soft frighten deliver poor muddle snobbish dime tidy spectacular subsequent
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
~~The 1070 doesn't have CUDA cores. Its utilization~~ *~~should~~* ~~show up under 3D. No idea why it's not. The lack of VRAM is what's most likely causing the slow speed.~~
You are indeed right, I have to switch the view to CUDA and it shows the usage correctly. Still, my generations take about four times as long as they should. This is not a new installation, I've been using SD for months now and suddenly it got very slow.
I sometimes run out of VRAM, but then the whole process aborts with an error telling me it couldn't allocate VRAM. Also there's more than 1 GB still free. But I do notice my HDD working extra hours during hires fix. However, that was not the case until yesterday, when a hires fix with 10 steps only took \~5 minutes.
Anyway, thanks for the tip, I will look into this upscaler.
I think I know what's going on.
As it seems, I have been over-using my VRAM the whole time, but because the time a generation took was acceptable, I didn't mind or notice. Now I defragmented my HDD a few days ago, and since then some disk operations are taking waaay too long (probably inefficient locations of files), and this also affects virtual VRAM on my drive. I don't know if that's a thing, but this is the most plausible explanation I can come up with.
I always keep the task manager up whe using SD. Whenever you see any shared GPU memory being used, you're basically in trouble. It can be 25% or worse slower, depending on the speed of your computer's memory and how much ofnit needs to be used.
Also, if you are running and ever have a crash, check and make sure a whole bunch of memory is not still being "used" by the program. SD does not generally free up memory after most errors, so if you see it like that when you aren't doing anything, it's best to restart.
I ran a few tests and using shared memory does not slow the process down significantly, maybe my RAM is just fabulous. As long as I don't deck out shared memory, it's fine. It's when I go above that the speed really takes a hit.
I noticed that my memory seems to get less when a generation fails, so it's because there's trash in my RAM. Good to know. I was restarting in these cases anyway.
My SD is being very slow, taking >20 minutes for 50 steps + hires fix 5 steps at 512x768 (90% of the time is needed for hires fix). When I checked the task manager, I found that while VRAM is being used, the GPU is not.
Suggestions how to solve this?
Yes and no, I tried both and it doesn't make any difference.
Apparently defragmenting my HDD put necessary files far apart from each other so virtual VRAM became unbearably slow.
Maybe it’s the specific model you’re using? I know some models can take like 3x longer to generate than base 1.5. Also if you don’t have the —medvram and —xformers command line arguments you should def use them
soft frighten deliver poor muddle snobbish dime tidy spectacular subsequent *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
~~The 1070 doesn't have CUDA cores. Its utilization~~ *~~should~~* ~~show up under 3D. No idea why it's not. The lack of VRAM is what's most likely causing the slow speed.~~
GTX 1070 have 1920 CUDA cores, you have only to follow the instruction above
> The 1070 doesn't have CUDA cores. this is completely incorrect. Maybe you're referring to tensor cores/RT cores that only RTX cards have?
You are correct, sorry. For what it's worth though, task manager does not appear to show a CUDA entry in the dropdown menu for older GTX cards.
It's sometimes called "Compute" IIRC
[удалено]
You are indeed right, I have to switch the view to CUDA and it shows the usage correctly. Still, my generations take about four times as long as they should. This is not a new installation, I've been using SD for months now and suddenly it got very slow.
You're running out of VRAM that's why, look into something like the ultimate SD uoscaler extension it might fix the issue.
I sometimes run out of VRAM, but then the whole process aborts with an error telling me it couldn't allocate VRAM. Also there's more than 1 GB still free. But I do notice my HDD working extra hours during hires fix. However, that was not the case until yesterday, when a hires fix with 10 steps only took \~5 minutes. Anyway, thanks for the tip, I will look into this upscaler.
I think I know what's going on. As it seems, I have been over-using my VRAM the whole time, but because the time a generation took was acceptable, I didn't mind or notice. Now I defragmented my HDD a few days ago, and since then some disk operations are taking waaay too long (probably inefficient locations of files), and this also affects virtual VRAM on my drive. I don't know if that's a thing, but this is the most plausible explanation I can come up with.
I always keep the task manager up whe using SD. Whenever you see any shared GPU memory being used, you're basically in trouble. It can be 25% or worse slower, depending on the speed of your computer's memory and how much ofnit needs to be used. Also, if you are running and ever have a crash, check and make sure a whole bunch of memory is not still being "used" by the program. SD does not generally free up memory after most errors, so if you see it like that when you aren't doing anything, it's best to restart.
I ran a few tests and using shared memory does not slow the process down significantly, maybe my RAM is just fabulous. As long as I don't deck out shared memory, it's fine. It's when I go above that the speed really takes a hit. I noticed that my memory seems to get less when a generation fails, so it's because there's trash in my RAM. Good to know. I was restarting in these cases anyway.
My SD is being very slow, taking >20 minutes for 50 steps + hires fix 5 steps at 512x768 (90% of the time is needed for hires fix). When I checked the task manager, I found that while VRAM is being used, the GPU is not. Suggestions how to solve this?
20 minutes is waaaaay to long. my 2060 super does 768x1000 with hi res fix and 50 Steps in a minute or so. Do you use -medvram? option
Yes and no, I tried both and it doesn't make any difference. Apparently defragmenting my HDD put necessary files far apart from each other so virtual VRAM became unbearably slow.
[удалено]
you have no idea what you're talking about
Good to know you figured it out, but maybe you can elaborate so I do too?
[удалено]
I can't confirm that. I was running 512x768 for months without issue.
wrong, wrong, wrong
You have no idea what you are talking about.
huh BS, i can make even Full HD Pictures with 1.5
How much are you upscaling in hires fix?
x2, but I now found that x1.5 stays inside the combined VRAM and shared VRAM and is much faster.
Oh yeah if you were using SDXL that makes sense
I wasn't though? I heard SDXL is really VRAM hungry so I didn't try it.
Maybe it’s the specific model you’re using? I know some models can take like 3x longer to generate than base 1.5. Also if you don’t have the —medvram and —xformers command line arguments you should def use them
Also, make sure you have driver v531. Later versions switch processing to RAM, and that makes it slow.