Carrara 8 Pro Memory
3dOutlaw
Posts: 2,471
Sooooo...I got C8Pro upgrade this weekend, and was thinking it was going to take advantage of more RAM. (running Win7 64 bit, 8gb ram, I7), but running something like an older howie scene (stoney creek), it drags on camera movement, and is only using around 800mb ram?
Is the main working window not as much RAM related, and more processor related, or video card related?
...or am I missing a setting?
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
If I recall, the working view is more dependent on your video card.
darn... :(
Ah, here we go again! Maybe I should dust off my old troubleshooting thread on Windows memory internals and Carrara...
Any 3D app is going to eat memory for breakfast; so you won't go wrong feeding it plenty of RAM (my box here has 64 GB in it...but it will also be used to run virtual machines for my job).
Kodiak3D is also right though; the video card (and the CPU) are important for chewing through a scene...not just rendering it but also displaying your working area. So you probably want to strike a balance between RAM, CPU and video card and try to get as much of all three as your wallet allows. ;)
One last thing...using Windows' Task Manager to monitor your system performance can be a cruel practical joke... Here's mine (Carrara is not running, but 3 virtual machines and a few Internet Explorers are):
There are better, more accurate ways, to find out what is going on with your box. :coolhmm:
Indeed scene movement and just draging object about etc is mainly a video card video ram issue. So the more video ram memory on your card the better but the card does need to be able to "Use" it all. There are some lower ends cards they market with a lot of vid ram and the card would never be able to process what it needs to be of any value.
So its almost always a cost issue --the more you spend for the vidoe card the better exerience. On one of my machines I recently added a relatively low cost gtx 650 with 2 gb of gdr 5 (very important not gdr3) video ram ----and it has been pretty nice working in Carrara , Modo and houdini scenes.
Laptop...I dont think upgrading the video card is an option.
I have found Carrara pro to be (at the risk of being jumped on) buggy in that area. When Interactive is set to "OpenGL", then yes, full GPU is used (although sometimes does not work correctly/fully) to pan/rotate the display, however, when moving objects, it is primarily CPU. That is on an nVidia GPU with Carrara pro-64 on win7-64
You can check yourself (if you have an nVidia or amd/ati card) using GPU-Z http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/
Man.
After realizing that I wanted to simply live in Carrara, I finally saved up enough (which wasn't much) to build my own Carrara machine.
To do that, I began by looking at what it seems to me that it craves the most. You see, my last few PC builds were always based on Gaming performance. I always felt that if I'd build a great game box, it could then handle everything. Funny thing about that... I don't play games on my computer. lol
It was my understanding that Carrara mostly need cores. The more the better.
Those cores will need RAM to feed them. The GPU is mainly needed for the working window (OpenGL), but it's still important in case you want to perform other PC-related activities. And finally I'd need gobs of storage space.
Using only desktop computer components, I was able to assemble via Newegg.com:
CPU - AMD FX eight cores running 3.1 GHz each (standard. I never overclock)
RAM - wanting to give each core 2GB, I chose 16GB RAM
Motherboard - this needs a motherboard with the proper chip slot for the CPU, and must be capable of handling twice the RAM I start with - which I found easily. Some of you may want to have all of the SLI or whatever - just watch for the features you want.
Video Card - I didn't really need anything special. I'm not a gamer. But the card I ended up getting, while not the latest high-end gamer, nor is it a server-class physics genius, but it has 1GB video RAM and a great clock speed. Again, Newegg fit me with a better unit that what my budget would have allowed.
For storage, I wanted to have my content on my main hard drive. I also know that Windows loves lots of free space for shuffling around files and getting them all organized the way they should be. I was going to set up a RAID0 system for this, but opted for a single 1.5TB 6GB/sec HDD.
Got a great case, Windows 7 64bit etc.,
As you can probably tell by reading this, I skimped. I skimped big time. The whole thing with Windows and Sony Home Movie HD suite was under $1000 USD
Nothing beats the day those parts come in and you get to assemble everything and install Windows and all of your softies!
This low-budget Carrara machine renders firey circles around anything I've ever used! I love it! You know how it usually takes a few seconds to start Windows? Bam! This thing is on! Anyways - with this small investment, which can actually be a pretty big number for me these days, Carrara operates very professionally. Just like it should. I used to have far more problems before I built this and solved it.
Too bad you don't overclock, the main point of getting an AMD FX is easy overclocking for a low price CPU, so that it can compete with high price Intel CPU.
Here are some details on how to go from 3,1 to 4,5GHz for a stable 24/7 overclock, a 50% performance increase if you have any other cooler than the stock one:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-8120-6100-4100_9.html#sect0
Like Dart, I won't trust overclocking...ever. The day you get a single bit-flip problem on the CPU registers because things are too hot will be the day you swear off of it too. ;-)
The best bit, you'll probably never know what the real issue it. It will be random and all but impossible to repro...but just about any running process could be impacted -- from an essential part of Windows, to notepad or calc up to Carrara... No sir; I will not risk it. Stay stable, keep rendering.
3drendero is right with the o/c of the amd fx chip but I have to agree with garstor with rendering. I have rendered some things for 8 days straight nonstop... I think that stresses the cpu enough without adding a little more heat. But it really is just how you feel as both ways have pros and cons .
Well, and I did that with my last PC build. Something tweaked - even though I went with a "Safe" OC setting, and it was running quite stable - but in all actuality, if my PC noticed a huge difference in performance, I surely didn't - a little, bit not worth the hassle. 3.1 is plenty fast - as my rig has been demonstrating day after night after day after night... rinse and repeat.
Not to say that nobody should... but I ain't gonna - not no more! ;)
Like I mentioned above - this build is delightfully and blazingly fast! It really gives me some real performance in Carrara - which is why I built it.
a bit OT but I wanna share with you a strange behaviour found in C8 with Win7 64: sometimes it looks like it makes it difficult to use all the RAM available and dramatically slows down the rendering process expecially with huge files because of this issue. Luckily I fixed it fine by installing super ram and holding its process always active, maybe it was a casuality but since then C8 has been using all the RAM available all the time and handles data in memory better allowing a faster workflow. actually I don't know if it's due to C8 or to my motherboard
Unfortunately; I didn't understand what the problem that you experienced was. Can you please explain things a bit differently?
Also, what is "super ram" and "holding its process always active?" RAM will vary in its size and its clock rates but I'm not sure what makes it super. Also, the Windows Thread Dispatcher will be switching between all the threads in all the processes. You have very limited control (altering the priority of a process for example); but ultimately you cannot make one process "always active."
I have been overclocking since my first PC, a 486 at 80MHz that I got 100% more fps in a game that I played then, and have never run stock since.
I fully understand non-techies that run stock, because you usually need an aftermarket CPU fan, change some numbers in BIOS after googling some recommendations and finally run a stability test tool like OCCT.
OCCT needs an hour to run the same highly unrealistic full CPU load test that Intel uses to verify CPUs and to checkthe cooling.
It is a fantastic tool that shows issue quickly instead of the random crash after many hours of gaming or rendering.
Checked Cinebench numbers for amd fx, should be very similar to Carrara, 40% increase. Like adding 2-3 more cores for free.
Never got permanent damage from o/c, only my Geforce1 had to be overclock a notch less after 3 years of rumnning at its max temp.
I know, you are all non-believers, but nowadays with OCCT, you are missing out on a free upgrade.
No no
I apologize for this Garstor, I mean Pgware Superram ( http://www.pgware.com/products/superram/ ). Actually I never trust in apps like that but since the installation, C8 keeps working faster especially when you stop the rendering and make some refinements on your scene, I mean huge scenes with a lot of items and instances. The active process is superram.exe and without it things appear to go worse. I got to use up to 10 gb of ram on 16 but do not know how and why, and during the rendering cpus are always at 100%. I'd like to know if anyone will have the same response.
p.s. in small scenes I have never appreciated such improvement
High CPU use is totally expected during rendering. 10 GB / 16 GB RAM is not a problem in itself. I don't have enough information to say for sure what is going on here. What other applications (besides Carrara) are you running? Your performance problems are likely paging.
Believe me; I get it. I know why people overclock -- honestly, I think it is less about the "free upgrade" and more about the geeky tinkering involved.
Alas, I don't have the link so that I can properly share this with you; but I was reading Raymond "Old New Thing" Chen's blog a few years back. He related a tale about some bizarre Windows crashes that could not be explained. You know when Windows crashes and it asks to send info to Microsoft? Please send it. I promise you that every single one is analyzed -- I worked on the SQL Server that stores those crash reports.
At any rate, the crash reporting showed a bunch of crashes that could not be traced to any known problem. Eventually, the analysts got permission from Microsoft Legal to contact some of the customers directly (a big no-no usually). It turns out...every single one of them was overclocking...
So the "free upgrade" isn't really accurate. AMD and Intel know that people are going to do this. Geeks tinker. Nothing will stop that. So instead of releasing chips that can go as fast as they can possibly make them -- they intentionally hold back and give geeks some room to play with the clock speeds. So today's chips can "safely" overclocked; but all that is really being done is setting the chip to its originally intended spec. :coolhmm:
I don't want to rain on your parade (as he looks out the windows and sees the miserable weather hanging over Dallas at the moment). Overclock. Enjoy. I just want my computers to be rock-solid stable.
High CPU use is totally expected during rendering. 10 GB / 16 GB RAM is not a problem in itself. I don't have enough information to say for sure what is going on here. What other applications (besides Carrara) are you running? Your performance problems are likely paging.
I totally agree with you garstor but I grabbed superram up in a magazine for free and after installation to try it out, things have gone better and better; I think it's being related to ram management by MB (temp issues) rather than W7 ultimate, anyway now I feel satisfied with it and appear to be stable too
Believe me; I get it. I know why people overclock -- honestly, I think it is less about the "free upgrade" and more about the geeky tinkering involved.
Alas, I don't have the link so that I can properly share this with you; but I was reading Raymond "Old New Thing" Chen's blog a few years back. He related a tale about some bizarre Windows crashes that could not be explained. You know when Windows crashes and it asks to send info to Microsoft? Please send it. I promise you that every single one is analyzed -- I worked on the SQL Server that stores those crash reports.
At any rate, the crash reporting showed a bunch of crashes that could not be traced to any known problem. Eventually, the analysts got permission from Microsoft Legal to contact some of the customers directly (a big no-no usually). It turns out...every single one of them was overclocking...
So the "free upgrade" isn't really accurate. AMD and Intel know that people are going to do this. Geeks tinker. Nothing will stop that. So instead of releasing chips that can go as fast as they can possibly make them -- they intentionally hold back and give geeks some room to play with the clock speeds. So today's chips can "safely" overclocked; but all that is really being done is setting the chip to its originally intended spec. :coolhmm:
I don't want to rain on your parade (as he looks out the windows and sees the miserable weather hanging over Dallas at the moment). Overclock. Enjoy. I just want my computers to be rock-solid stable.
In my case, it is about using my skills to buy at PC at half the price. Actually hate to change CPU fan and waste an hour on assembling it.
Painfully aware of the random crashes that are caused by overclocks set to above 100%, it was the way to find out the max back in the days before OCCT and it took hours. One PC kept corrupting the Registry when I wanted to quickly find the max, but again, this shit happens above the 100% limit that nowadays can be found quickly with OCCT.
It is a free upgrade, since the other option is to buy the CPU model that runs at full speed from factory at twice the price.
Trust me, also want rock-solid stable computers, but that does not dismiss overclocking when done properly, if you are budget limited.
thank to Garstor I I've been thinking more and more about the strange ram issue, so I have made up my mind to update the bios and actually the problem seems solved now; however, the W7 performance index has remained virtually unchanged, then it means that the problem was a "lack of optimization" between the MB and windows and not a bad handling of energy saving as I had supposed
I'm not sure if this has or has not been mentioned when it comes to monitoring more detailed accurate status of memory usage in Windows.I currently use Process Explorer from Mark Russinovich, a Senior Fellow at Microsoft and creator of the SysInternal Tools. In several of his webcasts, he jokes that Process Explorer is the "real" task manager. Which I agree with and have personally replaced task manager with Process Explorer on all of my Windows boxes and workstations.
You can download Process Explorer from Microsoft's technet site.
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896653
Like Dart, I won't trust overclocking...ever. The day you get a single bit-flip problem on the CPU registers because things are too hot will be the day you swear off of it too. ;-)
The best bit, you'll probably never know what the real issue it. It will be random and all but impossible to repro...but just about any running process could be impacted -- from an essential part of Windows, to notepad or calc up to Carrara... No sir; I will not risk it. Stay stable, keep rendering.
But if you go and read how the experts do the overclocking and don't try to go top fuel just a good increase it can ce done safely and cost effectivly.
Believe me; I get it. I know why people overclock -- honestly, I think it is less about the "free upgrade" and more about the geeky tinkering involved.
Alas, I don't have the link so that I can properly share this with you; but I was reading Raymond "Old New Thing" Chen's blog a few years back. He related a tale about some bizarre Windows crashes that could not be explained. You know when Windows crashes and it asks to send info to Microsoft? Please send it. I promise you that every single one is analyzed -- I worked on the SQL Server that stores those crash reports.
At any rate, the crash reporting showed a bunch of crashes that could not be traced to any known problem. Eventually, the analysts got permission from Microsoft Legal to contact some of the customers directly (a big no-no usually). It turns out...every single one of them was overclocking...
So the "free upgrade" isn't really accurate. AMD and Intel know that people are going to do this. Geeks tinker. Nothing will stop that. So instead of releasing chips that can go as fast as they can possibly make them -- they intentionally hold back and give geeks some room to play with the clock speeds. So today's chips can "safely" overclocked; but all that is really being done is setting the chip to its originally intended spec. :coolhmm:
I don't want to rain on your parade (as he looks out the windows and sees the miserable weather hanging over Dallas at the moment). Overclock. Enjoy. I just want my computers to be rock-solid stable.
The part about them doing it to give over-clockers room is not true. Processors are built by engineers. These are people who build in safety margins that are typically 50% over what is possible. This gives them extra margin of safety. But it is also about money back in the 386 and 486 days Intel dropped the 386's because it didn't want their performance to challenge the 486's. So other companies actually found niches in those days creating the low end systems and taking them to the limit.
Speed limits are like making race cars if you try to go top fuel you are subject to crash and burn. But just building a peppy street car it can last just as long as a mom and pop ride.
As to the problems if 10,000 people over-clock does it mean that all of them are doing it correctly? Are they playing it safe? Maybe the over-clocker problems developed in the machines that were made by those that tried to run on the razors edge that really didn't know how.
Now I am just being the devil’s advocate here. I just think it's like anything if handled responsible it can be a good thing. On the other side I am about to build a new machine that I have decided to go with a Xeon processor system. It can't be over-clocked...
I don't know much about the hardware topics being discussed, but your comment about dragging camera movement sounds familiar. When I first used PhilW's "Carrara Realistic Seas", the camera movement in the Assembly Room was incredibly slow (just normal preview, not textured). Its a Core i7 Win7 64 bit machine with a good amount of RAM and a good video card, and its never done that before. It took maybe a minute or two for a small camera angle rotation, basically unworkable. I ended up asking PhilW (the vendor) if that sounded right, he said no and didn't understand the problem, but offered a workaround. In the "View" mode for the "realistic seas" item, I switched from "mesh" to "bounding box" and everything went back to fast response. Its not really a problem visualizing in the Assembly room, the bounding box gives the placement OK.
FWIW.