Blender 5.2.2

If I may chime in here. I agree with @kikems. While the work done so far on Amiga Blender 5.2.2 is really impressive, I think we need to think about the user experience.
As a fanboy of Blender since about the 2.4 days, I know first hand what happens when Blender hits a hardware boundary. It's not pretty. While things have improved quite a bit,
I've managed to lock up even the most recent of Blender builds. This despite my Windows machine having 16 cores, 32 gigs of ram,
and an Nvidia 4090 gpu. Blender 5.x series is, whether Ton and Co. want to admit it, designed with those kinds of specs in mind.

While I understand that a new mult-core kernel is being developed, users of 5.x Blender are going to need more than 3.5 gigs of memory. I'm not talking about rendering either.
Simulations, geonodes, texturing, etc. require and generate a lot of data, much of it residing in memory before it gets written to cache (assuming you're baking to cache).
There are also a lot of addons available that can add to the complexity.

All in all, I'm looking forward to a new Amiga Blender. I just think we might want to keep in mind @kikems suggestion.

@kishigo
But then how 3.x version for example will fix for us issues of our 3.5gb limitation ? I mean, it's the same stop factors for editing big videos, big rendering, etc, no ? Yes, sure, 3.x can be just faster in basics, but then, it also will lockups once you reach limit of 1.8gb +those large blocks of ExtMem where we can put some data too, but still ..

I think i firstly will make 5.2 out, then, you all can test and play with it, find it bugs, issues which we need to deal with, and then, based on users experience and real necessary tasks we will see how it.

Cool, keep up the good work.

@kas1e

+1

@kas1e

Actually I was thinking more along the lines of 2.50-2.60. That is, post "recode" but pre Cycles. I think @kikems suggested 2.83 or 2.93. We currently have 2.49.
The logic was to try to go back to a Blender whose design was limited to the hardware available at that time. In 2011 that would generally be a 2-4 core Intel or AMD cpu.
I think more cores were available, but I couldn't afford them.

But let me be clear. This is your project, and I understand that. I don't know if I can express just how excited and enthusiastic I am that you're doing this.
Regardless of how things shake out. I intend to download it and play with it.

For that I wholeheartedly thank you.