Jump to content
[[Template core/front/profile/profileHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About eebling

  • Rank

Personal Information

  • Name
  • Location
    santa monica ca

Recent Profile Visitors

1,706 profile views
  1. Hey, I took advantage of some of the price drops on GPU's lately with the release of the 20 series cards from Nvidia. I Got an evga 1070ti ftw2 card for 429$( also has a 20$ MIR to drop final cost to 409$). I put this into my machine that has had an evga 1080ti FE card in it since I built it a year and a half ago. I wanted to share the "real world" test results in case anyone else is wondering if it is worth it to pick up another card. The PC is running win10pro, 64gb ddr4 ram, intel i7 6850k 3.6ghz, primary drive is a samsung 960 evo m.2 ssd and a secondary crucial ssd, 1000 watt evga gold G3 psu, Houdini 16.5.268 and redshift 2.5.48 ( i think ) etc... I ran a redshift test on a scene that is a decent size pyro sim, rendered 60 frames at full HD with fairly hq setting. With just the 1080ti in the pc, the render took 38min17seconds. With the addition of the 1070ti, the render took 25min26seconds for the 60 frame sequence. Adding the second card took almost 13 minutes of the sequence render time. I would say it is worth the roughly $400 bucks. With the option of enabling/disabling gpu's in the redshift plugin options, I ran a single frame of the render and here was the result: with just the 1080ti - 26 seconds for the first frame. With just the 1070ti - 34s, with a little boost to the gpu settings on the 1070ti using the evga overclock software - 32 seconds( not enough for me to want to keep it overclocked beyond how it arrived). With both gpu's enabled - 15 seconds. I think I would be willing to buy another 1070ti while the sale/rebate is going on if it will reduce the render time a further 13 minutes. I'm assuming it would, but maybe I'm not adding something up right here. If adding one 1070ti to the machine cut 13 minutes off the render, wouldn't the addition of another 1070ti take another 13 minutes off the render time.? It would be incredible to drop the test sequence render time down from 38 min to 12 min for roughly $800 in hardware upgrades.! I ran all the PC's parts through a component checker online and even If I add a 3rd card, it should still have about a 100watts of buffer on the 1000w psu. Would probably want to add some more/better case fans if increasing the GPU count from one to three.! Anyways, thats what adding an extra card did for me. E
  2. Ah cool, I will have to check it out. Thanks E
  3. Ah haha, now I'm seeing something that looks like the rbd parts. Lets see what is inside. Plays a whole lot faster too without the flip E
  4. Hmm, so far the attached scene file only has the beginning "water" part of the video that is posted, the multiple spheres being launched into the flip fluid. I don't see anything in the file that are the letters or the rbd sticks towards the end of the video. Should have guessed since the scene file was called "water_rbd_tests" that it would be the water part. I'll keep looking. Thanks
  5. Looks like there is a link on his vimeo page. will have to see what's inside.
  6. One of those would probably have the right stuff in the setup. Is there a hip file that comes along with the video somewhere.?
  7. Hi, I have been searching for a solution to this RBD problem for a few days now and can't seem to get this to work fully. I attached a scene file with some descriptions inside to help explain. The basic notion here is to dynamically create spring constraints when some packed rbd cubes get close enough to a collision sphere that is at the origin. I can't seem to get the constraints to work unless they are created/exist on frame one. I create them inside a sopnet in the dopnet and use a sop solver to get them into the constraint network setup. Haven't tried creating constraints like this before so might be totally wrong in this approach. This setup works as long as all constraints are there on frame one, and then in the sop solver I set a high strength if the cube is close enough to the sphere, which semi locks the cube to the contact point on the sphere, which is what I want. However if you change the search radius on the wrangle node in the sopnet so that only the closest cubes to the sphere have constraints on frame one, then only those constraints ever evaluate. Any help sorting this out would be appreciated. I couldn't find anything in other posts to help with this. Most posts I saw were about dynamically deleting constraints and not creating them after the sim is going. Thanks E RBD_CONSTRAINT_TESTING_CLEAN_V2.hip
  8. Ya, I'm unfortunately not too impressed with the price/performance that is being reported. Some of the benchmarks I have seen could be completely false, but one "overclocker" did some benchmark on supposedly a new 2080ti and it was a 5% higher score than the 1080ti. And if I recall, someone had said that the 1080ti was only about a 20% increase in performance over a 1070ti. If that is true, you could buy 3 1070ti's for the price of one 2080ti and get a lot more render power, minus the 3 gb difference in ram.... E
  9. Ah interesting. 22GB sounds very nice, haha. Im guessing for the time being, I will wait for the 1080ti's to drop even more in price and get another one or 2 for my main work/render-station and i need a small form factor card to enable another machine to be able to render redshift, so might just plug a 1060ti in that one, better than the no graphics card it has now . That NVlink you mention, is that not available on the 1080/pascal based cards.? thanks E
  10. Ya, I'm sure the ram limit is something they are doing on purpose to make you go to the pro level cards if you want to enter the 16gb and up playing field. All the info I usually see about tensor cores relates to AI and machine learning like you mentioned, so wasn't sure if that kind of processing even was a factor with gpu rendering. I have a feeling that a GTX2080ti isn't going to be a massive speed improvement over a 1080ti in regards to gpu rendering, but I hope time will tell and prove me wrong.! I would love to speed up render times and not have to spend too much to do so.
  11. Hi, Has anyone seen much information about the latest Nvidia cards that will be coming out end September in relation to GPU rendering.? I have been waiting for the specs on these cards for months, and finally they have been released, but of course all the articles so far that I have seen are still somewhat speculation on performance and "leaks" of specs that may or may not be real and all are geared towards gaming. I must say, some of these leaked tests aren't too impressive, like 5% performance increases on the new GTX2080ti over the old 1080ti, but I would have to assume that's because the software doing the tests isn't taking advantage of the RT and tensor cores. I am disappointed that on a $1200 card, they still only have the same 11GB of ram as the 1080ti has, although it is faster/newer ram, I was hoping for more ram.! Have there been any statements made by redshift or otoy about what speed improvements will come form having a card with "RT and tensor cores"..? Just wondering because I will be needing another 2 gfx cards in the next month, and the 10 series cards are having great price drops recently, some 1070ti's are as low as $399. If these new flashy RT cores are going to be a huge performance gain, then I will probably hold out for at least the 2070's. Any info would be great. Thanks. E
  12. RBD Glue Constraint Mysteries....

    That's Great. Exactly the end result I was trying to get to. Thanks for editing the file and re posting.
  13. Well, I went out into the RBD Constraint Forest Unprepared, and now I am lost in the woods. Any help would be appreciated. I'm trying to do something that should be fairly simple, and most likely is, but I don't have the combination to the Houdini lock to get the setup to work. In the example file I have an rbd box that has 10 faces per side that have been made into unique faces. They have glue constraints holding them together and are a rbdPacked object in my dopnet. There is a low rez smoke sim that pushes this rbd box into a collision sphere that is above it, and when the geometry collides with the sphere, some of the glue constraints start to break. All I wish to do is apply either a gravity force or a popForce to these rbd pieces that have lost their Glue constraint. I want the main chunk of the rbd box that still has a bunch of pieces glued together to keep on moving with no gravity or popforce. I might be trying to go about this the complete "wrong" way since I have very little experience with Glue constraints, But I see data in the geometry spreadsheet while in the dop net called ConstraintGeometry and this has a primitive group called "broken" which contains the glue constraints that have been broken due to collision. I would think I would want to try finding out which rbd piece that broken constraint belongs to and then use that to create an "applyGravity" group of rbd pieces so that I can do what I want to do. I just don't know how to do this in dops. Is this something that needs to be done in a sopSolver or geometry wrangle or....? I'm not to familiar with how to read data from the ConstraintGeometry and apply it to the Geometry data. When I middle click over my rbdsolver, it shows the main rbdpackedobj1 with Geometry and then CosntraintGeometry below it. They are like separate entities and I'm not sure the best way to get access to both in one node, if this is even the way to do it.? For example if I change a geometry wrangle to point to "ConstraintGeometry" instead of the default "Geometry", I can then read and manipulate data on the ConstraintGeometry, but then don't have access to the main rbd "Geometry" that I am use to normally working with. Like everything in Houdini, there are probably dozens of ways to go about this, I tried about 20 yesterday, without ever getting one to fully work. I ran out of search phrase ideas to try throwing at google after about the 6th hour of searching. Maybe using some of those copyData and applyData nodes would get the ConstraintGeometry data onto the Geometry stream so they can both be read in one wrangle or maybe that too is a completely wrong direction to take. I don't want to speculate any further since you could try things for a week and not get it to work if it just isn't the right approach. I love Houdini for its vastness and unbelievable tool set, but man, it can destroy you if you don't know how to do what you want to do, and can't articulate it well enough for a search string.! Thanks for any help. E rbd_constraints_v01.hip
  14. Ah cool, I wasn't aware that volumes couldn't render at all "out of core". That could influence the decision a little bit. I have rendered some pretty large vdb smoke sims on the 1080ti without any problems, I wonder what the vram usage was during that render. Might have to go back and render a frame to see if I can see the amount of ram being used in the task manager performance area in windows to give me an idea of how close I am getting to the 11gb limit. Thanks for the info E
  15. it just flows out... haha , so you say if a card runs out of memory, the render bucket fails on that card. I was sure I read that redshift will switch to computer ram to continue the render if the card's memory is exhausted.? Is this incorrect.? Or am I interpreting your response wrong.? Thanks E