Quadro 2 Pro vs Quadro DCC in 3DSMax?

[augiem]

Hi guys,

Ok, this is getting maddening trying to find good information. I'm putting together an upgrade for my againg CPU (basically replacing the guts with a 1.6 GHz Northwood) and I'm looking for the best bang for the buck in a 3D rendering card for 3D Studio Max.

I've been reading a bunch of stuff about modifying Geforce2/3 cards into Quadros and it has really gotten my interest up.

Anyone out there with experience with Quadro 2's or DCC's and 3DSMax? I'd like a little help please.

1. Which card would be faster in 3DSMax - Quadro 2 Pro (modded GF2 Ultra) or Quadro DCC (modded GF3)? If so, can someone give me a rough idea (maybe percentages) how much faster one is over the other? Which would it be faster in one rendering mode and slower in another? (wireframe vs solid render)

2. Does the fact that the DDC is missing the hardware line rendering support the Quadro 2 Pro had affect wireframe speeds in 3dsmax?

I already made the mistake of rushing in my enthusiasm for an upgrade and ordered a Gainward GF3 TI200 a few days ago. (Probably the worst timing on a purchase I have ever made what with GF4 coming out soon - prices will drop.) But I have the chance to swap the GF3 TI200 with my brother back in TX for his VisionTek Geforce 2 Ti (which I would mod to Quadro 2 pro -- and probably up the memory speed to 460MHz - making the card the equiv of a modded GF2 Ultra).

I read a professional graphics card comparison on aceshardware.com, but the review came out just before the DCC was released.
In most of the tests, the Quadro 2 destroyed the Geforce 3 in Maya (scenes with lighting mainly -- the scenes with no lighting the GF3 was actually faster).

I also read a newer comparison on X-bit Labs between the Geforce 3 and Quadro DCC. According to X-bit, there is only a 10-15% performance boost from GF3->DCC. This would not make up for the HUGE speed difference between the Quadro 2 Pro vs. GF3 benchmarks listed on aceshardware.com.

Xbit GF3 vs Quadro DCC
http://www.xbitlabs.com/video/quadrodcc-3dmax/

Aceshardware pro video card roundup - 3DS and Maya Benchmarks
http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=45000273

The ace's hardware review shows the Gloria III whipping up on the GF3 in most benchmarks (most are in Maya unfortunately, though there is one Max benchmark).

What I don't get is if the Gloria III beats out the GF3 so badly (talking 2-3x performances in some cases), and if the DCC is only 10-15% better than GF3, how could the DCC be faster than Gloria III (Quadro 2 Pro)?

Please keep in mind my main concern is 3DSMax (and maybe Maya). I'm trying to find out which card would be faster for 3DSMax - Quadro 2 Pro or Quadro DCC. (Either one would be a hardware mod job, BTW -- not shelling out $800 for the same card with a little resistor in a different spot.)

Thanks alot guys!

Augie

 

[Rand]

If all your worried about is 3DStudio Max performance get the Quadro2 Pro, the Quadro DCC still has numerous driver issues that's severely limiting it's performance and there are consistent rendering errors when doing smooth blinn shading. The more flexible DCC T&L engine has also shown itself to display weaker fixed T&L performance then the Q2 and the flexibility is a moute factor for 3DSM.
Also, the DCC is very weak under sustained high polygon loads, with just further increases what was already one of the bigest weaknesses of the Q2 relative to other professional level 3D rendering cards.

The GF3 architecture has proven to be very nice for games, but CAD is a very different area and the GF3 based Quadro DCC just hasnt shown itself to be capable of performing on-par with the older Quadro 2 Pro.

One last thing, USE ELSA's drivers!
nVidia's reference drivers for the Quadro/Synergy line of cards is really lacking. Elsa does not base their Quadro drivers on nVidia's reference drivers, and owing to their long years of experience in the CAD market they are much better then nVidia's reference drivers.