[w i l l]

I agree with... it's football and not soccer and yes it's a bore. That's about it really.

[choo-chee]

I think different. Other software companies show great quality results with their engines. What I like with MR is great quality with short learning curve. What I don't like is the need to render lots and lots and lots of time to get something that needs noise ninja. I don't care about 100% correct (who can tell it anyway ...? I've seen other images than MR that look 100% correct.) if I can get 85% correct and 25% of the time - I take it ... since some post will mostly make it 100% or at least 95%. So I vote for speed. How the speed will come, I don't care and don't think it matters, since lots of us are already using expensive hardware (we had no choice after getting addicted to MR 1...) and that's why NL has to put out something quick-because that's how things go in the software market: people always look for newer, updated, whatever version that does it better.

[zdeno]

good point but it seems like there is in NL interest to have slowest render engine. Then they can benefits from all this &^&*#% rendernodes policy.

Just think of it. If maxwell would be as fast as eg. vray then which of archvis artists buy few PCs and extra rendernode licenses to save deadlines? non , just one powerfull PC on xeons is good enough so there are no extra money to earn.

It looks like when maxwell 3.0 with GPU support arrives there will be software lock pay us one time You will have 50% speed if you want +10% speed pay us again.

I said this once on this forum, but users are punished to felt in love with this software.
but when You compliled so slow software without any chance to optymize settings or control quality/speed ratio at least have (balls/mercy) to let users render on any machine one can get. There would be many more splendid renders in gallery.
From maxwell 2.0 release there is just big silence in WIP and Gallery threads comparing to beta/1.0 stage.

[Mihai]

A relevant question perhaps Has anybody rendered yet their typical archviz scene in any of the GPU renderers currently available?

[wagurto]

I am ready to switch to gpu render but I am really afraid to invest in a new software and new hardware (very expensive hardware) just to know that a few month later new video cards with a lot of ram, faster and cheaper would be available. For now i think I would be waiting to see what happen. I hope NL comes out with a nice sorprise and the video cards are super powerful and super cheap.

[rusteberg]

A relevant question perhaps Has anybody rendered yet their typical archviz scene in any of the GPU renderers currently available?

ha! touche!
cpu speed will be equal with gpu once the 'ecosystem' of gpu has been established..... we'll see....in the mean time, just go rub it out.
p.s. what is command for accent over "e"

[choo-chee]

I said this once on this forum, but users are punished to felt in love with this software.
but when You compliled so slow software without any chance to optymize settings or control quality/speed ratio at least have (balls/mercy) to let users render on any machine one can get. There would be many more splendid renders in gallery.
From maxwell 2.0 release there is just big silence in WIP and Gallery threads comparing to beta/1.0 stage.

I totally agree with zdeno. If there's no real improvement in speed (and I don't mean, 10-15% or even 30% on "some scenes"), something like 10X faster, ppl will just give up on maxwell. others are showing great results - faster and faster. and most of us are small studios that cannot afford renders that take 5 days just to get clean image that vray or arion get overnight.

[MS]

p.s. what is command for accent over "e"

If you mean "é" it is Alt + 0233 - (at least on Windows...)

[Half Life]

I totally agree with zdeno. If there's no real improvement in speed (and I don't mean, 10-15% or even 30% on "some scenes"), something like 10X faster, ppl will just give up on maxwell. others are showing great results - faster and faster. and most of us are small studios that cannot afford renders that take 5 days just to get clean image that vray or arion get overnight.

You can get 10x faster very easily with Maxwell -- but if you are not just looking for 10x faster... you are looking for 10x faster without much financial investment (which is not the same thing) or a noticeable drop in quality (which will not happen).

It's nice to dream, but it's not nice to hold others responsible to make your dreams real.

Best,
Jason.

[choo-chee]

Well that's the point .... the new license policy is what making me stay with 1. With 1 I got 4 full licenses for about 1000$ (if I remember correct) and than I bought 4 strong PC's (another 7000$) and got good results (and used some noise removing stuff). Now I will have to pay much more - and as a returning client ? I'd rather buy another weapon for the same price - if not less since I see that speed is still an issue.

[Tok_Tok]

Before GPU rendering was even possible (CUDA), nobody would dare to ask for a speed increase of 10x (or even higher). But now the competitors are all showing just that, we want it too.
It's pretty much as choo-chee said and many people dreamt about this, including me. Now that it's proven possible.. well let's just say we are eager to get it.

The point in this post, it's understandable people want this. If rendering will go 10x faster, it would be a BIG relief!

[Half Life]

Hey man, it's kinda hard to take you seriously boo-hooing about the price of upgrade when you list your expensive lifestyle right below your posts

But seriously, 1 Upgrade plus 3 Rendernode Upgrades is just over $1000 -- certainly less than you pay for GPU application plus GPU worthy card. I don't see the issue here -- plus they recently had the sale where you could have gotten a couple FREE Rendernodes with an upgrade.

Seems to me they have bent over backwards to accommodate you (and people like you).

I suppose you are also bent out of shape the the "strong" computers you bought for $7000 are no longer even close to top of the line anymore -- where is your outrage that the company that makes those parts are not giving you free(or greatly reduced prices on) upgrades?

Best,
Jason.

[Half Life]

Hey Tok_Tok,

Like I said dreaming is nice, and maybe they can make some part of those dreams come true but getting antagonistic over it is juvenile... this is why a "wish-list" exists.

If you honestly believe the grass is greener in GPU-land then don't just talk about it... go over and USE it -- I bet you'll be back soon enough.

GPU is a marketing gimmick, and I for one want REAL performance not marketing gimmicks.

Next Limit is a damn good company that makes great software at a reasonable price and puts alot of effort into customer service... I don't see what is not to love.

Best,
Jason.

[choo-chee]

well, I don't think so. For me, the best new features of maxwell where back in 1.5 when I got displacement and lens bloom/glare. What changed since then? for me, not enough to pay the same price again... be it ver. 1 or 2, the results I get in my work (archviz) are still very very good, nickel looks good, marble looks great, emitters emit perfectly... so the only news for me will be speed so I'll say, "I don't buy another motorcycle now, I wanna buy the GPU based new maxwell now".

[Half Life]

Ah, now that is a reasonable response -- if the features they have offered don't tickle your fancy then wait until they do... I've been waiting several version of Photoshop for exactly that reason (Although no need to tell adobe this, my wallet speaks for me)

I would say color multi-light, better color emitters, global bump(killer feature), layer-based material system, better network rendering, much faster/better caustics(glass is usable now), and huge improvements in IBL are all excellent reasons for some to upgrade...

Best,
Jason.