 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi,
Iam a newbee. A colleague asked me to do some research in using pov-ray and GPU.
After reading your comments it seems not a good idea to render pictures with GPU
power because of single precision. But what about the Nvidia Tesla and its high
DP processing power? Are there any project in progress or does it make sense to
think about using the Nvidia Tesla GPUs for rendering?
greetings
SEb
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 14.12.2010 08:53, schrieb oleg:
> Hi,
> Iam a newbee. A colleague asked me to do some research in using pov-ray and GPU.
> After reading your comments it seems not a good idea to render pictures with GPU
> power because of single precision. But what about the Nvidia Tesla and its high
> DP processing power? Are there any project in progress or does it make sense to
> think about using the Nvidia Tesla GPUs for rendering?
Those comments are outdated, as double precision does not seem a problem
anymore on modern GPUs (at least the high-end ones, and GP-GPUs such as
Tesla).
Fusing POV-Ray with GPU would be a challenging task, as POV-Ray's
internal architecture relies on recursive function calls, which are
still a problem with GPUs; also, POV-Ray does not provide any
sophisticated mechanisms to "bundle" rays into batches to undergo
simultaneous processing (which would be necessary to exploit the full
power of a GPU); you would need some mechanism to identify "similar"
rays ("coherence" would be a buzzword here, though not in the laser sense).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymous org> wrote:
> Fusing POV-Ray with GPU would be a challenging task, as POV-Ray's
> internal architecture relies on recursive function calls, which are
> still a problem with GPUs; also, POV-Ray does not provide any
> sophisticated mechanisms to "bundle" rays into batches to undergo
> simultaneous processing (which would be necessary to exploit the full
> power of a GPU); you would need some mechanism to identify "similar"
> rays ("coherence" would be a buzzword here, though not in the laser sense).
Luxrays is a GPL providing precisely such mechanism:
http://www.luxrender.net/wiki/index.php?title=LuxRays
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 14.12.2010 16:47, schrieb nemesis:
> Luxrays is a GPL providing precisely such mechanism:
>
> http://www.luxrender.net/wiki/index.php?title=LuxRays
Quote from the features list:
triangle mesh primitive support (support for other kind of primitive may
be added in the future);
That currently makes it an absolute no-go for POV-Ray.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 14.12.2010 16:47, schrieb nemesis:
>
> > Luxrays is a GPL providing precisely such mechanism:
> >
> > http://www.luxrender.net/wiki/index.php?title=LuxRays
>
> Quote from the features list:
>
> triangle mesh primitive support (support for other kind of primitive may
> be added in the future);
>
> That currently makes it an absolute no-go for POV-Ray.
more like a 1-go.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 14.12.2010 18:49, schrieb nemesis:
>> triangle mesh primitive support (support for other kind of primitive may
>> be added in the future);
>>
>> That currently makes it an absolute no-go for POV-Ray.
>
> more like a 1-go.
no, a 0-go. POV-Ray is too generic when it comes to objects. It doesn't
really make much sense to make an exception specifically for meshes.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
