Will blender 2.79b get a cycles edition?

At this moment blender 2.8 and 2.79 nightly builds share all of the features and improvement of cycles , like CPU+gpu rendering, principles hair shader,random walk sss,ambient occlusion shader ,smoke and fire shader ,Russian roulette,bievel shader and much more
So my opinion is -by the release of blender 2.8 it will be cool if we have also a version of blender 2.79 with all of the cycles improvement
Like blender 2.79c( c means cycles ):slight_smile:

I am hoping for a 2.79 final release of sorts (especially with cycles improvements since 2.79b) before the switch-over to 2.8, but if that requires too much time or effort from the devs, then meh.

I used for my last project the 2.79.5 experimental version, and It has a lot of improvement on the cycles side. I do not know If it have all of the 2.8, but at least the GPU + CPU that its the most important feature for me.

I’m not so sure CPU + GPU will benefit everyone. My previous system (Phenom X4 965 + GTX680) was slower with the hybrid render than GPU only. I bought a GTX1060 in anticipation of my new build, and the difference was even more noticable.

However, on my new build (Ryzen 1800X + GTX 1060), there is a noticeable improvement.

I’d hate to give false hope to people out there, but unless your CPU and GPU are matched (at least a little), one or the other will out-perform hybrid. The slower of the two will bottleneck the render.

They don’t typically add features to letter releases (bug fixes only). It is more likely that the nightly build is the closest we’ll get to a 2.79 release with cycles improvements. It would be nice to have a release like that as a final sendoff for the 2.7 series, but I bet they have their hands full with 2.8. There is nothing to stop an outside developer from making that kind of build though.

1 Like

Officially a/b/c releases have bug-fixes only but exceptions have been made in the past (2.78c had a bunch of cycles speedups in it) however, for an a/b/c release we generally keep the supported platform identical ,ie build with the same compiler versions, and supporting the same hardware platforms. For the current buildbot builds both of these things have changed, a newer msvc was required because the AO node code hit an avx2 codegen bug that a newer compiler fixed, and on the gpu side, we moved to a newer cuda version as well, which removed support for fermi cards (gtx5xx) and has been removed from our codebase as well . so for all those reasons I doubt you’ll ever see an official 2.79c with the current features from the buildbots.


I find this is worse if your tiles are too big. In the latest builds the small tile = slow GPU rendering issue has also been fixed, so if you set your tile seize to say 32x32, the CPU can only bottle neck the render to a relatively small degree.

I get about a 3x speed increase using GPU and CPU together with a 32x32 tile size - compared to using GPU alone with an optimal tile size for the GPU.

I think that the project called “2.8” should have been named as “3.0” from the beginning. It would have been more suitable to address the drastic changes made in Blender and to have the possibility to have the last+final release derived from 2.7x. This way 2.8 would have been “this has every nice feature from master” -release. Yes, some or many addons would have not worked, but then again there would have been (version-) room for addons-upate, 2.80a or 2.81 etc.

That’s what I asked sometimes ago here: Why can’t we have *only Cycles* upgrades?
A 2.79-final would be nice to have (just before 2.80 gets merged into master) for all those who will be transitioning slowly to 2.80


I don’t think that renaming 2.8 to be 3.0 is really necessary. It’s not like we aren’t getting another stable release with the new features because we ran out of numbers or anything. Their main focus for the stable releases is stability. They won’t release new features on those releases because they may introduce new bugs.

You are basically asking them to rename the nightly build 2.79c. If they were to promote the current master as 2.79c, it wouldn’t become any more stable than it is now. There really is no point to renaming 2.8 or pushing master out as 2.79c, we can already use the nightly build for our projects if we choose to.

To be clear, I don’t really have a problem with getting a 2.79+ edition as a sendoff for the 2.79 series. I just wanted to point out that making a 2.79c or 2.8 this edition wouldn’t serve this purpose.

The only point in having this stable versus experimental build setup is to provide users with a more bug free version of blender to use. If they were to promote what is currently experimental as the next stable it would defeat the whole purpose of having this setup. They would have to promote a final edition as some sort of special edition in order to prevent confusion.

We should also keep the fact that anyone can build blender in mind. It would probably be better if an outside developer made an ultimate 2.79 build that has all the features the current stable 2.79 lacks. That would help prevent confusion that could come from an official 2.79+ edition. They could even mix in experimental stuff from other people’s builds like that radial array modifier, the fracture modifier build improvements, maybe even some UI tweaks.

edit: it looks like there already is a third party build like this:

I agree, the tile size issue does seem to be fixed. Nevertheless, you need a reasonably well matched CPU to GPU to see the benefit. I’m seeing about 2x increase.