Best nVidia chip for CAD.

[Neo_Geo]

I am thinking of updrading my home computer. I use it for both personal and professional use. I use SolidWorks at work and at home.

I have always been pleased with how well nVidia has worked with both professional and gaming graphics applicatons.

Thus, I want to stick with Nvidia as my video chipset... So, here is my question:

For SolidWorks (or any 3D CAD application, what would be the best performer?
1.) Quadro (Retails as Elsa GloriaII) (I currently use a GF256 hacked into Quadro)
2.) Quadro2 Pro (Retails as Elsa GloriaIII) .. (Could get a GF2Pro and hack it)
3.) QuadroDCC (Retails as Elsa GloraiDCC)
4.) Geforce3 (I am not aware of any way to "hack" the GF3 into a Quadro)

I only want to know which would be the best in terms of SolidWorks performance. Gaming and such is secondary and any of these cards will fit my needs for gaming performance anyway.

Currently, I am using a P!!!600/BX, 256MB RAM and a GeForce256 that has been hacked into a Quadro. I wold like to upgrade to a AthlonXP/KT266A system, but I am unsure of what direction I want to take for the video card (other than I have decided on an nvidia of course).

 

[Superwormy]

I would wait until a Geforce3 Quadro equivalent comes out if I were you... Are you running SolidWorks in OpenGL mode? If you arn't, they any of those cards will perform pretty much the same. Otherwise, go for Geforce2 Quadro

 

[Rand]

There is no Quadro equivalent of a GF3 at present, and the current GF3's are still a little buggy with mild performance issues in a few CAD apps right now from what I've seen.
I'd look towards a GF2 Pro and hack her into a Quadro 2 Pro

 

[Neo_Geo]

Hmmm.. I was under the impression that QuadroDCC = GeForce3. Like Quadro2 Pro = GeForce2 Pro. Was I wrong in this assumption??

 

[Rand]

<< Hmmm.. I was under the impression that QuadroDCC = GeForce3. Like Quadro2 Pro = GeForce2 Pro. Was I wrong in this assumption?? >>



Evidently you were correct, I just checked- the QuadroDCC is indeed based off of the GF3.
I wasnt aware of that, and I'd be interested in seeing how it fares as the GF3 has proven to be midly troublesome under CAD apps in comparison to the proven GF2.
Needless to say as I wasnt aware a Quadro 3 varient of the GF3 was available, I'm not sure if a GF3 can be hacked into a QDCC.

 

[tstanev]

I work for Autodesk and have a Quadro 2 Pro in my work machine. Can't complain.
My home machine has a GF3 and is much faster on 3DMark than my work machine, but the Quadro2Pro is pretty good for high polygon count scenes, which is what most of CAD uses. I would still go for a GF3 instead, since the Quadro is just too expensive.

 

[AA0]

I know you want NVidia, but doesn't ATI have the FireGL 8500 out? They always have great drivers, and its bound to be faster than a GF2 core.

 

[Ksnif]

Sorry if my question is a litle out of the subject. Is there a 3D redering aplication (like 3Dstudio MAX ,Maya ,etc.) that uses on redering (and not only for the viewport) any of nVidia's GPU. And if there is, what is the magic compination (aplication-GPU).
Thanks in advance.

 

[Neo_Geo]

So, for argument's sake, which would be better for an application like SolidWorks, a Quadro2 Pro or a QuadroDCC??

Elsa's site only says that the Gloria DCC (=QuadroDCC) is optomized for 3D Studio Max.... But makes absolutely no mention of any other proffessional level CAD application. In fact, the word "CAD" is no where to be found in their Gloria DCC product description here.

In the product description for the Gloria III (Quadro2 Pro) however, they prominently list numerous proffessional level CAD applications.

This leads me to believe that the Quadro2 Pro would actually be the best choice for most true CAD applications which only use simple shading and almost no texturing. While the Quadro DCC is better suited to applications with demanding texture rendering requirements.

Any thoughts??

 

[tstanev]

<< Sorry if my question is a litle out of the subject. Is there a 3D redering aplication (like 3Dstudio MAX ,Maya ,etc.) that uses on redering (and not only for the viewport) any of nVidia's GPU. And if there is, what is the magic compination (aplication-GPU).
Thanks in advance. >>



I'm not aware of any, because when you actually render your scene picture quality is the only thing that matters (quality is compromized on GPUs for performance reasons), plus there are many rendering options and styles that are simply not there in modern GPUs.

Edit: I suppose you could in theory use the GPU for transformation of vertices, but you can use the SSE on the Pentiums for that too and I'm not sure which is faster.

 

[tstanev]

<< So, for argument's sake, which would be better for an application like SolidWorks, a Quadro2 Pro or a QuadroDCC??

Elsa's site only says that the Gloria DCC (=QuadroDCC) is optomized for 3D Studio Max.... But makes absolutely no mention of any other proffessional level CAD application. In fact, the word "CAD" is no where to be found in their Gloria DCC product description here.

In the product description for the Gloria III (Quadro2 Pro) however, they prominently list numerous proffessional level CAD applications.

This leads me to believe that the Quadro2 Pro would actually be the best choice for most true CAD applications which only use simple shading and almost no texturing. While the Quadro DCC is better suited to applications with demanding texture rendering requirements.

Any thoughts?? >>



Just look at which card does more polygons/second and get it. I think the Quadro2Pro does 31 million/sec. It also has hardware antialiasing for lines, if you need that. I have no info on the DCC and the nVidia website does not share too much data.

 

[Sunner]

For the price a Gf2 Ti200 would be hard to beat.
Same poly power as an Ultra but should be cheaper, and it's well proven technology with stable drivers.

 

[Rand]

<< So, for argument's sake, which would be better for an application like SolidWorks, a Quadro2 Pro or a QuadroDCC??
>>



I'd go with the Quadro 2 Pro over the QuadroDCC, as the regular GF3's have shown themselves to consistently underperform the GF2 in CAD applications so I'd be slightly wary of the QuadroDCC until I saw how it performed.



<< I know you want NVidia, but doesn't ATI have the FireGL 8500 out? They always have great drivers, and its bound to be faster than a GF2 core. >>



The FireGL8700 and FireGL8800 are available, I'd have suggested them also as their most certainly going to outperform a Quadro 2 Pro, and they'll be backed up by FireGL's incredible driver team but he specified nVidia only so I presume he doesnt wish to purchase anything else.

 

[Neo_Geo]

<< The FireGL8700 and FireGL8800 are available, I'd have suggested them also as their most certainly going to outperform a Quadro 2 Pro, and they'll be backed up by FireGL's incredible driver team but he specified nVidia only so I presume he doesnt wish to purchase anything else. >>



The reason I specified nVidia was their mutaully good performance in both CAD and Home gaming use. If think anything else would make a good combination work/home video card, I would like to hear about it.

I have heard next to nothing on the FireGL8700 and 8800, but one thing that strikes me is it is based off of the Radeon 8800 GPU. Now I am not certain how this is related to the Radeon 7500/8500, but past Radeon issues makes me nervous.

Any more thoughts??

 

[alpineranger]

I thought the chipset in the FireGL cards is made by 3Dlabs, not ATi.

 

[rogue1979]

I think that the performance level of the Quadro2 and Quadro DCC is about equal in CAD and 3Dmax studio. However, the Quadro DCC based on the Geforce 3 chipset will play games better. The cheapest way to go is the Gainward 450 at newegg for $103 shipped. Just change the resistors 121>122 and 123>124 found on the back of the card. You can also use NVflash to change the bios to a Gloria III to utilize the Gloria III drivers which are supposedly optimized for some of that stuff. Just open the flash program (download from Gainward) and extract to a floppy, add the Gloria III bios file and go to DOS A prompt and type NVflash +(bios file name). It will warn you that the bios doesn't match, but hit yes anyway. The new default speed will be 250/400, so you will have to clock the core down to 215-220 and the memory up to 450-460. Otherwise get the Vision-Tek Geforce 3 Ti200 for about $170 and mod that, I think it is 216>217 and 218>219 and presto, Quadro DCC.

 

[Rand]

<<

I have heard next to nothing on the FireGL8700 and 8800, but one thing that strikes me is it is based off of the Radeon 8800 GPU. Now I am not certain how this is related to the Radeon 7500/8500, but past Radeon issues makes me nervous.

>>



My opinion, go with the GF2 Pro/Ti and hack it into a Quadro 2 Pro if your on a budget.
I'd pass on the Quadro 3 unless you've seen some results from it as the GF3 seems to underperform the GF2 in CAD.
If you've got a bit of extra money are willing to go with ATi then the FireGL8800 is probably a better buy.
You'll have GF3 Ti500 performance, and the backing of the FireGL driver team.... and IMHO the FireGL driver team is the best there is. They did an absolutely amazing job on the FireGL1-4 so I see no reason why it would be anything other then extremely reliable and high performing... and as you'll be using FireGL's drivers you won't have to worry about the dubious ATi driver support the Radeon core regularly has to put up with.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Isn't there a software hack for the GeForce 3 to become a Quadro DCC?

Because the Radeon FireGL 8700/8800 are professional level products, ATI cannot risk allowing for iffy drivers. The FireGL boards should be very solid indeed...