| ||||||||||
| lets put it another way, the cost of a CUDA compatible GPU is a couple hundred bucks. thats way cheaper than replacing an entire system sporting xeon CPU's that could easily run $3k-5K. a CUDA GPU is literally 1/10th the price of a CPU upgrade.. assuming you even need to do one. S On Jun 5, 2012, at 4:20 PM, Todd Kopriva wrote: >> I'm trying to get my head around Adobe's decision to go with the ray >> traced renderer they did in AE6. > > I just asked a couple of the software engineers involved about this decision, and they say that a ray-traced renderer is more efficient for getting good-looking results for reflections, refractions, and shadows than would be a scanline renderer. Our GPU-based ray-traced 3D renderer is actually quite fast compared with anything that gives comparable visual results for these light-related characteristics. That said, the CPU-based renderer is slow, and we acknowledge that. > > As far hardware dependencies: We officially support a couple dozen GPUs, and many of the high-performing ones (like the GTX 580) are not expensive. > > +---End of message---+ > To unsubscribe send any message to <ae-list-off@media-motion.tv> |
