what does the gpu actually do in R12?

[littlejam]

hello,

does anyone know specifically what the gpu is handling?

i recall mattias stating that 'not all graphics components are off loaded to the gpu'

i can't remember what thread it was

some forum members are stating that 'all graphics' are off loaded to the gpu

would be neat if someone has actual knowledge of this

cheers and eat well,

j

[plaamook]

Yeah I'm curious about this too, specifically because as I understand it, off loading graphics to the GPU should spread the load and optimise Reason but I've not heard very much about that round here.

[integerpoet]

I have no specific knowledge of what R12 is doing.

However, in the general realm of graphics acceleration relevant to similar applications, it could be as simple as "sending" a collection of large, infrequently changing 2D images to the GPU for compositing (rendering in front-to-back order) at varying scales. A non-trivial GUI needs a lot of that sort of thing to achieve a butter-smooth seamless appearance.

That's a simple enough kind of operation to describe to a GPU that it would be a shame to have the CPU do it over and over again when it could be, oh, I don't know, driving a couple dozen cycle-hungry oversampling VSTs.

In other words, it doesn't need to be a dazzlingly realistic panoramic 3D scene involving tons of math to be a performance win.

[challism]

I think it's handing the graphics of Reason on the front end and mining Bitcoin for Verdane Capital on the back end, which explains the bogged-down performance of R12.

[aeox]

I think it's handing the graphics of Reason on the front end and mining Bitcoin for Verdane Capital on the back end, which explains the bogged-down performance of R12.

Crazy, I was just thinking about this last night after work

[challism]

I think it's handing the graphics of Reason on the front end and mining Bitcoin for Verdane Capital on the back end, which explains the bogged-down performance of R12.

Crazy, I was just thinking about this last night after work

I'm joking... of course! Don't want to get kicked off that sweet moderator money train payroll we are all on.

Wow... I'm just in the mood to feed conspiracies, aren't I? ha ha ha
You'll have to forgive me... just got off an Alex Jones video marathon.

[aeox]

Crazy, I was just thinking about this last night after work

I'm joking... of course! Don't want to get kicked off that sweet moderator money train payroll we are all on.

Wow... I'm just in the mood to feed conspiracies, aren't I? ha ha ha
You'll have to forgive me... just got off an Alex Jones video marathon.

Just to be clear, I didn't mean that you're crazy. Just crazy that I was thinking about the same exact thing last night.

That would be sneaky and I'm sure a lot of sketchy software might try to do something like that

[avasopht]

Well, without a GPU accelerator, all rendering is carried out by the CPU. That means that every single pixel has to be produced, which might involve combining multiple pixels from the source bitmap graphics. And then copied again from their internal buffer to the GPU buffer.

A GPU does three things for you:
1. It frees up lots of memory by storing graphics assets and buffers on the GPU
2. It frees up the CPU since the GPU will be doing the heavy lifting when rendering bitmaps and
3. It frees up bandwidth since the GPU will be working with its own RAM

It's not so much of a big deal at lower resolutions, but when you get to Ultra HD or 4K resolutions you're looking at 8 million pixels, plus you've also got to store all those high-resolution graphics.

It gets even more complicated when scaling because that involves resampling.

These are all things GPUs do with ease.