so it can’t be turned on generally yes graphics acceleration commanded ?
for all models? it must be for the development team too annoying someone always comes up with another graphics model they want to add
1 Like
That’s exactly what I was thinking , if it don’t works well , user could upgrade on their own if it don’t reach the minimum requirement , in place of cherry picking because there are many cards that are faster than RTX 3050
I did suggested that yesterday to the team to remove the limitation and let the users decide .
1 Like
I’d love to know whether there will ever be GPU acceleration for Apple M-series CPUs. The GPUs in the Pro and Max models are around 3060 to 4060 performance in raw raster. I guess it will be a very low priority due to the low numbers of people using Macs.
Hi @Myklis2000
Please upload images direct to the reply , the link require to have an account to see it. I am on my phone
I tested yesterday out again 5.6.5 for 4 hours and there were no issues with markers even at the lowest marker level possible or any angels .
I used the recommended computer system to run the test.
I did had issues in 5.6.4 but now no more.
If that was the case then any card on any system would be possible to use regardless CUDA or not , what of course would be great for everyone .
Wishful thinking 
I will check on computer
But on phone still no access
Just upload images here , less hassle for everyone
Looks Kris , even with minimal markers , scanning just right
I will tag in @Revopoint3D-Gena to assist you , in main time collect the logo files
https://support.revopoint3d.com/hc/en-us/articles/24404212920987-How-do-I-find-the-software-log
She will take from here
P.S I suggest you reinstall the software removing data as well, and a clean installation and recalibrate your MetroX , bad calibration affects markers
Ah ok I was thinking it was screenshot , ok no problem, I check later when I am in my computer.
When you watch the video. It will show you that the 5.6.5 is at least 1 minute slower scanning than 5.6.4 and because the 5.6.5 software only tracking about 1/3 of the markers at 45 degree to the turntable it uses much longer time and the quality of the scan is actually lower. But I guess with GPU assisted tracking it will be better but I don’t understand why the software is only picking up like 30% of the markers. When using 5.6.4 it pick up the 90% of the markers on the turntable at a 45 degree angle. And giving a better result
I am not sure why it’s happening on your system.
I tested both with CPU and GPU and for me it is much better than before .
Maybe have to do with the graphic card , it is hard to tell .
Please collect the LOG files
And on Monday @Revopoint3D-Gena will investigate your situation
I am off for the weekend
apology to everyone, you aparently need to do the calibration on new version or else the markers won’t track properly. now it is working like it should
so do calibration everyone
I told you 5 hours go to check the calibration , this is the first sign when markets are not picked up
Glad you got it !
Mesh quality resets to recommended after every meshing now. 
Still an issue with grid size display: it shows a different grid size/quality relationship directly after fusing than it does after the first meshing. Still an arbitrary behind the scenes cap on number of polygons.
My favorite change: “Target Point Distance” makes so much more sense than “Preset Point Distance.” Also appreciate the arbitrary cap on it is gone. It really shows how much scanning you need to do if you want to fuse at 0.15mm. Scanning at the old preset distances was bound to disappoint when fusing much lower.
1 Like
Remember the recommended setting is based on the total volume of the fused object so if you captured more than you need I would not suggest myself with that because it is no different than One Click edit .
The GRID should be the same as your fusing settings and not recommend , ignore and set it according to your fusing settings for best results .
It was very confusing before for others that believed it was actually the capture settings of the final pitch point distance and not just preview settings for live scan.
Of course setting it at higher will allow you to see better how much you have left to capture , however using finest point preview will affect your graphic card , so if any issues at higher settings , it is recommended to set it to lower .
The minimal 8000 frames for small parts is still the golden ratio for smooth surface if fused at the highest quality .
seems to be forgot 1080ti already, damn
Seeing some parts of objects disappear when fusing. Fusing this XBOX controller at the recommended 0.25mm results in the left-hand thumbstick disappearing. However, fuse at 0.27mm and the thumbstick remains intact.
1 Like
Actually I just figured out the grid size display bug. If you trim the point cloud immediately after fusing and then switch to the mesh tab, the min/max of the grid size display from 1.0 - 8.0 is still based on the un-trimmed volume but the recommended quality is based on the new volume. Confusing? Yes it is. After meshing the grid size min/max is updated and seems to be in sync with the quality setting.
As far as the cap goes, regardless of what level you should mesh at, it’s weird when, using my XBOX scan from a few posts up, mesh quality 5.9 is ~1.2m polygons, 6.0 is ~1m polygons, and 6.1-8.0 are all ~768K polygons. 
That is s bug , in some cases how higher you go how lower the polygon results . I wonder if they do that on purpose to prevent crashing because that’s not the way
There is no reason to use GRID if you ignore your fusing settings .
Having a 8 points cube and meshing it with 16 points will not make it any better , artificial points will be induced for no reason and fine details can be erased in process.
I requested the GRID myself to be able to proper mesh the point cloud based on my fusing settings, it is my baby 
1 Like