I can confirm that. CPU is needed not yet GPU for rendering.

GPU is used to accelerate the editor. It is really faster this way ( with some tools only available when this mode is on ).
It is not yet used to accelerate the rendering ( production of the panorama ).

Brian Iannone wrote:

Okay, I see. Would you happen to know exactly how much faster it becomes?

I'm trying to understand if using a GPU that provides the maximum OpenGL performance will offer that much of a significant speed improvement in the editor.

Hi!

Even an older GPU speeds the editor up remarkably compared to non-GPU mode in earlier versions - besides you anyway can use some tools only with GPU assistance, as Alexandre said already.
Interesting is: what kind of GPU is preferable?

best, Klaus

Last edited by klausesser (2012-04-06 15:43:34)

Brian Iannone wrote:

klausesser wrote:

Hi!

Even an older GPU speeds the editor up remarkably compared to non-GPU mode in earlier versions - besides you anyway can use some tools only with GPU assistance, as Alexandre said already.
Interesting is: what kind of GPU is preferable?

best, Klaus

Thanks for the info Klaus!

I am indeed interested in knowing what GPU would be preferable. For example, which would be the fastest that would offer the best speed improvement in the editor; an AMD Radeon HD 7970, Nvidia GTX 680, an Nvidia Quadro 6000, etc.?

I don´t know - im my eyes the editor´s speed is good anyway with a GPU acceleration. Don´t think it will come remarkably faster
putting in an expensive super-GPU.

Most interesting it would be to use some stacked GPU cards for rendering - as in 3D applications . .

THIS is where the real speed is . . and the money . .

I mean APG on a good multiprocessor/multicore machine with sufficient RAM isn´t really slow anyway . . so i wouldn´t sell home and garden for overwhelming hardware . .

With "hundreds of gigapixels" i assume you better contact a mainframe . . - Cray or something . .

Another question will be: how would you display such panos? Print and install them along a riverbank or along a runaway on the next airport? You want it to be seen from the moon?

best, Klaus

Last edited by klausesser (2012-04-07 16:48:51)

[bo] wrote:

Brian, it depends on what projects you're planing to work, but in my experience even an old 9800GT is perfectly enough for the pano editor needs!
Currently, I would advise against investing in expensive GPU, at least until Autopano starts utilizing it for the final (actual) rendering.

GPU will be more used in autopano v3 series but in the editor only. So the old 9800GT will probably not be enough for v3.
Nevertheless, you won't need any fancy GPU : anything costing 150 USD now is good enough.

Alexandre, if GPU will still be editor-only, why the need for faster GPU? Maybe that concerns only large multi-gigapixel projects?

ohh, well, then no need to get the 680GTX, better to invest in faster controllers and harddrives, since the ram is maxed out.

It would have been great to have seen better GPU utilizion and improved HDR/color in v3, but please make the later happen, PLEASE!!!! :-)

Henrik

I have to say within many sectors of the industry, namely Adobe PS, Premiere, Davinci Resolve etc.... GPU accelerated performance (CUDA) has had a dramatic impact on both performance of intensive applications and the availability of that performance to a much wider audience of which I think APG would benefit from its usage ?

I would suggest buying a card with the most stable drivers. GPU tech changes so fast, that the drivers are notoriously buggy and cause applications to crash.

To Chatwin234. We will never go for CUDA, because it is proprietary. If we are going to use more GPU power, it will be through OpenCL for cross-hardware concerns. BTW : we already made test with OpenCL : it is really good.