gpu rendering.

Trying to do some greenscreen keying in fusion lite. When i render out i notice fusion not using gpu and render time is painfully long. I have nvidia 770ti and selected it under opencl setting. Is fusion only able to use cpu or do i have some other problem with my settings?

Very few standard tools in Fusion use the GPU. None of the keying tools do. If you want to verify OpenCL operation, try one of the tools in the OpenCL category.

Yeah, it was a smart move by the dev's for an unnamed competing compositing application to start implementing as much GPU acceleration they could a few years back and I have high hopes for Blackmagic doing the same with Fusion. I:D

Yeah, it was a smart move by the dev's for an unnamed competing compositing application to start implementing as much GPU acceleration they could a few years back and I have high hopes for Blackmagic doing the same with Fusion. I:D

A few competing compositing apps, in point of fact. Not just the Big Dog (tm), but also some of the lesser known. E.g. MambaFX, whose renderer makes Resolve's renderer look slow.

Fusion, under the hood, can run a complete comp on the GPU. No readback to system RAM at all, until you get the Saver, of course. The problem is that not enough tools support this feature to make any sort of comp like that likely. Under the hood, it's there, but the implementation at the tool level is not.

Fusion, under the hood, can run a complete comp on the GPU. No readback to system RAM at all, until you get the Saver, of course. The problem is that not enough tools support this feature to make any sort of comp like that likely. Under the hood, it's there, but the implementation at the tool level is not.

They're probably working toward making Fusion more GPU oriented. By the time they're done it probably won't run at all without a pretty powerful GPU.

Remember that Fusion was the first compositing package to natively support GPU processing. Trouble is, even in 5 years its still just a few tools. The problem isn't just Fusion though, by choosing OpenCL over CUDA or something higher level they got stuck in the mire of OpenCL development, where AMD was terrible and Nvidia was dragging their feet. And it's a shame because in the end most of us run Nvidia cards anyway.

Yeah, the Cycles AMD/OpenCL thread on Blender Artists have been very telling over the years, the Cycles developers continuously dropping in and trying their best to explain their troubles with OpenCL in general and AMD issues in particular. I've also had some feedback from the Houdini dev's on their implementation of OpenCL and what works really well and what they just don't try because of known issues. It's kinda sad, as you would think everyone (well, accept perhaps Nvidia) in both hardware and software development would be interested in having an open API as OpenCL work well...

Yeah, the Cycles AMD/OpenCL thread on Blender Artists have been very telling over the years, the Cycles developers continuously dropping in and trying their best to explain their troubles with OpenCL in general and AMD issues in particular. I've also had some feedback from the Houdini dev's on their implementation of OpenCL and what works really well and what they just don't try because of known issues. It's kinda sad, as you would think everyone (well, accept perhaps Nvidia) in both hardware and software development would be interested in having an open API as OpenCL work well...

Yes, especially since it would give nVidia a big leg up on Intel in the mobile and microserver markets. They're building the same GPU technology into their ARM cores, why not turn OpenCL into a competitive advantage and give their ARM cores a massive performance boost?

but remembder: BMD wants to port Fusion to the Mac and there is only AMD as GPU availible, at least for the "pro" and 5k iMac
only option is OpenCL

Also, tools will always need a CPU fallback to work well with renderfarms (if BMD ever get a native linux rendernode working)

And OpenCL being the clusterfrak that it is has probably also to do with the way the Kronos group operates, it's like the EU parliament trying to get on line on a subject, so many opinions, hidden agendas and simply not liking each other (bickering egos), that nothing good ever gets through, just a watered down sad shadow of the idea that went in.

but remembder: BMD wants to port Fusion to the Mac and there is only AMD as GPU availible, at least for the "pro" and 5k iMac
only option is OpenCL

Mmm, I've said it before, seeing Apple is obviously moving away from the pro market, I think it would have made way more sense for BMD porting Fusion to Linux - which instead is increasing in use in the VFX industry. Well, hopefully they'll port it to Linux as well.

(with Resolve and Fusion in Linux, I could/would drop Windows)

Also, tools will always need a CPU fallback to work well with renderfarms (if BMD ever get a native linux rendernode working)

And OpenCL being the clusterfrak that it is has probably also to do with the way the Kronos group operates, it's like the EU parliament trying to get on line on a subject, so many opinions, hidden agendas and simply not liking each other (bickering egos), that nothing good ever gets through, just a watered down sad shadow of the idea that went in.

Obviously CUDA is always going to be ahead because Nvidia is handling both sides, but I don't think the issue with OpenCL is Kronos. I think AMD is just bad at making software and Nvidia is hoping OpenCL dies so that CUDA can have the marketplace.

According to Rony the Linux version is happening - see his note at the end of this Fusion for Linux thread

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=29431&p=195777&hilit=linux#p195777

but remembder: BMD wants to port Fusion to the Mac and there is only AMD as GPU availible, at least for the "pro" and 5k iMac
only option is OpenCL

Mmm, I've said it before, seeing Apple is obviously moving away from the pro market, I think it would have made way more sense for BMD porting Fusion to Linux - which instead is increasing in use in the VFX industry. Well, hopefully they'll port it to Linux as well.

(with Resolve and Fusion in Linux, I could/would drop Windows)

According to Rony the Linux version is happening - see his note at the end of this Fusion for Linux thread

They confirmed a Linux render node, not the application.

According to Rony the Linux version is happening - see his note at the end of this Fusion for Linux thread

They confirmed a Linux trender node, not the application.

That's nearly the same. Only the GUI has to change, and to get to OSX they need to redo that anyway. Linux would likely be low hanging fruit at that point if the sales are there to support it. Might be somewhat feature limited on some I/O things, but that's manageable by the end user.

I don't know how much help an OS X port is for taking you in the direction of a Linux port - as far as I can understand BSD and Linux seems fairly similar and logically it wouldn't be a hard thing to do, but seeing how many apps are not ported to Linux even though they are available on Mac, I sometimes wonder if it really is about no incentive porting to Linux for economical reasons or if it's just not as simple as one would presume... Sometimes, having a little knowledge about something is a great way to lure oneself into a conclusion that is really based on a faulty premise.

Apps that actually need render farm support are not that common - CG rendering, sim baking, and heavy compositing would in my opinion pretty much cover most of it. And most of those apps - maya, houdini, softimage, nuke et al - have long been ported to linux (and osx) because the commercial production market demanded it. Autodesk Flame and its variants have run natively under linux for years.

As someone who actually used fusion6 on linux in production, both render node and gui version (albeit under eyeon's own wine set up) I can say that the gui wasn't at all bad, nearly as stable as the win version. I do realize that this doesn't automatically mean that a native linux gui port would be easy, but it does at least show that the capability (with particular reference to the linux video drivers, which Nvidia have been very good at maintaining) is there . . .

There are a ton of video folks on the Mac. Most of them are using Adobe or Apple products to get their work done. Nuke is the only industrial-strength nodal compositor currently available for them.

Fusion Free and Fusion Pro on the Mac is going to be popular. When they integrate Fusion with Resolve, it's going to be even more popular.

I don't know how much help an OS X port is for taking you in the direction of a Linux port - as far as I can understand BSD and Linux seems fairly similar and logically it wouldn't be a hard thing to do, but seeing how many apps are not ported to Linux even though they are available on Mac, I sometimes wonder if it really is about no incentive porting to Linux for economical reasons or if it's just not as simple as one would presume... Sometimes, having a little knowledge about something is a great way to lure oneself into a conclusion that is really based on a faulty premise.

I just mean that once the MFC and such are replaced for OSX, I suspect they would only replace it with something that is going to work with KDE/GNOME. Seems like doing it JUST for OSX is aiming for a pretty small market.

Fusion Free and Fusion Pro on the Mac is going to be popular. When they integrate Fusion with Resolve, it's going to be even more popular.

Customers using the free version, yes, or buying one or two copies. Studios buying 50 seat packages? I doubt OSX will make up a large slice of that market. That's where you see Linux as more popular (though Windows fills in the middle fairly well). And even from a pure marketing perspective, they'll want to show AE and Nuke users that they can run on Linux. To the former, to be better, to the latter to not be worse.

Fusion Free and Fusion Pro on the Mac is going to be popular. When they integrate Fusion with Resolve, it's going to be even more popular.

Customers using the free version, yes, or buying one or two copies. Studios buying 50 seat packages? I doubt OSX will make up a large slice of that market. That's where you see Linux as more popular (though Windows fills in the middle fairly well). And even from a pure marketing perspective, they'll want to show AE and Nuke users that they can run on Linux. To the former, to be better, to the latter to not be worse.

I get advertising bureaus and such will continue using Mac's for DTP and such, the 5K Imac would be my choice for that line of work, but Apple are so obviously moving away from pro video, editing, compositing, etc, what studio would invest in Mac's for this type of work today?

Personally I left Mac's behind some 5 years ago, having had MacOS as primary OS since the late 1980s, if I could I would run Linux today, though I still have some use for Adobe CC, I haven't, but I'm not far from the tipping point where I do leave Windows behind if I just know I'm covered, application wise.

Yeah, when you need this to get two 2012-era CPUs in 4U for $13000 you can sort of see how this won't scale well for any medium or large facility.

The iMac is very nice other than a poor GPU in it. I just bought a laptop that has a GPU more than 3x as fast with 4x the memory, and it's not driving a 5K display.

Of course the other way to do it is to run mixed. Put OSX on the desk but cluster with a full rack of Windows or Linux slaves in the machine room. You're still limited to having a slow workstation, but at least you have inexpensive render power on tap.

. . . and if you're going to run a win farm make sure you don't run afoul of the 20 network connection limit imposed by msoft (at least it's better than the old 10 connection limit). It's not difficult to see why most medium to large farms end up linux.

Loved the macpro rackmout pic Chad.

Didn't eyeon promote partnership with NVidia at some point? I thought that was about CUDA but it ended up being about OpenCL.

CUDA is the way to go when it comes to GPU rendering period.

Didn't eyeon promote partnership with NVidia at some point? I thought that was about CUDA but it ended up being about OpenCL.

CUDA is the way to go when it comes to GPU rendering period.

According to Nvidia marketing speak, OpenCL runs on CUDA. So they say that all OpenCL applications are really running CUDA, so CUDA is awesome.

CUDA absolutely is the way to go for GPU rendering, if only because AMD can't get their act together. But for homogeneous computing, OpenCL is the way to go. Sure, we're used to GPU's, but OpenCL will let you run code on mobile/embedded platforms, FPGA's, GPU's, CPU's, DSP's, and whatever else wants to add support.

. . . and if you're going to run a win farm make sure you don't run afoul of the 20 network connection limit imposed by msoft (at least it's better than the old 10 connection limit). It's not difficult to see why most medium to large farms end up linux.

If you get Storage Server 2012 R2 Workgroup Edition, it's only $300 and lets you run I think 250 concurrent connections. Standard Ed is $600 and has unlimited connections. Neither requires CAL's. Server 2012 gets you SMB 3.0 including SMB Direct and SMB Multichannel which is awesome for render farm and workstation use. It's very competitive with Linux now.

Loved the macpro rackmout pic Chad.

I just had to price out a 4 unit road case last week. The price differences between the Mac, Dell, and Newegg specials were pretty amazing. Like you could get easily 12x the GPU performance for the same price between building a farm from Newegg vs from Apple.

Didn't eyeon promote partnership with NVidia at some point? I thought that was about CUDA but it ended up being about OpenCL.

CUDA is the way to go when it comes to GPU rendering period.

According to Nvidia marketing speak, OpenCL runs on CUDA. So they say that all OpenCL applications are really running CUDA, so CUDA is awesome.

I believe this is incorrect.

On a NVIDIA GPU, both CUDA and OpenCL get translated to assembly language called PTX. This assembly text is then compiled into binary code to run on the GPU.

Jules

I believe this is incorrect.

As marketing-speak? Not at all. Nvidia developer zone doesn't link to anything OpenCL, on their OpenCL sample page, they link to CUDA libraries only (and the page is hosted under the CUDA Zone heading), the OpenCL drivers are not available except alongside the CUDA Toolkit, and Nvidia even defines it as thus, "OpenCL™ (Open Computing Language) is a low-level API for heterogeneous computing that runs on CUDA-powered GPUs."

Nvidia would really you rather forgot all about OpenCL.

And you know what? I'm not even mad. Would I rather that Nvidia embraced OpenCL? Sure, but Nvidia has single handedly done more for high performance computing with CUDA than Khronos and Microsoft have with OpenCL and DirectCompute combined, and both of those groups had Nvidia's help.

Just installed the 350.12 drivers and now Fusion sees Nvidia OpenCL 1.2 devices. So that's something.