/3/ - 3DCG

How did you "try it out" ?

This isn't tpb

>>483400
just answer the question nigger

I dont have zbrush (yet) but I will try to help you.

A bit of googling told me you should up the RAM.

What are your RAM specs at the moment?

I'm new to modelling, and haven't done much yet. Why do you need sculpting tools like this? What

>>483409
Couldn't finish before that posted. What does sculpting do?

>>483399
What the fuck, OP? What kind of machine do you have? Pushing 40m polygons in 3ds Max requires more than 18 GB of RAM.

And I have a 6m polygon sculpt open in ZBrush right now while my CPU sits at 6% usage. It goes no higher than 30%.

>>483399

>this is a joke right?

You're the joke, I'm afraid. Out of all sculpting softs nothing has better benchamrks than Zbrush right now. I've got an old ass computer and Mudbox will get outperformed by Zbrush everytime.

Your hardware (especially evereything concerning RAM and cpu)/drivers are likely all fucked up, because you can't handle a simple desk pc building and/or maintenance. Who built your rig? Don't tell me, some dudes at walmart?

>just answer the question nigger

How can we help you, you numpty? Anyone with a mind of their own would do a couple google searches and realize this is your individual problem.

>>483422
>I've got an old ass computer and Mudbox will get outperformed by Zbrush everytime.
Because you dont have a good gpu, faggot

>>483423

Maybe you've got a shit cpu, bulldyke.

>implying it wasn't a gpu heavy gaymen rig in it's days of glory

>>483423
Please, go sculpt on a 32m poly mesh in Mudbox, see how well that performs. Doesn't matter what GPU you have. Mudbox cannot compete with ZBrush's unique approach to processing geometry. That's why Autodesk hasn't added any new features to Mudbox in the past two versions, and actually integrated most of Mudbox into Maya now. Mudbox is ded.

>>483407
I've got a decent amount of memory (24GB), I was using ZBrush 64-bit. Almost all of the example models lag a lot when I rotate and zoom around them, even though they're fairly low-poly.

I went ahead and tried the student Mudbox version and it runs extremely smoothly even with tens of millions of polygons. Mudbox seems to be powered through the GPU, ZBrush doesn't use my GPU at all, but maxes out my CPU.


>>483411
Pic related is the type of model that lags like crazy for me, it's located under 'Lightbox -> ZBrush47RSearchlight'. I added the CPU graph, the spike is when I rotated the model around.

This kinda sucks. Mudbox looks like a much more simple program with a lot less features and versatility, but it runs so much better because it uses the GPU.


>>483409
To create organic stuff (characters) or add fine details to hard-surface stuff that you can't model efficiently in regular modeling software. Things like scratches, tiny dents and cracks that you sculpt onto the high-poly mesh for extra detail in the normal map bake. For example I made some basic wooden planks in 3ds max, but to create the tiny chips/cracks on the wood edges I would use sculpting software.

>>483430
Performs just fine on this titan.Shill somewhere else.

>>483433
>Needs $1000 GPU to perform anywhere near as good as my $200 5 year old CPU.

>>483435
Lol, you rely on voxelization techniques and other 2d hacks while my mudbox operates on real 3d points. Mudbox is at ~4x as good

>>483438
*at least ~4x as good

>>483438
Lmao, they're both "real 3d points", Zbrush doesn't use voxels, that's 3DCoat. ZBrush works with Catmull-Clark based subdivision levels just like Mudbox and can do direct poly modeling just like Maya/Max/Blender/whatever, Mudbox can barely do shit all. The only thing Mudbox is better for is direct texturing painting, that's it. But who gives a shit about that when we have Substance and Mari.

>>483430
OP here. i just got a model with 100 million polygons (yes one hundred million) in mudbox. it's using roughly 14GB RAM and 2.3GB of VRAM (well it says 700mb VRAM but i assume that's whats left over rather than the amount that's used)

here's the best part: its rendering at 300 fps. lol. rotates at around 180 fps. i'll admit there's some delay when you sculpt it, but holy shit this is crazy.

so the only questions remains, why on earth does zbrush render stuff on the CPU? i mean, there's no way even a thousand dollar CPU can compete with 100m poly's at 300 FPS, and my GPU is already over a year old (GTX780).

for fuck sake why couldnt they let zbrush run on the GPU.. all that raw power wasted. i could probably display a quarter billion polys on this thing before the memory runs out.

>>483440
>Zbrush doesn't use voxels, that's 3DCoat
It uses voxels all over the damn place.

>>483441
> why on earth does zbrush render stuff on the CPU?
Because they'd rather not use dedicated graphics processing hardware because they're a special snowflake.

>>483443
but i'm sculpting a 100 million polygon mesh with 300+ fps. surely there must be a technical reason as to why you would give that up and opt for using the CPU instead.

>>483446
They're using horrible legacy code from 98 and earlier, you can see it in the zsketch stuff and the ui. It's laced in with the new stuff. Hell it took them years just to from 32 bit to 64 bit cpu libs lmao

>>483442
No, it doesn't. The only time it uses voxelization is in the process of redynameshing so it can tell where to create or remove polys. And it's an incredibly quick operation that Mudbox users wish they could do. The end result is every bit as much "real 3d points" as Mudbox's are.

>>483443

Because ZBrush came out in 1999 and was obviously going to be CPU based. It would be a rewrite of nearly all of their code to adapt it to GPU acceleration now. It's not worth the time/money investment when it already performs better than other software while using just the CPU. It's better they focus on workflow improving features, like direct to texture painting, subtool folders and layer blending styles for the layer system.

>>483448
everyone that uses a computer has a gpu of some kind, either integrated or a peripheral. Pixologic? More like Idiotic.

>>483448
you keep saying it runs so well on the CPU but then why does this fucking thing lag so hard as well as other models with similar polycounts: >>483432

i tried disabling shadows, using flat lighting etc nothing helps. its always around 5-10 fps when i rotate it.

>>483451
Shitty programming, shitty PAID shills defending

>>483451
You still haven't said what CPU you actually have. You showing your task manager with 8 threads means nothing, the Pentium 4HT I had 10 years ago had 8 threads too, doesn't mean it can push ten of millions of polys. I have a measly old i7 930 and I sculpt 20m+ no problem.

>>483446
Yeah, that's totally 100m breh, please, show the geo info box. Because I know for a fact that Mudbox mesh interaction starts to shit the bed at 10m+ and goes so slow that it's not really worth it. Better yet, to a gyazo capture or w/e the fuck you want of you sculpting on this 100m mesh, I'd love to see it.

>>483451
I can run 10m polygons on a ultrabook with zbrush. It is dual core i7-3667U with 8 gb ram and no gpu.

>>483446
I have used mudbox before, unless you sculpt from the ground up and created lots of fine details all over the place, it would become an absolute dog at 8m. Just becomes you subdivided a cube and zoom in really close does not make it workable in the long run.

Does anyone know what happens when the trial expires? do you lose the ability to export ?

>>483475
funny, i have the same CPU. when i subdivide one sphere to 20m poly's i can work without lag. but for some reason a 5m poly model that is made up of many subobjects lags like crazy. go open that search light model in the lightbox and see if you get lag when rotating or sculpting

here's a vid of a 130m poly head. couldn't sculpt with fraps on because the circle brush thingy dissapears while recording, you probably won't believe me but i don't care already posted pics earlier. had to cut the vid a bit to fit it under 3mb.

Up the ram, right now it's probably at the default 256mb limit in the preferences. up it to max, enjoy smooth shit.

>>483501
Dude the search lights demo has dynamic subdivs 2-4 levels on for every substool. The poly count you seeing is a complete lie. Try and open the clown brute scene and have a look at the total points, even though it say 3mil TPC that equals to about 6 mil polys.

>>483501
I have Mudbox, I opened it up and Subdivided to 20m and it was lagging hard when I used brushes.

Rotating the search light doesn't lag for me.

The reason the lightbox lags when you sculpt is because the ActivePoints isn't showing you how many points that thing actually has. Why? Because it's using the new "Dynamic Subdivision". Which is basically like your "Smooth Mesh Preview" in Maya. You don't want that shit on when you're sculpting, it's primarily so you can do your low-poly box-modeling without adding subdivision levels (since subdivision levels stop the zModeler brush from working). It also keeps your save file lightweight. But it's not a mode for sculpting.

Just go to Geometry>Dynamic Subdiv, and turn it off. (or shift+d is the hotkey), it's per-subtool, and basically all of them have it turned on.

>>483506
>say 3mil TPC that equals to about 6
ignore that part i wrote, im confusing it with something else

>>483448
>Because ZBrush came out in 1999 and was obviously going to be CPU based

So did Poser 4 and it's had GPU support since Poser 6 at least. We're on 10 now. Get with the fucking times.

>>483531
Poser isn't 3D modeling software you piece of trash. It's a fucking 3D model viewing with some sliders that adjust blendshapes. It's an incredibly simple program to recode, you really cannot compare.

>>483399
Get a non-shit CPU. I have an ancient i7 2600 and it hardly ever uses more than 10%

>>483588
>windows cpu monitor