- This topic has 68 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
And that really is the key, though, @frank22 & @eelgoo--what you want to use DAZ for should determine the hardware setup you use.
We don't all want the same kind of output. Some folks prefer the older figures like V4, which are relatively low-poly, while others prefer to work with newer HD figures with a lot more detail. Some people are after a cartoony or anime-style look, something that would suit a digital comic or graphic novel, and others want to see skin pores and fine body hair in extreme close-ups.
It's also about scene complexity and size. If the kinds of scenes you like to create are small, intimate vignettes with a handful of figures you don't need the kind of horsepower you would if you wanted to build a scene full of intricate detail. If you're happy rendering at 2K (1920x1080) or smaller you can be happy without the VRAM that someone needs if they want to render at 4K or 8K.
It also comes down to your time constraints and patience. If you're used to renders that take 20 minutes and you don't find that intolerably long, you can get by with less GPU power than someone who wants to see that render in under 5 minutes. If it's a hobby for you and you're not on any deadline you might not mind tying up your computer for hours (or overnight), while that would be completely unacceptable to someone who has client commitments.
So yes, you can be very happy with even modest hardware setups, provided your expectations are realistic--smaller, less-detailed scenes with lower-poly figures (or a very small number of high-poly figures), rendered at 2K or smaller, with longer render times. Folks that got into this a long time ago are used to these limitations--this feels "normal" to them--so they're perfectly happy within that performance envelope.
Folks just getting into DAZ these days, however, are often drawn to the HD side of things--the G8.1 and G9 figures, and the high-poly environments, clothing, and props that HD figures would look out of place without. The hardware baseline for these people is necessarily going to be higher as a result.
I am absolutely a proponent of scene optimization, and I've already made the point that having to work within the constraints of hardware can force some good habits on people in that regard, but as I've also mentioned I still occasionally hit the limits of optimization when I've been overly ambitious with my scene construction. So while having better hardware can encourage laziness in a novice, it gives skilled optimizers more potential to work with.
Rank:
@queensknight
The optimization is something I completely glossed over in learning how to use daz. I'm finagling my way through it and picking up stuff here and there but didn't even think of that as a consideration. I'm definitely going to spend some time learning about that.G2-3/G8-8.1/G9, I'm just not experienced enough to really know the difference. I lean into G8-8.1 because there's a ton of assets available for it and it runs "decent" on this system I have. The models look "good enough" to me for the tests I've been running but I suspect that some of the things I see in my mind are not something that G8-8.1 can accomplish although I don't really know enough to be firm in that. I'm not some art conasuer but man, I love Rembrandt and idk if the things I want to take from his work is something that can be done with G8-8.1. I'll have to poor into but I'm waiting to get more hardware before I jump in.
What are your thoughts on backup drives? I would imagine you have some really good insight with this considering the professional angle and monster system you're using. I was leaning into a western digital black but I like the sizes on the red series. Is there a better solution for archiving/mass storage that you would recommend? I'm of the idea that I don't mind if the transfer rate is slow but I can't accept a high fail rate of the HD it's self.
@chupacabre409
Where hard drives are concered don't put all eggs in one basket.
Split the storage into say 2TB per drive. New old stock WD enterprise drives if you can get them on marketplaces, usually $30 for 2TB, and If you really want to have all your data separate from your main PC then I suggest a NAS. Perhaps an old cheap HP server on marketplaces will do the job.Rank:@inversekinematics
Man, that's disappointing to hear. I was hoping for a single drive solution but I suppose that is a bad idea. Thanks for the infos.Back ups on seperate drives are a good idea! 😉
When you plot cost v. performance the graph starts off fairly linear then hikes a lot more $ for decreasing returns in performance.
I always try to hit the curve around where it just starts to rise exponentially.
🙂
@chupacabre409
If you lose that 10GB drive you lose everything. That's why servers have disk arrays to limit the damage if drives start failing. eelgoo's option is also good if you have a docking station or extra drives attached to your PC.
My pc's content is split over the drives like this, has some built-in redundancy.
C (SSD 500GB) OS and programs (Daz scenes, render library and customized assets)
D (SSD 1TB) Daz installed content - Libraries/Runtimes
E (HDD 4TB) Downloads folder and DIM folder with installed zips
F (HDD 4TB) Backup of C and D and other unrelated stuffE and F is WD blue, happy with them.
Rank:So I was thinking about buying 2x 10TB drives and mirroring them. I've never done that but I do have a concern about bad sectors and whatnot. Maybe that's not a good solution either. My thought is that it would divide the risk and if/when one fails, I'd just buy another and put it back into RAID 1: Mirroring. IDK, none of you guys do this?
@chupacabre409
As others here are pointing out, you want to avoid a single point of failure. Ideally you want your data to be in three places:
- On a fast SSD that you use directly as your working copy, for responsive performance
- On a slow(er) HD or local RAID as your on-site backup
- On a cloud backup service (e.g. Backblaze) as your off-site backup
Your "working copy" should be on faster storage because the read and write times can make the difference between an app that feels zippy and responsive and one that feels sluggish and tedious.
Your on-site backup can be slow on the other hand, because you're only syncing data to it from your working copy and occasionally recovering data from it if something gets corrupted on your working copy.
Having an off-site backup as your third component is your insurance against having your computer stolen or your house burning down, or the kind of catastrophic failure that fries both of your on-site storage drives. Backblaze lets you back up unlimited amounts of data for a flat fee of a few bucks a month (I have 10TB+ backed up there), and their app takes care of syncing your changes quietly in the background so you don't need any additional backup software for this.
If you have this kind of "data-in-three-places" arrangement, the robustness of your on-site backup solution doesn't need to be particularly high, so a slower 10TB HD like a WD Blue would be fine.
If you skip the off-site cloud backup, though, your on-site backup solution needs to have some redundancy built in because it is now a critical point of failure. As you're suggesting, a RAID1 mirror set of two identical HDs would do that for you, and yes, if one of those drives in the set fails you can rebuild the set with a replacement HD.
Eventually you might consider a NAS or USB3/4/Thunderbolt-connected enclosure that can house an array of 4+ HDs that you can configure in a variety of RAIDs for added reliability, faster reads and writes, and more, but that's overkill for you at this stage.
Rank:@queensknight
Ok, I think RAID1 is what I'll do. Thanks man.Where backups are concerned, one is none and two is one...
The ideal solution is to have a 'live' back up locally, either a second, mirrored, drive or NAS with an off-site back-up backing up the live one. Of course, that all costs money and this hobby is not light on disc resources...
My personal solution is to use my 1TB of 'free' OneDrive storage from my Office365 sub to back-up my finished projects and do a poor man's mirror of my runtime and working drive using robocopy once day to a second internal drive (Both ex-CCTV 4TBs that I got cheap on ebay). That's not an ideal solution; if one of the drives fail, I'm covered but in the event of a fire or something that takes out my entire PC, I'll lose my runtimes. But, I'm about to pull the trigger on a new PC upgrade and plan on using the old parts to build a file server/render box/CAD station with as many drives as I can afford to cram into it. I'm also building a shed/workshop for my 3D printers and tool, and the server will eventually live in there so it's as 'off-site' as I can make it. Ideally I'd build a separate TrueNAS box for my backups (cheaper than buying a NAS enclosure) but space and power consumption are considerations as is the amount of faff I'm prepared to do to get it all working.
That PSU is a decent unit and should be more than enough for a 3060.
Just adding by 2¢ on storage:
you can get 1TB thumb drives for about $20 now. They're not going to be the cheapest option, but you can store them anywhere and the prices keep falling as the storage sizes keep getting bigger. I have almost 8TB of DAZ crap and I have two 512GB thumb drives with content that I really don't want to lose. Got those on sale for $14/each on black friday.
Of course, sites like Zone, 3dload and renderstate act like online backup sites to some degree as well. Another option would be for the community to start creating large torrents that serve as a 4th or 5th level of backup, letting the P2P community provide redundancy. And there's always usenet, where large zipped files can be uploaded to the 3dmodeling groups and be stored there for years for free. You'd need usenet accounts and pay for a provider, but those files stay there for at least 10 years.
There are options, especially if folks come together to do it.
Rank:All this is really good information very insightful. I was only vaguely aware of these strategies for backup security. I've lost an HD in the past and it really sucks. As far as what I'm personally doing I feel like RAID1 mirroring is slightly more then was I need and not doing that is less then what I need.
Ok, so I realize I'm revisiting something here that many of you spoke on but I can across something that really threw a wrench in what I was thinking. This comparison shows the 3060Ti is +28% better then the 3060 12GB version. I know you guys are leaning into the 12GB "non-Ti" but I find myself stuck. The situation I'm in is this:
1: Go with the 3060Ti 8GB and stay with 32GB system RAM that my PC has now @ about $500 and gain the +28% benefit "claimed" over the 3060 12GB.
2: Buy the 3060 12GB @~$380 and more ram @ ~$120 putting my system RAM from 32GB to 64GB so that I can max out the usage of the video card's ram (12GB x 4 = 48GB required). This would basically cost the same as option 1.
Consider that what I do is play video games, mess with DAZ3D as a hobby and want to get into modeling/texturing & video game creation as a hobby as well. I'm of the mindset that the extra video card RAM is where the game industry/3D asset stuff is heading but I'm hung up on the extra speed. I haven't messed with 3D modeling since 2003 and I'm severely limited on my understanding of what is better/required for that sort of thing. I need some thoughts/insight on this.
Two questions here I need answered. If you where in my position, what would you do and why? Is there a trade-off between these two options or is that just promotional BS that I'm falling for?
@viai @necro @frank22 @gladson1976 @ethiopia @gts6 @ulysses @SkippyTheMeh @queensknight @cage @inversekinematics @eelgooI promise I'll quit pestering you guys, I'm just stuck on this one because I don't have the experience with the things I'm about to get into but I want to be able to play games with a decent FPS/graphics setting as well. Thank you!
As you have split priorites which vary your requirements, I feel that as with anything in life a compromise has to be settled on somewhere.
I would just go with the best deal you can get on either of the above.
The likelihood is that you are going to be happy with either.
🙂
Rank:The cost seems to be the same within $20. The decision comes down to +28% increase in speed/fps or +VD-RAM/+SY-RAM and potentially slower overall system because more RAM = to slower speed I think.
Maxing out the system RAM slots would cause a slower system right? This is killing me.
EDIT: Forgot to mention, I don't run anything beyond 1080p so maybe that's something to consider as well.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
