Member CoolCGI Posted January 11, 2011 Member Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 Hi, I'm very new to 3D-Coat, and am using the educational version at the moment, the 64bits version. I just upgraded my graphics card from a 9800GTX 512mb to a GTX460 with 1GB. Unfortunatly, performance when sculpting in the CUDA version is very poor, like 1fps. I have the latest drivers from nVidia. Now, when I start the DX version, it complains about a missing DLL, and that is correct, I have DX11 installed (fresh Win7 64 bits install). Can I install DX9 alongside 11 so I can check if the DX version worls better? Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted January 11, 2011 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 Hi, I'm very new to 3D-Coat, and am using the educational version at the moment, the 64bits version. I just upgraded my graphics card from a 9800GTX 512mb to a GTX460 with 1GB. Unfortunatly, performance when sculpting in the CUDA version is very poor, like 1fps. I have the latest drivers from nVidia. Now, when I start the DX version, it complains about a missing DLL, and that is correct, I have DX11 installed (fresh Win7 64 bits install). Can I install DX9 alongside 11 so I can check if the DX version worls better? Thanks. I have a GTX 470, and I don't know what you mean, with the claim that the CUDA version is slow. It's slower than non-CUDA or just not as fast as you thought it would be? When he finished up the brush engine work in Volume mode, Andrew stated that CUDA worked but wasn't optimized yet. I've been waiting for that to occur as well. However, performance in Mudbox and ZBrush is also slow....when you try to use large brushstrokes on very dense meshes. That is why you have subdivision levels. In 3DC you have Multi-Res that works essentially the same way and for the same reasons. Use it, and you'll be surprised how fast it is. There is a bug with the cache/proxy in this last build or two, so you may want to use build 3.5.07 until that get's ironed out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member CoolCGI Posted January 11, 2011 Author Member Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 I have a GTX 470, and I don't know what you mean, with the claim that the CUDA version is slow. It's slower than non-CUDA or just not as fast as you thought it would be? When he finished up the brush engine work in Volume mode, Andrew stated that CUDA worked but wasn't optimized yet. I've been waiting for that to occur as well. However, performance in Mudbox and ZBrush is also slow....when you try to use large brushstrokes on very dense meshes. That is why you have subdivision levels. In 3DC you have Multi-Res that works essentially the same way and for the same reasons. Use it, and you'll be surprised how fast it is. There is a bug with the cache/proxy in this last build or two, so you may want to use build 3.5.07 until that get's ironed out. Hi, With slow I mean it takes a second or 3 before the brush starts to do something (anything, move, fill, smooth), and also it takes a second or 3 before I can pick a new tool. I'm pretty sure the 9800GTX wasn't this sluggish, and I'm tempted to put it back in again just to be sure. Also, the DX version has the same issue. I'll downgrade the drivers, because I was doodling on a bit in 3D-Coat before I put in the GTX460 and it seemed ok. To be continued.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member CoolCGI Posted January 11, 2011 Author Member Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 Ok, issue is solved, apparently it's not always the best thing to update drivers. With the default drivers (258.xx) everything is fine now. 260.xx killed it for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reputable Contributor AbnRanger Posted January 11, 2011 Reputable Contributor Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 Ok, issue is solved, apparently it's not always the best thing to update drivers. With the default drivers (258.xx) everything is fine now. 260.xx killed it for me. That's odd. I've been using 260.99 for a while now. Never noticed anything. Maybe just a bad install the first time or something. I don't have that described behavior on 260.99. It's very fast until I reach a large brush radius or increase the resolution beyond a medium-high amount. That's why I try to keep the model as low res as possible for as long as I can, and only increase it as needed to move on to higher levels of detail (same approach you take in either ZB or MB). At that point, you shouldn't really be using large brush sizes, anyway. But when you do need to make large scale adjustments, working on the lower res proxy is ridiculously fast and you can generally jack up the brush size a good deal. You also have Surface mode at your disposal, which is a good deal faster than Volume mode. It's really just a matter of getting comfortable with the tools/different modes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member CoolCGI Posted January 14, 2011 Author Member Report Share Posted January 14, 2011 I whacked in some more RAM because I still wasn't happy, and that made a huge difference. Now, time to serious delve into 3D-Coat. 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.