Just saw this video card at NewEgg ... uhh, what is it?

[TheInvincibleMustard]

This is the product info link here (pdf) ... and the newegg link is here ... (btw, the pdf listed is for the 64MB on-sale one)

Just a question ... uh ... what is it? I've never heard of this graphics card before, and it's comparably priced to the new ATI/nVidia offerings ... and there's even a higher-end option for 512MB ( :Q !!! ) flavor for $818.00!!

Just wondering if anyone knows information about these, or if they're any good, or if there's reviews anywhere (I haven't been able to find any) or whatever ...

TIA! 🙂

 

[hjo3]

From 3dlabs' web site:

The Wildcat?4 ... is designed for professionals running CAD, DCC and Visualization software that want the finest in performance, quality, reliability and productivity.

It's not a video card designed for gaming, if that's what you were looking for.

 

[newbiepcuser]

They are used for CAD, 3D Studio Max for rendering 3D. I'm sure other members can elaborate more.

 

[mechBgon]

That's not their high-end either... Wildcat 4 7210 I believe this is the second-from-top card from 3D Labs, or will be.

 

[ElFenix]

i wish my video card had half a gig of ram...

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
i wish my video card had half a gig of ram...

What in the world would that be used for? something like 64xAF + 16xAA assuming the videocard could actually push decent framerates with it?

 

[AgaBoogaBoo]

Originally posted by: magomago

Originally posted by: ElFenix
i wish my video card had half a gig of ram...

What in the world would that be used for? something like 64xAF + 16xAA assuming the videocard could actually push decent framerates with it?

Again, this is not a video card designed for gaming.

 

[ProviaFan]

More likely than not, the 512MB of RAM in that one 3DLabs card would hold more geometry data than texture data. This is a professional card, after all, and not a gaming card (from what I've read, it can run some games ok, but it has some compatibility problems because the 3DLabs people worry more about making it work with pro 3D apps instead of 3D games).

 

[Sunner]

I played Quake once on an old Glint card, don't remember which model anymore, it was rather expensive though, something like $1.500 or so.
Sucked, performance was lousy and there were IQ flaws all over the place.

Of course it was just for fun, and I didn't expect much. 🙂

 

[PrinceXizor]

Originally posted by: jliechty
More likely than not, the 512MB of RAM in that one 3DLabs card would hold more geometry data than texture data. This is a professional card, after all, and not a gaming card (from what I've read, it can run some games ok, but it has some compatibility problems because the 3DLabs people worry more about making it work with pro 3D apps instead of 3D games).

You are partially correct. While the RAM is helpful in queing large display matrices of geometry close to the output to your monitor (see point 2), the main function of that much RAM is to

1. Hold massive quantities of texture data for multi-threaded rendering passes in generating sohpisticated rendered scenes.
2. Enable Real-Time Dynamic Rotation in 3D of complex geometric shapes and simple rendering.

Point One is generally more applicable then point two in the environment the Wildcat series is targeted at. Which explains why it doesn't do so well in gaming applications. Its not architected for rapid calculations of dynamically moving 3D vertices which is applicable in most of today's games. Its more for static rendering or fixed object viewing with a rotating viewpoint.

I'm sure there is a better more concise explanation out there, but that is the synopsis from what I was told (and what I've read) when I was spec'ing my work CAD station (did not purchase because the additional performance did not justify the cost in my application).

P-X

 

[dullard]

It is a workstation card as others have said. The Wildcat cards have always been known to be very expensive and top of the line in workstation performance. Here is a review from Oct 2002 showing the Wildcat cards with a good lead over the competition. Similar review from Feb 2003 showing the Quadro 4 actually beating a Wildcat. Cadalyst labs is an easy read and is one of the only sites I've seen that tests these cards. Too bad they need a little more training on good benchmarking though (I've love to see more results and less opinion).

 

[TheInvincibleMustard]

Hey, thanks for all the info, guys! I wasn't necessarily looking at using one of these instead of the Radeon I was planning on purchasing, but just saw something that I wasn't sure exactly what it was about, so I figure I'll ask! 🙂

Thanks again.