Cycles Development Updates

this was like christmas, very excited.

seems like non of us saw this coming, but I’m happy for once to have guessed wrong :slight_smile:

1 Like

For this and for the future, we definitely need some sort of CyclesLeaks® site!

Thanks you, I got the branch to build but got errors in Cuda and Optix kernels.
Nice WE for testing.

Cheers, mib

1 Like

Daaaaaamn… hype was worth it :smiley:

1 Like

yw, I tried building it too, but got infinitely stuck on hpdf_destination.h
Prolly just a one time thing. :slight_smile:

Hi, I make a new thread about CyclesX for testing.

I guess there are other Cycles development in the next month, at least I hope so.

Cheers, mib

2 Likes

cycles is 10 years old :open_mouth:
That means I’ve been using blender for 10 years. Wow what a journey.

4 Likes

Guys, I hope you don’t mind that I’ve moved the recent Cycles-X related posts to the new dedicated thread about that. I think Cycles-X deserves its own discussion. Come join us there:

9 Likes

A post was merged into an existing topic: Cycles-X

Hi, Cycles development goes further:

https://developer.blender.org/D11088

I will check the patch on top of CyclesX, if I can get it to work.

Cheers, mib
EDIT: Cant get anything meaningful out of it. :thinking:

1 Like

Does anyone have a performance regression when using Optix vs CUDA? I was experimenting with 2.93, (we are still on 2.79), testing out both Optix and CUDA, and Optix was around 30-40% slower then CUDA?

I thought reading around that CUDA was supposed to be slower than Optix. Maybe its the scenes we do.

1 Like

Optix is slower then Cuda if you are using a 10xx graphics card or lower, it needs those RTX GPUs to take advantage of their RT cores / Tensor cores.

Some pretty impressive test with the experimental texture caching branch.

14 Likes