Supposedly, Maya isn't slow but it isn't fast either. However, the slow disk speed of the PBG4 make it less nice.
But more interestingly, if you have the dough to get Maya, then you probably have the dough to just go out there and get a really nice PowerMac. I also suspect that it will get a huge speedup come Quartz Extreme.
First of all, I have a 500, and when I ran maya it was OK but not great. I have 512MB of RAM.
If you got an 800Mhz with lots of RAM and preferably an external 7200 firewire drive, I bet Maya would run quite well. When 10.2 ships, I bet it will run quite exceptionally.
I'm not familiar with the SGI Octane. I'm guessing you're running a MIPS 5300 or similar, in which case it also have some tasty ASICs in there suited for 3D design, etc. I am familiar with the Indy's, though. About similar?
A new PBG4 will outdo those. When the Radeon is tapped in 10.2 through Raycer's Quartz Extreme, it will REALLY outdo those, since both will essentially have custom ASICs.
The problem with MacMaya is that it's the "Complete" version, not the "Unlimited" version. Two things I know that you're missing right away are sub-d modeling and Maya Live (for camera tracking).
I could not comment on speed, however. I can say that I'd consider LW for the Mac instead, unless there're specific Maya features you require.
(Disclaimer: I'm no expert in any one 3D app. I'm currently learning Maya on the job, and I worked with Softimage for a few years in a corporate environment. I have a respectable working knowledge of Soft and am learning more about Maya every day. I did some LW tutes and read several reviews on it. Based on all that ;-), I believe LW might be more cost-effective for you, assuming you haven't bought Maya already. )
Quartz is the two-dimensional PDF layer of OS X. It simply is, there's no getting around it. The brilliance of Quartz Extreme is using 3-D hardware, which has been designed to render millions of triangles near-instantly, to render 2-D user interface elements.
A typical Quake III scene is on the order of 100,000 triangles. A typical desktop scene is on the order of 10 to 100. Some bright young thinker realized that if the 3-D hardware is so fast then we shouldn't need to wait for the main CPU to draw the desktop, it should be drawn as a 3-D scene that happens to be in a plane.
So, you see, Quartz Extreme has almost nothing to do with Maya or any other genuine 3-D program. These were either already using the 3-D hardware to render 3-D images, or were using the CPU and will continue to do so, although Quartz Extreme will move the window in which the rendering was done around slightly faster afterwards. There are improvements to 3-D handling in Jaguar, but they aren't called Quartz Extreme.
<strong>I am looking for a portable maya solution and do not want a bulky dell laptop.
I like the video aspect of the tiBook as well.
if it were to run maya and shake then all bases would be covered!
but before i drop the cash on a new g4 tibook i need to know how maya runs on it.
currently i run maya on a 195mhz SGI octane SI with 0 texture memory... is the tibook performing better than this?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Take your money and upgrade or replace your Octane. The market is SO oversaturated with those machines right now. You could probably get an MXE Octane with dual R12000 processors for about what you would spend on a PowerBook g4. Remember, SGI's are specifically designed for visualization tasks like this. The graphics subsystem alone is worth it for Maya.
I've used Maya on a Mac... but it's similar to using, say, Combustion on a Mac. It runs, it doesn't run slow per se, but it doesn't run like it does on my Octane.
Octanes are so slow compared to almost anything out there these days, at least in terms of rendering. We still have a couple of Octanes and an Onyx at the office, but nobody wants to use them.
Since the cost of Maya Complete is now $1995, I don't think the cost advantage vs. Lightwave is much of an issue anymore. Unless you use Cloth and Fur, I don't see much use for Unlimited. You can achieve the same results with the CPS plugin, as with subdivisions.
Once the next version comes out, the problems such as the non-threaded renderer wil be fixed.
The biggest factor in terms of performance on a Mac of any form factor, at least to me, is graphics performance. Right now they're OK as long as the models don't get too heavy. But Apple needs a higher end solution like, for instance, a Quadro 4 card. Maybe the Geforce4 4600 Ti will suffice, but I don't know anyone who has it yet.
Now, back to Lightwave as a possibility. The choice between Maya and Lightwave depends on what you're going to do with it. If you're doing character animation, then Maya is the choice. If you're doing 3D logos or web content, then Lightwave would probably be a better choice.
Hope this doesn't confuse things even more for you.
Comments
But more interestingly, if you have the dough to get Maya, then you probably have the dough to just go out there and get a really nice PowerMac. I also suspect that it will get a huge speedup come Quartz Extreme.
I like the video aspect of the tiBook as well.
if it were to run maya and shake then all bases would be covered!
but before i drop the cash on a new g4 tibook i need to know how maya runs on it.
currently i run maya on a 195mhz SGI octane SI with 0 texture memory... is the tibook performing better than this?
If you got an 800Mhz with lots of RAM and preferably an external 7200 firewire drive, I bet Maya would run quite well. When 10.2 ships, I bet it will run quite exceptionally.
I'm not familiar with the SGI Octane. I'm guessing you're running a MIPS 5300 or similar, in which case it also have some tasty ASICs in there suited for 3D design, etc. I am familiar with the Indy's, though. About similar?
A new PBG4 will outdo those. When the Radeon is tapped in 10.2 through Raycer's Quartz Extreme, it will REALLY outdo those, since both will essentially have custom ASICs.
[ 06-12-2002: Message edited by: Splinemodel ]</p>
I could not comment on speed, however. I can say that I'd consider LW for the Mac instead, unless there're specific Maya features you require.
(Disclaimer: I'm no expert in any one 3D app. I'm currently learning Maya on the job, and I worked with Softimage for a few years in a corporate environment. I have a respectable working knowledge of Soft and am learning more about Maya every day. I did some LW tutes and read several reviews on it. Based on all that ;-), I believe LW might be more cost-effective for you, assuming you haven't bought Maya already. )
A typical Quake III scene is on the order of 100,000 triangles. A typical desktop scene is on the order of 10 to 100. Some bright young thinker realized that if the 3-D hardware is so fast then we shouldn't need to wait for the main CPU to draw the desktop, it should be drawn as a 3-D scene that happens to be in a plane.
So, you see, Quartz Extreme has almost nothing to do with Maya or any other genuine 3-D program. These were either already using the 3-D hardware to render 3-D images, or were using the CPU and will continue to do so, although Quartz Extreme will move the window in which the rendering was done around slightly faster afterwards. There are improvements to 3-D handling in Jaguar, but they aren't called Quartz Extreme.
<strong>I am looking for a portable maya solution and do not want a bulky dell laptop.
I like the video aspect of the tiBook as well.
if it were to run maya and shake then all bases would be covered!
but before i drop the cash on a new g4 tibook i need to know how maya runs on it.
currently i run maya on a 195mhz SGI octane SI with 0 texture memory... is the tibook performing better than this?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Take your money and upgrade or replace your Octane. The market is SO oversaturated with those machines right now. You could probably get an MXE Octane with dual R12000 processors for about what you would spend on a PowerBook g4. Remember, SGI's are specifically designed for visualization tasks like this. The graphics subsystem alone is worth it for Maya.
I've used Maya on a Mac... but it's similar to using, say, Combustion on a Mac. It runs, it doesn't run slow per se, but it doesn't run like it does on my Octane.
Since the cost of Maya Complete is now $1995, I don't think the cost advantage vs. Lightwave is much of an issue anymore. Unless you use Cloth and Fur, I don't see much use for Unlimited. You can achieve the same results with the CPS plugin, as with subdivisions.
Once the next version comes out, the problems such as the non-threaded renderer wil be fixed.
The biggest factor in terms of performance on a Mac of any form factor, at least to me, is graphics performance. Right now they're OK as long as the models don't get too heavy. But Apple needs a higher end solution like, for instance, a Quadro 4 card. Maybe the Geforce4 4600 Ti will suffice, but I don't know anyone who has it yet.
Now, back to Lightwave as a possibility. The choice between Maya and Lightwave depends on what you're going to do with it. If you're doing character animation, then Maya is the choice. If you're doing 3D logos or web content, then Lightwave would probably be a better choice.
Hope this doesn't confuse things even more for you.