<div dir="ltr"><div>Just tested the memory usage, there still is a massive increase in memory usage when using experimental vs supported kernels...</div><div><br></div><div>Generic Test scene:</div><div>Supported - 850mb</div>
<div>Experimental - 1408mb</div><div><br></div><div>Tried to run Mike Pans BMW benchmark but I could not get it to load under experimental kernel (1500mb ram limit, kernel was too big)</div><div><br></div><div>Are you using a external program to report the memory usage for the GPU? Cycles does not report GPU memory correctly to blender. </div>
<div><br></div><div>Carlo</div><div><br></div><div>>Hi Thomas and Sergey,</div><div>></div><div>><a href="http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-blender-cvs/2014-August/067323.html" target="_blank">http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-blender-cvs/2014-August/067323.html</a></div>
<div>></div><div>>Firstly, thank you kindly for adding experimental GPU SSS cubin files, </div><div>>what an exciting, unexpected, surprise!</div><div>></div><div>>Amazed to find Experimental cubin using exactly same amount of memory as </div>
<div>>Supported cubin in a complex scene containing SSS. Also, less memory </div><div>>than Blender 2.70a and 2.69.1 (GPU SSS test version).</div><div>>Understandably Experimental cubin are a little slower than Supported </div>
<div>>cubin due to SSS calculations, but not by a massive amount!</div><div>>If helpful/interested added GPGPU memory consumption and speed test </div><div>>results at the end of this mail.</div><div><br></div></div>