Okay, after an epic battle with Win'10 Workgroups etc, I'm actually remote rendering a test-scene with six LaFemme figures on new Box. This task made my CAD-Tower's local render via twin graphics cards promptly 'fall over', totally blank...

I'm still on toe of 'learning curve', had a few hair-tearing moments before I realised that PPro_11.3 queue manager spends about five minutes doing 'admin stuff', sending files to remote Box, before that render begins...

But, Box's task manager shows render is only using ~8% of available CPU resources, so barely one (1) thread of the Ryzen7's 8-core = 16 available.

PoserPro_11 manual offers no clue to why this should be. Box' queue manager offers no obvious options...

Any ideas how the remote render app may conscript more of Box' dormant CPU power ?

Still, 4½ hours in, Box delivered...

https://www.renderosity.com/rr/mod/forumpro/?thread_id=2958942

I raised as wish-list item for P_12, but may be an obscure bug in PP_11.3.

Or, possibly, some quirk of Box' Win'10 Pro system that would need a 'security' flag cleared... D'uh.

Ha !! With Firefly set in Poser, network app correctly renders with multi-threads.

After doing 'admin stuff', app spun up to 100% CPU usage: FF render took fifteen (15) minutes !!

So, I've suggested that 11.3's 'single thread' remote render bug be sought in Superfly area...

FWIW, QueueManager 11.3.740

Curiously, same 'single thread' issue now seems to apply to PP_11.3's 'local' CPU-only Superfly renders, yet Firefly recruits up to 100%...

Have we been afflicted by a recent Win'10 update ??

SOLVED ! SOLVED !! SOLVED !!! It's excessive Progressive Bucket size !!

I thought to experiment with local renders on a simple scene, one LaF + swimsuit.

Superfly Path Trace Tile went straight to 100 %. Yeah, okay, but I prefer 'Progressive'...

Superfly Progressive went straight to 100%, too. WTF ??

After some iteration, I realised Poser had 'fired up' with its 'progressive' 0_volume +64_buckets defaults, but I usually set 64+1024 to make best use of my twin graphics cards. Seems such do not 'play well' with CPU-only renders. Bucket size is the main multi-thread killer. Break-over point seems to be 128+128...

For CPU-only Superfly renders, I got ...

Volume 0 ____ 16 ____ 64 ___ 64 __ 128 __ 64 __ 64

Bucket 64 ____ 64 ____ 64 __ 128__ 128 __ 256 __ 1024

CPU % 100 __ 100 ___100 __ 100 __ 90+ __~75 __ 20%

And remote renders ? With 128+128 set, six-up scene is now rendering with 95~~100% CPU, ~10x faster. And done. Took 36 mins instead 5½ hours. By reducing the bucket size to 64, could probably shave five minutes...

So, not a bug as such, but a 'gotcha'.

May we have a designated corner of Rendo forums for network rendering issues & ideas ?

Being able to hang a modest, perhaps superseded PC on home network to do CPU-only renders without throttling main PC is so handy...