) Or If it would make a big difference. I could also go for the Intel® Core i7 Processor 880 (3.06GHz, 8MB) Legitieme Windows® 7 Ultimate Engels 8.192 MB 1.333 MHz Dual Channel DDR3 (4 x 2 GB) 2 TB Dual harde schijf, RAID 0 "Stripe" (2 x 1 TB - 7.200 rpm) 1GB Nvidia® GeForce® GTX 460 Graphics Card Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted October 10, 2010 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted October 10, 2010 Yes, me too. I was thinking about buying a dell studio-xps 8100, it comes with a nVidia GTX460. I don’t know if it’s a good idea, maybe it would be better to have one custom made? Anyone having some insights in this matter? I have very little! Regards, Robert Studio XPS 8100 - Intel Core i7 Processor 870 (2,93 GHz, 8 MB) Or If it would make a big difference. I could also go for the Intel® Core™ i7 Processor 880 (3.06GHz, 8MB) Legitieme Windows® 7 Ultimate – Engels 8.192 MB 1.333 MHz Dual Channel DDR3 (4 x 2 GB) 2 TB Dual harde schijf, RAID 0 "Stripe" (2 x 1 TB - 7.200 rpm) 1GB Nvidia® GeForce® GTX 460 Graphics Card Robert, there are a host of reasons why you should almost always go the custom build route. The only reason to buy one of the shelf is if you don't know how to build your own and just don't have the time. Nevertheless, there are a number of companies that have custom builds, with all aftermarket parts. Check Ebay first. There are plenty of brick and mortar stores that happen to have a storefront on EBay. Many of them let you pick everything that goes into it, and none of them are OEM parts.The main reason is that you will get EXACTLY the components you want and aftermarket parts are ALWAYS a cut above the OEM stuff you get in off the shelf builds (DELL, HP, etc). They also have extensive warranties on them. You have absolutely no overclocking capability in OEM parts. The Motherboard BIOS won't allow you to access CPU/GPU/Memory timings and voltage. The second reason is there is almost no room to expand in a pre-built case. Poor cooling and often no room to add a beefy card and definitely no room to add a second card (there are a number of renderers on the market now that take advantage of multiple GPU's...such as Octane, Arion, and Max 2012 will have iRay that will utilize multiple cards, as well as PhysX). Both AMD (black box editions) and Intel CPU's have a significant amount of overclocking capability...which is like upgrading to a much higher end model without the added cost. Most aftermarket Motherboards come with overclocking software that lets even the novice tune it without any OC experience, all within the Windows environment. You just want to ensure that you buy a decent aftermarket CPU cooler (Zalman, Thermaltake, and CoolerMaster are usually good choices), and pick a case with good airflow (most come with fans in the front and back). http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835118036 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835103057 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835106103 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835887023 http://www.newegg.com/Store/BrandSubCategory.aspx?Brand=1647&SubCategory=574&name=Zalman-Tech-Co-Ltd-CPU-Fans-Heatsinks I would also make sure that you buy a Graphic Card that has aftermarket cooling on it...not the standard (reference) box. The reason is that these cards not only have much better cooling, but they generally have higher quality memory chips and GPU's that have a much higher overclocking yield. They generally are about the same price or very close. They are worth it. You can get a 470GTX and overclock it to perform like a 480, without it ever breaking a sweat. Again, the card will come with overclocking software that makes it easy for even a novice to work with. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125338 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127513 If you don't know how to build one yourself, and don't have the time, I would still shop for the components, and take it to a local Computer shop (that you trust) and let them build it for you...and have them overclock everything for you and test it for stability (they have software utilities that run long stress tests to ensure stability). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philnolan3d Posted October 10, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 10, 2010 The biggest problem IMO in building yourself is the lack of support, even if you do know what your doing. I built my current computer myself, it was my first that I built instead of buying. I was pretty sure I got everything right, but this computer crashes a lot, like a couple of times a week on average. I've never been able to find the cause in 3 years of looking so I've often wondered if there was something I did wrong when building and just didn't know it. With support they could either tell me whats wrong, or replace something for me, or walk me through a fix on the phone instead of me having to hunt for the info online. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted October 10, 2010 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted October 10, 2010 The biggest problem IMO in building yourself is the lack of support, even if you do know what your doing. I built my current computer myself, it was my first that I built instead of buying. I was pretty sure I got everything right, but this computer crashes a lot, like a couple of times a week on average. I've never been able to find the cause in 3 years of looking so I've often wondered if there was something I did wrong when building and just didn't know it. With support they could either tell me whats wrong, or replace something for me, or walk me through a fix on the phone instead of me having to hunt for the info online. Well, you can always take it to a local shop and have them try and diagnose it. When certain components act up, they generally show different signs. You could try and run a software memory test (aftermarket motherboards usually have this utility on their software disk). Sometimes it may be as simple as a faulty memory chip, or miss-matched modules. If you tried to OC your memory timing, it sounds like the voltage is on the weak side and needs to be bumped up a tad.There is a certain threshold you can reach in memory clock speed before you have to increase the voltage. In general, to OC the CPU, you increase the FSB (front side bus) speed , and it will increase the RAM speed accordingly. That is usually the only setting I will adjust. You could always go into the BIOS and back the memory clock speed down one notch and see if that helps. Memory is the most finicky part of all the components. One little thing is off just a bit and it can cause issues. Everything else is fairly hassle-free. I had to wrestle with my RAM a bit and ended up having to back it off the listed speed (1066), manually in order to get it stable. You'd be surprised at how much help you can glean from Youtube. You can type in something like "overclocking memory" and get all kinds of tips. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.