Texture - Full Vram #121482

New Issue

William-Asperti · 2024-05-06T14:55:40+02:00

William-Asperti commented

2024-05-06 14:55:40 +02:00

System Information
Operating system: Windows-10-10.0.22621-SP0 64 Bits
Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090/PCIe/SSE2 NVIDIA Corporation 4.6.0 NVIDIA 536.40

Blender Version
Broken: version: version: 4.0.2, branch: blender-v4.0-release, commit date: 2023-12-05 07:41, hash: 9be62e85b727
Worked: (newest version of Blender that worked as expected)

Short description of error
Hi, i have a big problem like all people with full vram...
I try to render a bedroom with 650mb of texture, and take 7.8gb of vram
Than, i render the same file, but with jpg texture that weight 150mb all... but take me 8.1gb vram

IDK why, but with texture that way less, use more vram, how is possible?
My problem is that i have 100 prop with 4K texture in a bedroom, for a production series, and cycle is fast, but i can't render a lot of object in the same scene

I also see, that if i render the bedroom without texture, take 4gb of vram (full white, with material override)... With 650mb of texture, take 8gb of vram.. Why 650mb of texture begin 4gb?

How blender studio render big scene? i see that there isn't a .tx file in blender to optimize the resolution of texture based on the distance from the camera, like redshift or arnold... This is a foundamentals thinks for use blender in a production series, i think...

What can i do? I can use simplify and load alla texture in 2K, but if i must render in 4K this solution is wrong, i can lost resolution to render 2K texture object in 4K

Exact steps for others to reproduce the error
[Please describe the exact steps needed to reproduce the issue]
[Based on the default startup or an attached .blend file (as simple as possible)]

**System Information** Operating system: Windows-10-10.0.22621-SP0 64 Bits Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090/PCIe/SSE2 NVIDIA Corporation 4.6.0 NVIDIA 536.40 **Blender Version** Broken: version: version: 4.0.2, branch: blender-v4.0-release, commit date: 2023-12-05 07:41, hash: `9be62e85b727` Worked: (newest version of Blender that worked as expected) **Short description of error** Hi, i have a big problem like all people with full vram... I try to render a bedroom with 650mb of texture, and take 7.8gb of vram Than, i render the same file, but with jpg texture that weight 150mb all... but take me 8.1gb vram IDK why, but with texture that way less, use more vram, how is possible? My problem is that i have 100 prop with 4K texture in a bedroom, for a production series, and cycle is fast, but i can't render a lot of object in the same scene I also see, that if i render the bedroom without texture, take 4gb of vram (full white, with material override)... With 650mb of texture, take 8gb of vram.. Why 650mb of texture begin 4gb? How blender studio render big scene? i see that there isn't a .tx file in blender to optimize the resolution of texture based on the distance from the camera, like redshift or arnold... This is a foundamentals thinks for use blender in a production series, i think... What can i do? I can use simplify and load alla texture in 2K, but if i must render in 4K this solution is wrong, i can lost resolution to render 2K texture object in 4K **Exact steps for others to reproduce the error** [Please describe the exact steps needed to reproduce the issue] [Based on the default startup or an attached .blend file (as simple as possible)]

William-Asperti added the

labels 2024-05-06 14:55:41 +02:00

Iliya Katushenock commented

2024-05-06 15:18:52 +02:00

Can you added simple example file?

YimingWu commented

2024-05-06 15:24:16 +02:00

Hi @William-Asperti , Blender will decompress all the images into actual pixel data into the VRam. 650MB->4GB sounds reasonably fine for a png/jpg. If 8GB is your video card limit, then it's perfectly reasonable to lower the texture resolution for objects that are much farther away.

If you have to do 4k texture, then if you have enough memory in your CPU side, you might need to consider rendering those intensive frames in CPU.

Hi @William-Asperti , Blender will decompress all the images into actual pixel data into the VRam. 650MB->4GB sounds reasonably fine for a png/jpg. If 8GB is your video card limit, then it's perfectly reasonable to lower the texture resolution for objects that are much farther away. If you have to do 4k texture, then if you have enough memory in your CPU side, you might need to consider rendering those intensive frames in CPU.

William-Asperti commented

2024-05-06 15:30:14 +02:00

Sorry, i can't
but the problem isn't in my specific case, but in blender... how can i render 100 prop with 4K PBR texture?

Sorry, i can't but the problem isn't in my specific case, but in blender... how can i render 100 prop with 4K PBR texture?

Rendersetting.png

257 KiB

Image.png

349 KiB

William-Asperti closed this issue

2024-05-06 15:30:17 +02:00

Blender Bot added

and removed

labels 2024-05-06 15:30:19 +02:00

William-Asperti commented

2024-05-06 15:39:37 +02:00

i ask to myself, how is possible that blender not optimized texture like redshift, arnold, renderman... I must reduce the texture size manually? this is impossible in a production series.. The SET must work in 360° there isn't a prop that in all shot are far awey from the camera

I'm actually working on this animation series https://www.formatbiz.it/dettNews.aspx?id=10979. in maya, with 60 UDIM 4K only for the ground... probably 20gb for all textures, without count poligon, fur, and grass scatter with mash....
In blender with only a bedroom with 100 prop i can't lunch a render

Yes CPU work.. but i can't wait 1 hourse for a single frame

Blender is fast, but not optimized for large scene

i ask to myself, how is possible that blender not optimized texture like redshift, arnold, renderman... I must reduce the texture size manually? this is impossible in a production series.. The SET must work in 360° there isn't a prop that in all shot are far awey from the camera I'm actually working on this animation series https://www.formatbiz.it/dettNews.aspx?id=10979. in maya, with 60 UDIM 4K only for the ground... probably 20gb for all textures, without count poligon, fur, and grass scatter with mash.... In blender with only a bedroom with 100 prop i can't lunch a render Yes CPU work.. but i can't wait 1 hourse for a single frame Blender is fast, but not optimized for large scene

William-Asperti reopened this issue

2024-05-06 15:39:41 +02:00

Blender Bot added

and removed

labels 2024-05-06 15:39:43 +02:00

William-Asperti commented

2024-05-06 15:41:33 +02:00

And not understand why, if i change the texture format and lost 400mb of weight texture, increase the vram usage instead of decreasing

Alaska commented

2024-05-07 05:34:51 +02:00

@William-Asperti as @ChengduLittleA pointed out, Cycles uses uncompressed textures. What does that mean? It means the size of the raw image is how much space the texture will take up in memory. Not the compressed size.

Take for example a 4096x4096 image with RGBA data with 8 bits per channel. The amount of memory it will take up is width x height x number of channels x bits per channel. So 4096 x 4096 x 4 x 8 = 536,870,912 bits (Roughly 64 Megabytes)

And if I test this with Cycles, this is the result I get.

Details on how to test this with Cycles

Open a command prompt
Run /path/to/blender -- --cycles-print-stats
Add a texture you want to test.
Start a render with the CPU then cancel it or wait for it to end.
Memory statistics will be printed to the command line.

But my file is only a 1 Megabyte PNG, So why is it taking up 64 Megabytes of space in Cycles? Because Cycles works with the raw pixel data while rendering, not the compressed image. So it doesn't matter how small your compressed image is, as long as it's 4096x4096 with 8 bits per channel with 4 channels, then it will be consume 64 Megabytes of space.

Is there a way to resolve this? Like can the compressed images be used directly? Technically yes, but they would need to be uncompressed very time they are used, which could significantly slow down rendering time.

GPUs typically have a way to store some types of compressed textures in VRAM and use them, but to my knowledge Cycles doesn't use that feature yet.

I'm not sure if this is a feature of OIIO or OSL, but on-demand texture loading or mip-mapping could be used to reduce memory usage. But this feature is only available on the CPU at the moment (most likely due to technically issues supporting it on the GPU).

Overall, I would consider high VRAM usage from textures to not be a bug. It could be improved, since it's not a bug, I will be closing this bug report.

i see that there isn't a .tx file in blender to optimize the resolution of texture based on the distance from the camera

I believe Blender does have tx support. But I don't think the memory saving features are implemented yet.

How blender studio render big scene?

By optimizing scenes to reduce memory usage down to what fits within their RAM/VRAM constraints. Along with having computers with more RAM/VRAM than what you may have.

@William-Asperti as @ChengduLittleA pointed out, Cycles uses uncompressed textures. What does that mean? It means the size of the raw image is how much space the texture will take up in memory. Not the compressed size. Take for example a 4096x4096 image with RGBA data with 8 bits per channel. The amount of memory it will take up is `width x height x number of channels x bits per channel`. So `4096 x 4096 x 4 x 8 = 536,870,912 bits (Roughly 64 Megabytes)` And if I test this with Cycles, this is the result I get. <details> <summary><b>Details on how to test this with Cycles</b></summary> 1. Open a command prompt 2. Run `/path/to/blender -- --cycles-print-stats` 3. Add a texture you want to test. 4. Start a render with the CPU then cancel it or wait for it to end. 5. Memory statistics will be printed to the command line. </details> But my file is only a 1 Megabyte PNG, So why is it taking up 64 Megabytes of space in Cycles? Because Cycles works with the raw pixel data while rendering, not the compressed image. So it doesn't matter how small your compressed image is, as long as it's 4096x4096 with 8 bits per channel with 4 channels, then it will be consume 64 Megabytes of space. --- Is there a way to resolve this? Like can the compressed images be used directly? Technically yes, but they would need to be uncompressed very time they are used, which could significantly slow down rendering time. GPUs typically have a way to store some types of compressed textures in VRAM and use them, but to my knowledge Cycles doesn't use that feature yet. --- I'm not sure if this is a feature of OIIO or OSL, but on-demand texture loading or mip-mapping could be used to reduce memory usage. But this feature is only available on the CPU at the moment (most likely due to technically issues supporting it on the GPU). --- Overall, I would consider high VRAM usage from textures to not be a bug. It could be improved, since it's not a bug, I will be closing this bug report. --- > i see that there isn't a .tx file in blender to optimize the resolution of texture based on the distance from the camera I believe Blender does have tx support. But I don't think the memory saving features are implemented yet. > How blender studio render big scene? By optimizing scenes to reduce memory usage down to what fits within their RAM/VRAM constraints. Along with having computers with more RAM/VRAM than what you may have.

👍 1

Alaska closed this issue

2024-05-07 05:34:55 +02:00

Blender Bot added

and removed

labels 2024-05-07 05:34:57 +02:00

Alaska commented

2024-05-07 05:36:35 +02:00

And not understand why, if i change the texture format and lost 400mb of weight texture, increase the vram usage instead of decreasing

This is a separate issue, please create a new bug report for that and provide example files.

> And not understand why, if i change the texture format and lost 400mb of weight texture, increase the vram usage instead of decreasing This is a separate issue, please create a new bug report for that and provide example files.

👍 1

William-Asperti commented

2024-05-07 09:22:35 +02:00

@Alaska
Hi, thanks wor your explanation.
I try to run blender from CMD and i see the 3 texture loaded, but not the memory statistic

@Alaska Hi, thanks wor your explanation. I try to run blender from CMD and i see the 3 texture loaded, but not the memory statistic

CMD_Blender.png

66 KiB

William-Asperti reopened this issue

2024-05-07 09:22:39 +02:00

Blender Bot added

and removed

labels 2024-05-07 09:22:42 +02:00

Alaska commented

2024-05-07 10:31:53 +02:00

To get the memory statistics, you need to run Blender with /path/to/blender -- --cycles-print-stats and render a scene on the CPU.

I should note not all memory statistics are tracked here. Texture memory usage and geometry memory usage is printed here, but BVH and state memory usage is not (state usage can get quite large on some GPUs)

To get the memory statistics, you need to run Blender with `/path/to/blender -- --cycles-print-stats` and render a scene on the CPU. I should note not all memory statistics are tracked here. Texture memory usage and geometry memory usage is printed here, but BVH and state memory usage is not (state usage can get quite large on some GPUs)

William-Asperti commented

2024-05-07 10:41:17 +02:00

sorry i'm a 3D artist, not a programmer
this is what i wrote in CMD "C:\Program Files\Blender Foundation\Blender 4.0\blender.exe" can you write the right string that i can past in cmd

i try this "C:\Program Files\Blender Foundation\Blender 4.0\blender.exe -- --cycles-print-stats" but not work

one other things 4096 x 4096 x 4 x 8 = not is 67,108,864 but 536.870.912 .... ??
Are you sure blender also takes bits into account? Because 4096 x 4096 x 4 is 67,108,864

sorry i'm a 3D artist, not a programmer this is what i wrote in CMD "C:\Program Files\Blender Foundation\Blender 4.0\blender.exe" can you write the right string that i can past in cmd i try this "C:\Program Files\Blender Foundation\Blender 4.0\blender.exe -- --cycles-print-stats" but not work one other things 4096 x 4096 x 4 x 8 = not is 67,108,864 but 536.870.912 .... ?? Are you sure blender also takes bits into account? Because 4096 x 4096 x 4 is 67,108,864

Alaska commented

2024-05-07 10:57:39 +02:00

i try this "C:\Program Files\Blender Foundation\Blender 4.0\blender.exe -- --cycles-print-stats" but not work

That should work.

one other things 4096 x 4096 x 4 x 8 = not is 67,108,864 but 536.870.912 .... ??
Are you sure blender also takes bits into account? Because 4096 x 4096 x 4 is 67,108,864

Sorry, I forgot to include bits in my calculation. You're correct. It's 536,870,912 bits which is roughly 64 Megabytes. I have updated by comment to reflect that.

> i try this "C:\Program Files\Blender Foundation\Blender 4.0\blender.exe -- --cycles-print-stats" but not work That should work. > one other things 4096 x 4096 x 4 x 8 = not is 67,108,864 but 536.870.912 .... ?? > Are you sure blender also takes bits into account? Because 4096 x 4096 x 4 is 67,108,864 Sorry, I forgot to include bits in my calculation. You're correct. It's 536,870,912 bits which is roughly 64 Megabytes. I have updated by comment to reflect that.

William-Asperti commented

2024-05-07 11:01:52 +02:00

Ok, i run blender correctly...

Last question... why if i export from substance to 3 channel... the final texture have 4 channel
1 channel are 16mb... 16x3 (RGB are 3) in 48. 16x4 is 64 mb

There is a way to have an image in RGB 48mb instead of RGB 64mb?

Ok, i run blender correctly... Last question... why if i export from substance to 3 channel... the final texture have 4 channel 1 channel are 16mb... 16x3 (RGB are 3) in 48. 16x4 is 64 mb There is a way to have an image in RGB 48mb instead of RGB 64mb?

Size.png

164 KiB

Photoshop.png

846 KiB

Alaska commented

2024-05-07 11:17:40 +02:00

I don't know why a three channel image is loaded as if it has 4 channels of data. I assume Cycles is creating a "empty" or "constant" alpha channel, but I don't know why.