New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Quadro? GTX?

post #1 of 8
1/29/06 at 5:35pm
Thread Starter 
My finger is hovering over the purchase button... I am hesitating on the Quadro vs GTX issue though. I do a LOT of 3d aniamtion work, so Im wonding if anyone here has expereince with any real difference between the GTX and the Quadro vid card?

Thanks!

Mike
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 8
1/29/06 at 7:49pm
Go with Quardo - it' optimized for 3D modeling. And you can still play games pretty damn well. If you do more gaming, then GTX.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 8
1/29/06 at 9:13pm
3d animation work for final product? 7800gtx won't do very accurate rendering, but it will work perfectly fine for just editing and stuff.

quadro is for final rendering of the 3d product.

i say go with the gtx.
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 8
1/29/06 at 9:36pm
Thread Starter 
Thanks artem

Maximus: Final rendering is done by the CPU, not the vid card. I was just wondering how the 2 compared when working in Viewports/HW particles etc. I've always used gaming cards to do aniamtion, but I need to see if I can justify the extra $160 for a pro-level production card.

Has anyone else here noticed any drastic improvements with the quadro?

m
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 8
1/29/06 at 9:49pm
For use with professional 3D apps the Quadro Go 1400 is twice as fast as the Go 7800GTX and offers rendering accuracy and quality (particularly anti-aliasing) features that the Go 7800GTX doesn't. However, for 3D gaming it's almost the exact opposite, as the Go 7800GTX is twice as fast as the Quadro Go 1400 (given that the Quadro is based on the Go 6800 core).

Much of the Quadro's lead over the 7800GTX in professional 3D apps is due to careful driver optimisation by NVidia, in the past people have had some success with hard/soft-mods to get the Quadro drivers to install with their GeForce gaming cards, I haven't heard if this is possible with the Go 7800GTX but if you're more of a gamer and only a casual 3D artist/designer then you may want to consider the 7800GTX. If the opposite is true and gaming is only a casual pastime then the Quadro is probably the better choice.

It's basically a case of horses for courses.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 8
1/29/06 at 9:56pm
Thread Starter 
Thanks Andre, perfect explenation! CG is how I earn my living, so I guess that makes my choice a no-brainer... Although Im looking into how succesful soft-modding is now

Wicked!

m
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 8
1/29/06 at 10:06pm
Here's a link to a comparative review of desktop Quadro (including Quadro FX1400) and 7800GTX cards in SpecViewPerf 8.1 benchmarks....

http://features.cgsociety.org/story_...id=3321&page=3

The 7800GTX (even in SLI mode) gets soundly trounced by the FX1400 in all of the results, with the FX1400's performance gain being anywhere between 20% (in the EnSight Viewset) up to almost 200% (in the Pro/Engineer Viewset).

However, the FX1400's gain in 3DSMax is only 66% and in Cinema 4D benchmarks it's actually slower! Also, these benchmarks are only synthetic and cover a wide range of functions whereas your needs may be more specific to a particular regular function within a particular application.

Not to mention that the benefits of a professional 3D card are seen only in Pre-vis as an aid to workflow and you may find the performance and accuracy of a GeForce card is more than adequate for your needs (as I do).
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 8
1/29/06 at 11:00pm
Thread Starter 
Damn... thats a significant difference in Maya. Thanks for the link, I'm surprised I missed it o.O
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sager & Clevo Notebooks