which one is best for 3d apps

[moris7]

Hi guys!
I'm currently shopping for a new pc..Probably a i7 920..
The thing is i have a choice of 2 graphic cards...And don't know which one should i get

Radeon hd4870x2 2048mb or
GEFORCE gtx 285 1024mb

I thing the X2 in the Radeon is worthless in 3d apps..Am i right?
So Is the 2048mb worth the 100$ more or should i just get the geforce?

My pc is mainly for 3dsMax 2010 ,and some other apps like Vue,zbrush and photoshop..
Any help would be appreciated!!
Thanks!!

 

[Solaris17]

hmmm well their not 3d program cards but i use my GX2's for rendering and i can tell you vram is mad important

though it all depends on your patience level and deadline times both would render pretty quick my apps are as follows in case you need a veiwpoint


3DS Max 2010
Bryce 6.1
lightwave 9
Maya 8.5
Adobe CS4 Master collection suite
Poser 7
Conitec 3d game studio A7
terragen 1 and 2
Gmax

 

[moris7]

Are you saying that in rendering mode my render app will recognize the x2 and will render a bit faster?
What about in viewport, do you think there's a big difference between the two's? Considering that the Radeon is 100$ more?
I use some evermotion library (vegetation..I'm in the 3d architectural field)

Thanks for your quick response !!

 

[Solaris17]

some programs deffinetely recognize more than 1 card

as for exact card well are you redering images or scenes? in imagines the ATI will render faster but it will probably be neglagable...in scenes though more cards and more vram will make a huge diffirence.

 

[erocker]

If most of the applications/programs you use are optimized to use two ATi GPU's then the 4870X2 for sure. If not The GTX285 or even higher clocked HD 4890(it's cheaper) would be fine. The best way to decide is to make a list of all the applications you use, then research each application to see if it can work with ATi CrossFire.

 

[KainXS]

http://www.motherboards.org/reviews/hardware/1825_10.html

ati cards usually outperform nvidia's in apps like 3dsmax but the 4870x2 dosen't scale well in them

i would get a 4890 if i were you

 

[angelkiller]

Maybe I missed something, but why not get a workstation graphics card? I know they're expensive, but they're much, much faster than Geforce/Radeon cards.

 

[moris7]

Angelkiller
For what i've read, it's seems they don't justify the price.

A lot of people are saying that the gamer's pc are almost as fast as the workstations today.
Same for the graphic cards...
The thing about the graphic cards is that i'm shopping with Dell...And the xps 730 are my options for now, they seems pretty good for 3d apps and cost much less..And they offer those 2 cards..

I'm also looking at the Precision t7500

http://configure.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=ca&CS=cabsdt1&l=en&oc=T7500_R_E
but it seems less impressive than the xps730x..

http://configure.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=ca&CS=cabsdt1&l=en&OC=DT_X730_F2_BE

That's where i am!!
I'm willing to pay about 2500.00$

 

[mudkip]

Angelkiller
For what i've read, it's seems they don't justify the price.

A lot of people are saying that the gamer's pc are almost as fast as the workstations today.
Same for the graphic cards...
The thing about the graphic cards is that i'm shopping with Dell...And the xps 730 are my options for now, they seems pretty good for 3d apps and cost much less..And they offer those 2 cards..

I'm also looking at the Precision t7500

http://configure.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=ca&CS=cabsdt1&l=en&oc=T7500_R_E
but it seems less impressive than the xps730x..

http://configure.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=ca&CS=cabsdt1&l=en&OC=DT_X730_F2_BE

That's where i am!!
I'm willing to pay about 2500.00$

Lol , damn expensive and I don't like builds like this

 

[phanbuey]

Angelkiller
For what i've read, it's seems they don't justify the price.

A lot of people are saying that the gamer's pc are almost as fast as the workstations today.
Same for the graphic cards...
The thing about the graphic cards is that i'm shopping with Dell...And the xps 730 are my options for now, they seems pretty good for 3d apps and cost much less..And they offer those 2 cards..

I'm also looking at the Precision t7500

http://configure.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=ca&CS=cabsdt1&l=en&oc=T7500_R_E
but it seems less impressive than the xps730x..

http://configure.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=ca&CS=cabsdt1&l=en&OC=DT_X730_F2_BE

That's where i am!!
I'm willing to pay about 2500.00$

that is not true... a workstation gfx card, the quadro FX 3800 (which runs about $899) renders:
- 3dsmax04 at 46.12
- Catia-02 at 49.51
- ensight at 46.12
-SPECapc3ds Max 2009 at 5.52

a $500 GTX 295 renders
- 3dsmax04 at 10.75
- Catia-02 at 13.86
- ensight at 17.23
-SPECapc3ds Max 2009 at 3.18

(INFO TAKEN FROM CPU MAGAZINE sept. 2009 issue)

and this type of trends extends to just about any (barring cinebench) 3d rendering app... the workstation card renders sometimes 400% faster than the top of the line dual GPU offering. It uses less than half the power (only one six pin connector), and runs much quieter. Performance/$ is owned by workstation cards in the workstation space...
Basically, you can spend $900 on the GFX card and $1000 on the rest of the system (if you build it) and have a monster rendering machine for $1900.

All you have to do is put it together and voila.

 

[angelkiller]

that is not true... a workstation gfx card, the quadro FX 3800 (which runs about $899) renders:
- 3dsmax04 at 46.12
- Catia-02 at 49.51
- ensight at 46.12
-SPECapc3ds Max 2009 at 5.52

a $500 GTX 295 renders
- 3dsmax04 at 10.75
- Catia-02 at 13.86
- ensight at 17.23
-SPECapc3ds Max 2009 at 3.18

and this type of trends extends to just about any (barring cinebench) 3d rendering app... the workstation card renders sometimes 400% faster than the top of the line dual GPU offering. It uses less than half the power (only one six pin connector), and runs much quieter. Performance/$ is owned by workstation cards in the workstation space...
Basically, you can spend $900 on the GFX card and $1000 on the rest of the system (if you build it) and have a monster rendering machine for $1900.

All you have to do is put it together and voila.

You read CPU too?

I was going to refer to the same article. Workstation graphics cards blow gaming cards out of the water in terms of professional apps. No competition. The GTX 295 is even beat by a FirePro V3750, which uses similar hardware to a 4670. Workstation cards are optimized through software to perform really well in 3D apps and the difference between a non-optimized gaming card and a worstation card is huge.

I was getting my numbers and info from an article in CPU Magazine. I'd recommend running over to a bookstore and reading the article. (p24 of the Sept 09 issue)

If you really want speed in professional apps, you might want to look at these Dells. They have workstation graphics card options. I think you can get a pretty sick machine for alot less than $2500. The system that phanbuey put together is on the lines of what I was thinking. But if you don't want to build it yourself (I strongly recommend building it yourself, even if you're unsure about your skills), you can always just get a similarly configured Dell from the link above. But the Dell will likely be more expensive... The $1800 config is only equipped with 2GB of RAM and an 80GB HDD. :shadedshu

 

[phanbuey]

You read CPU too?

I was going to refer to the same article. Workstation graphics cards blow gaming cards out of the water in terms of professional apps. ....

Lol yeah i was quoting the sept 2009 article...

I mean, building workstations is always better than buying. That $2500 dell will get blown out of the water with a custom built workstation IMO.

BTW... that Dell Precision T7500 is a MASSIVE computer, the Industrial Engineering department has those, and they are literally bigger and heavier than a WC'd full tower tower. Beasts.

 

[moris7]

First..thank you guys for helping me so quickly!!

Here's what a friend of mine wrote me...

Basically, for most people, quadro cards are a waste of money. Also, in the benchmarks done, SLI was actually more of a hinderance than a benefit. These were done on ‘real world’ scenes. I’ve recently done tests on a Quadro 4800, and without performance drivers, neither it nor the Quadro 5600 can best a GeForce 285. I will be getting a second 4800 in the next week or so, so I can do benchmarks on SLI in a Quadro environment.

That said, NVIdia told me this week that performance drivers are in the final stages of development, and new 800 class cards will come with software to improve encoding out of premiere, not just for the CX. So then the Quadro cards will have an edge, but I expect it to be marginal, and not worth the price difference unless every -second- counts.

I'm so confuse about what to get..

 

[phanbuey]

First..thank you guys for helping me so quickly!!

Here's what a friend of mine wrote me...

Basically, for most people, quadro cards are a waste of money. Also, in the benchmarks done, SLI was actually more of a hinderance than a benefit. These were done on ‘real world’ scenes. I’ve recently done tests on a Quadro 4800, and without performance drivers, neither it nor the Quadro 5600 can best a GeForce 285. I will be getting a second 4800 in the next week or so, so I can do benchmarks on SLI in a Quadro environment.

That said, NVIdia told me this week that performance drivers are in the final stages of development, and new 800 class cards will come with software to improve encoding out of premiere, not just for the CX. So then the Quadro cards will have an edge, but I expect it to be marginal, and not worth the price difference unless every -second- counts.

I'm so confuse about what to get..

if its mostly for 3dsmax a quadro card will kill... here if you want, try this... buy the fx3800 $800 card from newegg and see if it works... if it doesn't then send it back. $20 bucks lost tops. I guarantee a 285 won't hold a candle to it in 3dsmax, and performance drivers make a 4x-5x difference. You pay for the drivers really.

 

[YinYang.ERROR]

I would go with this one if I needed a rendering pc: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102768

It is kind of expensive though... VRAM is very important for rendering.

 

[moris7]

Thanks YinYan...
Yeah...i think i'll get that one...Even if it's 100$ more than the gtx 285...
Still trying to learn more about the differences between these 2 cards in Max viewport and in rendreings....But my mind is almost set
Since i'll probably be doing some renderings on that machine, 2048mb is probably better than the gtx 285 which is 1024mb...

Anymore thoughts?
Thanks a lot guys for the quick responses! Cheers!!

 

[raptori]

hi moris7 and welcome to TPU............. well from what I know ....... 3dsmax rendering depend much much more on CPU than on GPU and VRAM ........... and you if you got your self a Quadro you'll get the most difference in viewport not in render ........ even low-med end quadro is better than good geforce in viewport working its because of the drivers ....... and I've read in some 3d forums that ATI card radeon and FirePro have more problems with 3dsmax than nvidia cards not sure about it but keep it in mind ......

 

[moris7]

Ok...Thanks, i'll keep on reading
And see what i'll do!

Thanks a lot guys!! Keep it coming!

 

[Hari Purnomo]

Hello, I'm a new at TPU. I work at 3d apps to. 3dsmax 2009, Autocad 2010, and Photoshop CS 4 is the most 3d apps I used.
I have hd4870 512 mb, GTX 285, and Quadro FX 1800. None of the Geforce/Radeon can help you in viewport.
In large model at 3ds max; do rotate, move, or copy with gaming card is nearly imposible.
It makes me frustating. Even with GTX 285 makes me desperate. Because of that, I deside to buy Quadro.
I try Quadro fx3800 and fx1800. I test both of them, compare one each other.
Finaly I decided to use FX 1800 than FX3800. At 3ds max 2009, FX1800 perform faster performance than FX3800.
At autocad 2010 both perform equal.
Now with Quadro FX1800 I can do job faster, and smother.
I can play games with FX1800 to.
Sorry for my bad English.

 

[angelkiller]

Hello, I'm a new at TPU. I work at 3d apps to. 3dsmax 2009, Autocad 2010, and Photoshop CS 4 is the most 3d apps I used.
I have hd4870 512 mb, GTX 285, and Quadro FX 1800. None of the Geforce/Radeon can help you in viewport.
In large model at 3ds max; do rotate, move, or copy with gaming card is nearly imposible.
It makes me frustating. Even with GTX 285 makes me desperate. Because of that, I deside to buy Quadro.
I try Quadro fx3800 and fx1800. I test both of them, compare one each other.
Finaly I decided to use FX 1800 than FX3800. At 3ds max 2009, FX1800 perform faster performance than FX3800.
At autocad 2010 both perform equal.
Now with Quadro FX1800 I can do job faster, and smother.
I can play games with FX1800 to.
Sorry for my bad English.

That's exactly what I would expect from using those cards. The Geforce/Radeon cards are optimized for gaming and don't do well in 3D apps. Everything I've read confirms this also.

For the record, the FX 1800 appears to be based off a 9600GSO and the FX 1800 appears to be based off the 8800GT.

 

[KainXS]

the FX3800 is a cut down GTX260(FX4800) with a GT200 core, but the bandwidth really hurts its performance

http://www.solidsmack.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/quaddro-fx-linecard.jpg

it might look like a good card but but unlike the rest of the GT200's that have more than 20 it only has 16rops, and when rendering scenes rops = performance, more than shaders,

 

[Hari Purnomo]

angelkiller and KainXS, both of your are correct.
For the spec.....yes FX3800 is 3x shader procesing power than FX1800. But it doesn't show its power at 3ds max 2009 or autocad 2010. In Open GL, FX1800 and FX3800 has identical performance. I can give you the result.
FX3800 has all the spec and technology for new GPU, like SDI, stereo, SLI multi OS, so it cost lots of money. But performance almost same.......I don't know why.......

 

[Hari Purnomo]

I give you the realworld application 3dsmax 2009 review in viewport. My project have 2 million poligon and 1,7 million vertex. I set the camera, in walkthrough, 500 frame. Edge faces, smooth+highlight is active. I use stopwatch to count from frame 0 to 500. Here is the result :

TIME: 84,5 sec
Video CARD: Quadro FX 1800
CPU: Core 2 Quad Q9450
SO: Vista Ultimate 64 bit
MAX Version: Max 2009
System Driver: Nvidia Quadro 190.38
Max Driver: 3ds Max Performance DriverDirect3D 9.0(NVIDIA Quadro FX1800)
Screen Resolution: 1680 x 1050
RAM: 8 Gb

TIME: 86,3 sec
Video CARD: Quadro FX 3800
CPU: Core 2 Quad Q9450
SO: Vista Ultimate 64 bit
MAX Version: Max 2009
System Driver: Nvidia Quadro 190.38
Max Driver: 3ds Max Performance DriverDirect3D 9.0(NVIDIA Quadro FX3800)
Screen Resolution: 1680 x 1050
RAM: 8 Gb

TIME: 94 sec
Video CARD: Geforce GTX 285
CPU: Core 2 Quad Q9450
SO: Vista Ultimate 64 bit
MAX Version: Max 2009
System Driver: Nforce 185.85
Max Driver: Direct3D 9.0
Screen Resolution: 1680 x 1050
RAM: 8 Gb

TIME: 89 sec
Video CARD: MSI HD4870 OC 512 Mb
CPU: Core 2 Quad Q9450
SO: Vista Ultimate 64 bit
MAX Version: Max 2009
System Driver: Catalyst 9.6 64 bit
Max Driver: Direct3D 9.0
Screen Resolution: 1680 x 1050
RAM: 8 Gb