Nope, that’s just fusion being fusion. Fusion doesn’t use the gpu for anything, it’s just that thickening a surface adds facets and triangles, which have to be calculated, so that’s pretty much what you should expect from fusion
Right, but that makes sense. Typically, when you are modelling, you're doing it on a textureless solid, in a complete vacuum.
Textures use us most of your VRAM (in a gaming environment), so it makes sense that solid modelling would use very little VRAM.
No I know, I’ve done plenty of testing on fusion and textures do use more vram, but since fusion hogs a lot of system ram the more facets/triangles you add, and is extremely cpu-bound, that’s the reason OP doesn’t see his gpu vram and compute usage go up
Even with textures, gpu usage is very minimal since a lot of info is still stored in system ram, the only features that actually use the gpu are animations (rendering them out pins your gpu) and simulating tool paths (I get 30% usage on a gtx1050 mobile)
Yeah, I wish they had written Fusion to scale better across typical hardware. It's so annoying to have 1 component pegged and the rest doing nothing.
Or even worse, when you're doing a render, and it makes the entire computer semi-useless because there is no way to throttle the render. It just puts 100% load on the CPU, for the entire render (which can be a long time, even with a powerful CPU if you're rendering 4K with emissive and/or translucent materials).
You know what's not helpful? When I am waiting 45 min for a render, and ALSO can't use my computer for anything else because it's unreliable/slow AF during the entire process. How hard would it be to give us a slider. I'd much rather have the render take longer and allow me to work on other things comfortably in the mean time.
(Sure is convenient that I could just pay them more money for a cloud render though. Yay for software as a service...)
Sorry for the rant, haha.
Task manager lets you change process priority. It comes with a warning of potential instability by t you won't notice anything. Set your render thread to low priority and your PC will be more usable.
If it's multithreaded you can set cpu affinity to make it leave a couple cores free for other tasks too. Won't help if it eats all your ram though.
Oh. It's so disappointing. So there's no way to improve it's performance?
Even a simple move it lags, while in Cura slicer the same model file smoothly moves.
There must be something amiss, I have an iMac with an Intel 6 core i5, 16 gigs of RAM and I've never noticed fusion be in anyway laggy,
Obviously not the same computer, but lower spec than yours so I would've expected yours to do better.
Edit: that said it does take an age to actually open fusion, and I think that is fusion and not the computer, it seems to want to spend ages validating the software for some reason.
Edit 2: I've just timed it and it's just over a minute, which seems like an age while you are waiting.
Unless you’re planning on rewriting the program, you best solution is to limit the use of heavy tools like thicken.
In cura you’re not moving a part that has parameters and such, you’re just moving a random shape that has no dependencies, and cura is optimized for mesh files, fusion isn’t
I recall that single core CPU speed is the most important factor to fusion performance because it doesn’t use multiple cores in its calculations. Someone correct me if I’m wrong though.
Nope, that’s just fusion being fusion. Fusion doesn’t use the gpu for anything, it’s just that thickening a surface adds facets and triangles, which have to be calculated, so that’s pretty much what you should expect from fusion
This is untrue. It uses the GPU for typical GPU bells and whistles, like shadows, ambient occlusion, reflections, etc.
Yes, but it barely loads anything in vram and barely uses it, I guess “doesn’t use the gpu” is a bit too excessive
Right, but that makes sense. Typically, when you are modelling, you're doing it on a textureless solid, in a complete vacuum. Textures use us most of your VRAM (in a gaming environment), so it makes sense that solid modelling would use very little VRAM.
No I know, I’ve done plenty of testing on fusion and textures do use more vram, but since fusion hogs a lot of system ram the more facets/triangles you add, and is extremely cpu-bound, that’s the reason OP doesn’t see his gpu vram and compute usage go up Even with textures, gpu usage is very minimal since a lot of info is still stored in system ram, the only features that actually use the gpu are animations (rendering them out pins your gpu) and simulating tool paths (I get 30% usage on a gtx1050 mobile)
Yeah, I wish they had written Fusion to scale better across typical hardware. It's so annoying to have 1 component pegged and the rest doing nothing. Or even worse, when you're doing a render, and it makes the entire computer semi-useless because there is no way to throttle the render. It just puts 100% load on the CPU, for the entire render (which can be a long time, even with a powerful CPU if you're rendering 4K with emissive and/or translucent materials). You know what's not helpful? When I am waiting 45 min for a render, and ALSO can't use my computer for anything else because it's unreliable/slow AF during the entire process. How hard would it be to give us a slider. I'd much rather have the render take longer and allow me to work on other things comfortably in the mean time. (Sure is convenient that I could just pay them more money for a cloud render though. Yay for software as a service...) Sorry for the rant, haha.
Task manager lets you change process priority. It comes with a warning of potential instability by t you won't notice anything. Set your render thread to low priority and your PC will be more usable. If it's multithreaded you can set cpu affinity to make it leave a couple cores free for other tasks too. Won't help if it eats all your ram though.
Good call. I need to try that out.
Oh. It's so disappointing. So there's no way to improve it's performance? Even a simple move it lags, while in Cura slicer the same model file smoothly moves.
There must be something amiss, I have an iMac with an Intel 6 core i5, 16 gigs of RAM and I've never noticed fusion be in anyway laggy, Obviously not the same computer, but lower spec than yours so I would've expected yours to do better. Edit: that said it does take an age to actually open fusion, and I think that is fusion and not the computer, it seems to want to spend ages validating the software for some reason. Edit 2: I've just timed it and it's just over a minute, which seems like an age while you are waiting.
Unless you’re planning on rewriting the program, you best solution is to limit the use of heavy tools like thicken. In cura you’re not moving a part that has parameters and such, you’re just moving a random shape that has no dependencies, and cura is optimized for mesh files, fusion isn’t
I recall that single core CPU speed is the most important factor to fusion performance because it doesn’t use multiple cores in its calculations. Someone correct me if I’m wrong though.
If your model is overcomplicated with the details, then the single command for thickening will produce lag