Maxwell Render | Official public forum

hoaaaw. Impressive.

http://www.randomcontrol.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5680
http://www.randomcontrol.com/wiki/index ... er_machine

nice machine ..

is arion still being developed ? they did not update anything on the homepage in about 3/4 years..

exactly... I was looking at their solutions before buying maxwell... but the poor communication, a exagerated price and a lack competence
on the engine rendering due to the GPU architecture was for me the reason not buying it

actually I don't guess they're incompetent .. I'd not say this.

I think it's just strange to me that you have to buy the software to try it. To have no access to a demo is just bad marketing.

No changes on their homepage does not look good either in the eyes of a customer.

Well, the stuff that actually works on GPU looks okay to me. Especially for arch viz (which has no need for all features of a full production renderer), I don't see too many points which are against GPU rendering, but that's certainly up to the user.

Did you read the article on GPU rendering in the new issue of 3d World ?

As far as my tests have gone, FIRE is a great tool for previewing, but cannot hold up for final renders, so I will continue to envy anyone who can actually use GPU rendering, even with some limitations which come with it.

No, Fry is a good piece of software, I am sure about that (the images speak themselves)
But making from one product several and ask to pay them is another example of bad marketing.
I dont readed the article I will take a look. I dreamt of a GPU solutions without limits but comments for luxology and nexlimit tells me that in the unbiased world they (NL) made the good choice.

You might give Octane a try as GPU based render engine...

but otherwise: if you had enough money for such a machine you could ignore the graphics cards and build a small renderfarm for Maxwell and use this to increase your renderspeed.

buy more hardware ?

this is a frustrating discussion ..

Whoa...

Has anyone tried to work out how much that cost to build?

nope, but it certainly costs wayyy less than a machine for iRay, where you MUST use quadros.

I'm using Iray just fine with a regular GeForce card, although Quadros are recommended. But they are not a necessity, it would also rule out 80% of the target userbase.

Ben

I've just seen in the reality server installation docs that they "officially" support just the quadro (+ higher) lines.

I'm not totally sure if this is all true for iRay or if you develop for reality server, but the risk is just too high for a standard user to run into issues, that's whay I meant by the "MUST".

RealityServer 3.0 Installation Guide:

Graphics Card
Graphics cards are optional; they are needed only if the hardware renderer (GPU or SKETCH) or the iray
renderer is used by the applications.
The following graphics cards are supported:
NVIDIA Quadro Plex 2200 S4
NVIDIA Quadro Plex 2200 D2
NVIDIA Quadro FX 5800
NVIDIA Quadro FX 5600
NVIDIA Quadro FX 5500
NVIDIA Quadro FX 4800
NVIDIA Quadro FX 4700 X2
NVIDIA Quadro FX 4600
NVIDIA Quadro FX 3800
NVIDIA Quadro FX 3700
NVIDIA Tesla
NVIDIA Tesla M1060
NVIDIA Tesla M2050


System Requirements— Graphics Card
NVIDIA Tesla C2050
The Developer Edition of RealityServer also supports NVIDIA Geforce graphics cards if they support
shader model 3 but they might only support a subset of the rendering capabilities of RealityServer.

and of course - as you say - it would rule out 80% of the users who use gamer cards ...

btw. are you familiar with any missing features ?

is instancing, SSS, motion blur and depth of field working ?

how does iRay handle the case when the data set exceeds the graphics card memory ? [ arion for example then cannot render the picture. ]

what other limitations do you see ?

Take a looksie here: http://area.autodesk.com/blogs/shane/the_iray_faq

thanks a bunch for that link !!!

well .. if I worked with max ..