Maxwell Render | Official public forum

not
have someone really experienced this... or is better to upgrade ram from 1032 to 2064?
please i have a deadline and i have to make my decision asap

Hd option, as far as i know is for rendering very high res when you may not have sufficient physical memory to do so.
Additionally, maxwell is in beta stages so i wouldn't use it for commercial projects with tight deadlines.

philipbruton wrote:Hd option, as far as i know is for rendering very high res when you may not have sufficient physical memory to do so.
Additionally, maxwell is in beta stages so i wouldn't use it for commercial projects with tight deadlines.

it is just what i have to do.. render high res
anyway from your answer it seems u have never really experienced that option

I havew tried -d -hd command line for rendering, but in my experience it took ages to even start rendering, mind this was with quite heavy scenes, it might work better with less poly's than with heavy scene's, why not doa few tests of your own !

making test already... what i can say is YES IT REALLY IMPROVES...
i also put ht:12 as someone adviced
before using hd option 3h and samplel level 0
after 30 mintes 2,9 samples

... the small preview (render converge to this) doesnt work.... does it?

It's not an accurate representation

philipbruton wrote:It's not an accurate representation

dont know what u want to know more...
with hd option for now is rendering almost 3 time more samples in one third of the time
can give more detail news when render will be finished .. in 24 hours

giacob wrote:... the small preview (render converge to this) doesnt work.... does it?

I was refering to what you said here

and i was refering to the small preview window in "render option", wondering if it works as rendering with hd option on.. it would seems not

updating... sample level 4,4 at 1h 10 minutes
so, if iam not wrong, this is 12th time faster than without hd option

i don't think that giacob's conclusion is correct. it might be in his special case with this one file - but not in general.

e.g. i had one that took ages just to start (30min. without even showing a picture) with -hd and without hd it got at sample 5 in 45 min.

A brief explanation about -hd option.

HD option has been created to render resolutions that not enough RAM is available. So the first conclusion is that is not possible to compare renders with -hd and with hd option.

However, in some resolutions ( estimations are resolutions bigger than PAL ) hd option CAN BE faster than without -hd option.

Anyway the -hd option has a limitation. The update display is not as fast as normal render option. It can take a lot of time, but it does not means that it is not working. If you want to do AN ACCURATE comparation I recommend:

a ) Launch a render with -hd option. Stop the render after get some image updates.

b ) Launch the same render without -hd option the same time used by the -hd option.

c ) Compare both images.


I hope it helps.
Best Regards

is the "ht:12" command not suppose to be "th", to set #threads ?

philipbruton wrote: is the "ht:12" command not suppose to be "th"

yep. -th:

the render i launched was 2500 x 1200.. when i launched it without hd option and th:2 in 3,49hours riched just 0,0 sample level... with hd and th:12 in the same time has riched 7,49 sample level
now i dont know this improvement to wich of the 2 option is due to ( hd or th:12) but surely that has been a great improvement with the same identical render changing this options
i precise that another render at the same risolution i am rendring now on another pc is showing the same improvement......
it happen to be mi luky day?