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
© 2025 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
It turns on the Magic Go Faster button.
Not really, it's the Opti X very fast ray tracer. It speeds up most renders. I'm not sure why they made it optional.
Because it doesn't, speed up most renders that is. Probably depends on the render and the rig, but these are the figures I got for my awesome, clever test image (which I put together to run the new leather shaders this morning and then found the OptiX button).
OptiX Prime
Total Rendering Time: 2 hours 24.51 seconds
Iray INFO - module:category(IRAY:RENDER): 1.0 IRAY rend info : Device statistics:
Iray INFO - module:category(IRAY:RENDER): 1.0 IRAY rend info : CUDA device 0 (GeForce GTX 780): 3667 iterations, 19.638s init, 7182.504s render
Iray INFO - module:category(IRAY:RENDER): 1.0 IRAY rend info : CPU (7 threads): 351 iterations, 12.816s init, 7202.918s render
No OptiX Prime
Total Rendering Time: 2 hours 19.2 seconds
Iray INFO - module:category(IRAY:RENDER): 1.0 IRAY rend info : Device statistics:
Iray INFO - module:category(IRAY:RENDER): 1.0 IRAY rend info : CUDA device 0 (GeForce GTX 780): 2532 iterations, 19.622s init, 7181.224s render
Iray INFO - module:category(IRAY:RENDER): 1.0 IRAY rend info : CPU (7 threads): 290 iterations, 12.859s init, 7197.479s render
There's no figures for not using the GPU because, frankly, that takes forever.
This is a chunky render. 3000x4242 pixels. Of particular interest here (since 5 seconds difference is not really worth mentioning) is that the OptiX render produced more iterations, which is why it took a little longer. I can't see a notable difference in image quality.
Greetings,
O_o!
So you're saying that turning on OptiX got you 31% more iterations. Your image was bounded by time, which is why they both end at 7200s (2 hours).
Iteration speed is everything, and that's what you gained. Your numbers prove that OptiX is significantly faster...
-- Morgan
I stand corrected. I've been expecting (and generally seeing) the 95% convergence threshold being reached in beta. I don't think I've ever hit the 2 hour limit before.
Now I'll have to run some of the really fast renders using both to see what happens. D'Oh!
(Most amused by 'New Member' identifier. Though it must be admitted I don't use the forums much. :))
I stand corrected. I've been expecting (and generally seeing) the 95% convergence threshold being reached in beta. I don't think I've ever hit the 2 hour limit before.
Now I'll have to run some of the really fast renders using both to see what happens. D'Oh!
(Most amused by 'New Member' identifier. Though it must be admitted I don't use the forums much. :))Or extend your render time setting beyond 2 hours. LOL.
I think I'd prefer 10-20 minutes and get the results faster. :)
Okay, and the results are in...
GPU
Total Rendering Time: 13 minutes 35.34 seconds
Iray INFO - module:category(IRAY:RENDER): 1.0 IRAY rend info : Device statistics:
Iray INFO - module:category(IRAY:RENDER): 1.0 IRAY rend info : CUDA device 0 (GeForce GTX 780): 435 iterations, 22.586s init, 784.332s render
Iray INFO - module:category(IRAY:RENDER): 1.0 IRAY rend info : CPU (7 threads): 42 iterations, 15.679s init, 785.585s render
OptiX+GPU
Total Rendering Time: 10 minutes 30.63 seconds
Iray INFO - module:category(IRAY:RENDER): 1.0 IRAY rend info : Device statistics:
Iray INFO - module:category(IRAY:RENDER): 1.0 IRAY rend info : CUDA device 0 (GeForce GTX 780): 459 iterations, 22.564s init, 595.125s render
Iray INFO - module:category(IRAY:RENDER): 1.0 IRAY rend info : CPU (7 threads): 38 iterations, 15.646s init, 606.683s render
So SickleYield is right. It is, indeed, the magic-go-faster button. (Because there doesn't seem to be a logical reason for it to go faster, OptiX Prime is just an API, but go faster it does.)
Oh yeah, YMMV.
It turns on the Magic Go Faster button.
Not really, it's the Opti X very fast ray tracer. It speeds up most renders. I'm not sure why they made it optional.
Where can I find the OptiX setting please? :-)
It turns on the Magic Go Faster button.
Not really, it's the Opti X very fast ray tracer. It speeds up most renders. I'm not sure why they made it optional.
Where can I find the OptiX setting please? :-)Please excuse my custom tab positions. LOL.
Question, should someone know the answer...
The positioning of the option implies that OptiX Prime is only used on photoreal renders (i.e. production ones) and I'd have thought it would be more use in interactive (or at least it would be as much use).
Is it right that it only applies to photoreal renders?
Is there a reason it's not applied to interactive renders.
It is a photoreal only option. Its an option that controls the underlying acceleration structure, not whether Optix in general is used. Its off by default because it trades memory for speed and memory is a precious resource on video cards.
Interactive does not provide the option but that does not mean Optix tech is not being used, just that its not an option.
It is a photoreal only option. Its an option that controls the underlying acceleration structure, not whether Optix in general is used. Its off by default because it trades memory for speed and memory is a precious resource on video cards.
Interactive does not provide the option but that does not mean Optix tech is not being used, just that its not an option.Thanks. My mistake.
I've just upgraded to iRAY and wanted to find out why renders are slower when I have both CPU and my GPU's switched on. Switching on the CPU adds about 50% to the rendering time. I have a fairly new and fast Intel CPU so I thought it would increase the rendering speed of my GPU's with it switched on. For now I have switched off my CPU and switched on Optix Prime which definitely speeds up GPU rendering a bit. Is there a way to have both CPU and GPU switched on so that it increases rendering speed rather than decreases it?
I read elsewhere on the forums that CPU-only Iray render speeds were comparable to that of 3Delight, but that's apparently not the case at all.
I have a Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2GHz and 16GB of RAM, so I'd like to think it's somewhat decent, but a simple test render with one figure, one room, and one light source takes more than an hour with Iray, whereas it would only take 90 seconds with 3Delight. Yikes.
Where? It's highly unlikely that an engine like iray would give its full photorealistic results at the same speed that 3Delight does.
You're trading speed of production for image quality, just as you do with other alternative engines (like the LuxRender interfaces and iClone's bridge to Indigo).
On the other side of the spectrum try using UE2 with GI Bounce turned on and the HDRI that Iray uses by default on V6HD or Olympia HD, your favorite AprilYSH hair and your favorite clothing in 3Delight compared to the same character in Iray. Don't forget to drop in a spotlight and make it invisible to turn off the headlamp and set the render time SubD up to 3. Please let us know the results.
There are extremes on both ends of the scale, on average, CPU mode, equal scenes use equal render times.
There is an issue if using both GPU and CPU.
If using just GPU, the CPU is still used (2 cores out of 4 on my setup), so there must be some need for communication between GPU and CPU when rendering.
If both GPU and CPU are being used, those communications are being interrupted and the GPU will not be fully utilized (GPU usage jumps between 97% and 35% on my setup).
I am not sure as to why so much CPU usage is needed for GPU rendering. I have been meaning to have a look at another implementation of iray to see if the same, but not had time yet.
Where? It's highly unlikely that an engine like iray would give its full photorealistic results at the same speed that 3Delight does.
You're trading speed of production for image quality, just as you do with other alternative engines (like the LuxRender interfaces and iClone's bridge to Indigo).
Hmm, taking a look at the post again and I seem to have misread "GPU" as "CPU". *whistles innocently*
That being said, I didn't expect it to produce insanely good results within a few minutes though, just thought it would be something along the lines of the Iray interface having a quality vs. speed (or the tortoise vs. hare) slider, but with the lowest quality setting still producing comparable results to a 3Delight render in the same or shorter amount of time.
You see, this is why I started wearing glasses all the time. :D
You see, this is why I started wearing glasses all the time. :D
I do believe the problem is I don't see very well at all! :p
I have a GTX Titan X and render with Iray take long. Just load "Victoria 6 naked with hair" and is very excessive rendering time.
I have also OCDS and make the tender in 30 sec. 1000 samples. Advanced configurations have enabled GPU. I do not know because they say Iray is the best and fast, I have bad experience not say the same.
How long was the excessive time? How was your scene lit, and what were your Tone Mapping settings?
1. I loaded "Victoria 6 naked with hair"
2. I loaded "Iray Optimized Genesis 2 Female MAT" to "Victoria 6"
3. Double click on the face of Victoria 6 for zooming in on the face.
4. Render see images:
Tone Mapping settings > http://imgbox.com/e37w9hVx
CPU + GPU TItan X > http://imgbox.com/R0kRRQFZ < 4:59 min. of rendering.
Only GPU Titan X > http://imgbox.com/pD5dDkha < 3:29 min. of rendering.
VRAM Usage OcDS > http://imgbox.com/5rXAmy7y
Render with OcDs > http://imgbox.com/W5nayBmJ < 40 seconds of rendering.
A render-speed related question for DAZ people: I known that I can resume a suspended render but not a completely stopped one.
1- Is there a way to split a long render into completely separate sessions? e.g. 400 samples today, 400 tomorrow and so on until I reach e.g. 2000 total samples?
2 - Alternatively, is there anything similar to a functionality I have with Cycles, i.e. being able to set a seed for the internal random number generator, enabling me to create statistically indipendent renders that I merge afterwards?
I found an advice on a forum about Iray, where they said that if you multiply by -1 the X and/or Y scale of the camera you can create indipendent renders and I verified that this is true also inside Studio but this gives me at most 4 items (std, flipped horizontally, flipped vertically, flipped both).
1. I loaded "Victoria 6 naked with hair"
2. I loaded "Iray Optimized Genesis 2 Female MAT" to "Victoria 6"
3. Double click on the face of Victoria 6 for zooming in on the face.
4. Render see images:
Tone Mapping settings > http://imgbox.com/e37w9hVx
CPU + GPU TItan X > http://imgbox.com/R0kRRQFZ < 4:59 min. of rendering.
Only GPU Titan X > http://imgbox.com/pD5dDkha < 3:29 min. of rendering.
VRAM Usage OcDS > http://imgbox.com/5rXAmy7y
Render with OcDs > http://imgbox.com/W5nayBmJ < 40 seconds of rendering.
Right now, you are comparing apples to grapefruit. The lighting and surfaces are not directly a one to one comparison between Iray and Octane (or 3DL/any other renderer). You need to have the same surfaces and same lighting to make the test valid. There is stuff going on in the Iray render that just doesn't seem evident in the Octane one...the specularity is completely different between them, there doesn't seem to be much if any SSS in the Octane render...and both of those will cause a huge difference in render times, even with the same renderer. So it looks like you are comparing surface/light conversion between the Studio set Iray defaults and the Octane exporter defaults, not the renderers.
4 should be enough for most things...
There is a lower limit/threshold, where no amount of random seeds/statistically independent renders will merge to a nice, clean final one. So, 4 should work. That will probably put you in the middle of the range.
I I guess I just realized the render progress bar, I guess I thought the image was done when it let you save it, my current render is at 63% and been going for 43min I think something's are changing just very subtle, the image looks fine as is though so maybe it's just fine tuning if amd adding more detail...
Two questions;
1. Can you Stop & Save a render when "you" feel it's ready and it hasn't reach a stop point?
If so how?
2. Can a render be Paused, Saved and then Resumed at a later time?
If so how?
You can save a render before it's done, that's all I did until I realize that it had a status bar. After it renders a while at least for me it gives me the option to save.