Workstation CAD card

[Duvie]

As topic states....

I will running

Autocad Architectural Desktop 2004 and will be doing 3d CAD rending wih animation and flybys. HIghly detailed lighting, shadows, and materials so very good visual quality is wanted....

The animation is converted to standard video format....

 

[SickBeast]

Cool man, I do architectural work as well.

From what I've read, the nVidia workstation cards annihilate those made by ATi (EAT THAT ROLLO...fanboy...pfft).

I don't have any links off hand, but you should probably look at nVidia's offerings, especially those mainstream cards which can be modded into professional workstation cards.

By the way, you don't need an amazing graphics card to do amazing things in architectural desktop. Most of the stuff I do is CPU-limited. For example, you will probably create a wireframe model in AutoCAD, then create lighting, textures, materials and such. None of this is actually visible until you render the scence, which basically uses nothing but your CPU and produces a JPEG image.

You may be able to actually do realtime rendering with a professional graphics card, although I have never seen it. I suppose it would be nice, but again, it's not such a big deal.

For the record, the fastest CAD graphics card I've used was a Matrox G400 (yes, it even beat out my R9700).

For your animations you'll want a P4 w/ hyperthreading, of which I know you're the forum guru, so you should be all set.

Oh yeah, you might want to try 3D Studio Max for your renderings and animations; in my experience it produces vastly superior results.

 

[MDE]

To echo SickBeast, from everything I've seen Quadros eat FireGLs alive.
NV30GL vs FGL9700(R300)
Quadro FX3000

 

[imported_TheCadMan]

Yep the quadros outperform the FireGl series usually by 30% but usually cost almost 100% more. Also you can't softmod a gaming card into an actual quadro card. There is a difference in the way the cards clip multiple view planes. Anyhow, for real time rendering you may want to look at the 3dlabs wildcat solution. If you want to edit hq streams in realtime you will have to look into an sgi computer. No hardware i know of can render in real time like the sgi onyx system. If you compile everything ahead of time you can use just about any graphics card, even the gaming cards.

 

[foofoo]

hi,
check out toms reviews...
link
it was useful to me when i was looking for a good solidworks card.

 

[Gamingphreek]

The Nvidia cards slaughter the ATI cards in everything. Nvidias low end offering (lol about the same price as ATI's highend offering) even kills ATI's highend offering. Nvidia is no doubt the way to go for professional video and crap like that.
-Kevin

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
The Nvidia cards slaughter the ATI cards in everything. Nvidias low end offering (lol about the same price as ATI's highend offering) even kills ATI's highend offering. Nvidia is no doubt the way to go for professional video and crap like that.
-Kevin

then why would anyone even consider the ATI

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
The Nvidia cards slaughter the ATI cards in everything. Nvidias low end offering (lol about the same price as ATI's highend offering) even kills ATI's highend offering. Nvidia is no doubt the way to go for professional video and crap like that.
-Kevin

then why would anyone even consider the ATI

Pure, unadulterated, fanboyism?

- M4H

 

[imported_TheCadMan]

Lol, I chose the FireGL over the quadro series because i like to game. And the quadros are really slow when it comes to games. I do about 60% gaming 40% CAD work on my pc. In comparasion the quadro FX 1100 which costs the same as the fireGL X2t and beats the X2t is a Gefore FX 5700 while the X2t is a radeon 9800XT. Anyhow the reason ATI is so far behind nvidia in OpenGL is strictly bad drivers. In theory the FireGL should kick the crap out of the Quadro series. To make matters even stranger the new OpenGLSL is a complete piece of crap and shouldn't even work on the Quadros but it still is faster. Anyhow, yeah the quadros perform better in OpenGL but the FireGl's do better in games and DX9. So it's a trade off.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
The Nvidia cards slaughter the ATI cards in everything. Nvidias low end offering (lol about the same price as ATI's highend offering) even kills ATI's highend offering. Nvidia is no doubt the way to go for professional video and crap like that.
-Kevin

then why would anyone even consider the ATI

Pure, unadulterated, fanboyism?

- M4H

That is a flame i hope you know -_- . And know it isn't. Its the truth Nvidia massacres ATi in workstation graphics.
-Kevin

 

[Duvie]

OK...

Since the Geforce FX series of workstation cards are DX9 capable but I willnot be gaming should I look at the Geforce 4 quadro series like the 750,900, & 980 which I assume would only be DX8.1???

The 1100 will cost me around 660-700 while I think the 750 is in the upper 200's and the 900 is the low 400s and the 980 is I think in the 500's....


I serious want for fast rendering to reduce my rather long rendering times, and don't tell me cpu as I already have a 2.4c@3.5ghz P4 with HT...the HT benefits me to a tune of 19-22%....my slowdown is obvious my cards lack of hardware rendering, less pixel shders, pipelines, etc.....

 

[JonnyBlaze]

a video card has NOTHING to do with rendering using adt, max, viz or any other renderer like that.

its 100% in the cpu. the video card will just give you better working windows in max / viz

JB

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: JonnyBlaze
a video card has NOTHING to do with rendering using adt, max, viz or any other renderer like that.

its 100% in the cpu. the video card will just give you better working windows in max / viz

JB

Can you point me to some links on that because that is contradictory to what I have read and others have stated. Right now my current vid card as software only opengl rnedering and these cad cards are hardware which means they would not offload the work onto the cpu at all and the cpu could do other things......Even the benches in things like specviewperf, cinebench, etc show likewise there are increases in performance...

 

[JonnyBlaze]

opengl only has to do with whats being displayed on the screen while your working. once you start a render, its 100%cpu dependent, its not using opengl any more. you should read around autodesk's newsgroups. you will see what im saying is correct. the server is discussion.autodesk.com and you want to look thru the pn.hardware group.

unless you do alot of max / viz or use programs like inventor or pro e, you dont need a quadro. a 9800 or equal card would still give you a lil better performance while working, but not while rendering.


JB

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Cool man, I do architectural work as well.

From what I've read, the nVidia workstation cards annihilate those made by ATi (EAT THAT ROLLO...fanboy...pfft).

I don't have any links off hand, but you should probably look at nVidia's offerings, especially those mainstream cards which can be modded into professional workstation cards.

By the way, you don't need an amazing graphics card to do amazing things in architectural desktop. Most of the stuff I do is CPU-limited. For example, you will probably create a wireframe model in AutoCAD, then create lighting, textures, materials and such. None of this is actually visible until you render the scence, which basically uses nothing but your CPU and produces a JPEG image.

You may be able to actually do realtime rendering with a professional graphics card, although I have never seen it. I suppose it would be nice, but again, it's not such a big deal.

For the record, the fastest CAD graphics card I've used was a Matrox G400 (yes, it even beat out my R9700).

For your animations you'll want a P4 w/ hyperthreading, of which I know you're the forum guru, so you should be all set.

Oh yeah, you might want to try 3D Studio Max for your renderings and animations; in my experience it produces vastly superior results.

Actually while you can do the wireframing in Autocad you actually have the same base platfrom in Acheitectural Desktop. the advanatge ofcourse if you are not familar with it is I can pick entire wall systems complete with all layers of materials (IE 4" brick, 1" airspace, vapor barrier, 8" cmu, and 5/8" layer of sheetrock...) I set the height and the base line or justification of how the wall will be orientaed and it draws it. I like to do this in 3d or orthogaphic mode. It has nice cleanup function to terminate ends and how to meet other walls. Then I use the tool library to pick manufacturer sized windows and place them by merely clicking the wall and then setting its position alon it. I then can mod sill height to move it up and done as well as justfy it to exterior wall or interior wall. I like to orbit aroundit as I work with materials on and in shade mode. I can click to 3d wireframe in one click if I need to see through objects.


If the CAD cras have no benefit in this then why do they target these markets and cost many more then the often disabled commercial gaming versions??? the have more available pipelines and pixel shaders often in the specs of this card...Do these not apply????

I guess I am at a loss why these cards score higher on specviewperf and not help me in what I am doing???

Also wouldn't software rendering be slower then hardware rendering???

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: JonnyBlaze
opengl only has to do with whats being displayed on the screen while your working. once you start a render, its 100%cpu dependent, its not using opengl any more. you should read around autodesk's newsgroups. you will see what im saying is correct. the server is discussion.autodesk.com and you want to look thru the pn.hardware group.

unless you do alot of max / viz or use programs like inventor or pro e, you dont need a quadro. a 9800 or equal card would still give you a lil better performance while working, but not while rendering.


JB

I do the majority of the drawing in ADT, but it is thenlinked to Viz Renderer for the applicatio of lights, materials (sometimes if not setup in the ADT), and then setting up the cameras and the animation paths....

As for the animation I can do much of the motion in wirframe, solid, etc in the Viz program and only when I out put it as a completed files dones it go through the render process. Before that I will have watched the process moving at realtime working 10x over....Will I take advanatge of features of the CAD cards since rendering is only at the end???

 

[JonnyBlaze]

hows the performance once your in viz while your trying to place lights and cameras? a 9800 would make it run smooth while working in viz, and may even make autocad run a bit better also. how detailed are the files your working on? if possible, send me something you do and ill tell you how it works. i have adt2004 and a 9800.

btw, nice overclock. i can only get my 3.0 to 3.3

JBlaze

 

[SickBeast]

duvie,

i'm 99% certain that by having one of the workstation graphics cards the only benefit is that you get to see your 3d model rendered in real time. if this entices you then i encourage you to spend the money, but otherwise it's a waste. as others have stated, your render times are 100% cpu dependant. i've never used one of the cards, so i'm not 100% certain as to their usefulness. the thing is, they would have to render in real time at an insane resolution of something like 4000x3000 pixels since that's the resolution you would need to plot out a poster sized rendering. also, it would need to support insane 3d features in real-time that do not exist on any current commercial graphics cards. i don't see how a graphics card could aid in a cpu-intensive task such as rendering, but i suppose anything is possible.

as for the dx9 bit, i'm sure it would be more future-proof, but you should check into whether arch.desk.2004 can utilize such features. i'm actually fairly certain that 3d studio max 6 can, so there's a good chance that your software will use it as well.

as for the arch.desktop wall construction stuff, i have heard of those features but have not delved into them as yet. the majority of my work is 2d-based, and i have blocks of basically anything that i use repetitively.

if you want something to seriously speed up your drafting, try creating macros. type "customize" at the command line, then create a "user defined button". they're awesome, you basically punch in a series of commands that would normally take a few minutes (plotting, for example), and it will do them all at the click of a button. i use mine to plot, change layers, etc. i even has one that does a zoom-extents, turns all layers on, plots, qsaves, and quits autocad (hometime...woohoo!).

if you do end up getting a pro graphics card let me know how it goes and i may pick one up myself.

 

[Duvie]

Some more info from an hour or so at the autocadd discussion forums....

With the newer cards ppl got performance increases from disabling vsynch, opengl drivers 8.0,....It appears that rendering is not vid cad related but if one does more 3d moedeling, and orbiting and panning within that that is where those cards shine....

I need to do some more research ofcourse but I think I see where the card may benefit me and now I need to think if that is needed...

It appears the 2gb of ram can be very helpful for me....

bunch of misinformation over at that forum by the way....

People say that ADT can't take advantage of HT or dual processors which is incorrect...Whipthread as been available for some time and the 2nd processor becomes very useful in regenration, panning and zoom.....Do this in 3d modeling and it becomes more important...Also 2004 will take advantage of HT and dual processor in rendering with Viz rendered actually having multithread spot to check in rendering and I have tested it on and off as well as HT on and off and it results in 19-22%.....

Also people said some craxy things about opengl8 and ADT which I just verified works and is an options in ADT2004...This drastically can speed up performance versus 7 with the newer quadro 4 and FX cards over their commercial bretheren as well as older quadro line.


Oh well I am learning.....

I like the one where the guy said they will go with an opteron over a dual xeon setup cause ADT and autocadd shows no advantage with dual or HT cpus. Anybody wonder why he is buying a much more expensive opteron say versus an FX??? I guess he likes to spend more on that expenisve ECC memory as well......

 

[JonnyBlaze]

does the fx support dual? are you talking about sean's system? i frequent the inventor group with him.

on the ram issue, check task manager after you do alot of rendering, if the commit charge is less than your physical ram, an upgrade wouldnt do anything. if its over, it will help.

 

[Duvie]

Fx doesn't support dual, and the person wasn't named sean.....


I went through about 30 threads after searching the hardware forums for "Video Card" related topics...many were just ppl asking what card should they use and not awhole lot of real answers....A guy named Dave seemed to very helpful there with his testing, IMO....


Without a doubt I know the dual xeons with HT can benefit my rendering time in Viz which will help my times.....The question is will a Cad card like a Quadro4 or GeforceFX benefit me anymore then a 9800 (which there seems to be many anti-ATI card there) would??? If commercial cards are just as good for what I am doing and I was looking at spending 500-600 maybe I pick up a 6800U when the become available and get that handy built in encoder as well.....

Definitely PM me and we can BS about CAD.....I have some other questions that may help by properly configuring it and maybe you know all the bells and whistles....

 

[reever]

Love all of the Nv fanboy comments. If you read a site which isn't used to doing workstation tests, then you might get the impression that Nvidia owns every single workstation application, when the truth is it doesn't. Most sites use 1-2 programs to test workstation performance, not very valid if you ask me

If you want a REAL workstation roundup read this article http://www.3dchips.net/content/review.php?id=62

it also tests the 9700 to give you an idea of what you can expect from a regular card

 

[JonnyBlaze]

yeah, that group is very anti-ati, especially the inventor users. the older cards , pre 9600 maybe had LOTS of problems trying to do opengl in real apps. iv had my 9800 since august and it runs great for me. i would say 99% sure you dont need more than a 9800.

and as for duals, even if the program your using dosent support them, i know viz does, but having the extra cpu keeps your computer useful while another single threaded app ties up one cpu.

JB

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: reever
Love all of the Nv fanboy comments. If you read a site which isn't used to doing workstation tests, then you might get the impression that Nvidia owns every single workstation application, when the truth is it doesn't. Most sites use 1-2 programs to test workstation performance, not very valid if you ask me

If you want a REAL workstation roundup read this article http://www.3dchips.net/content/review.php?id=62

it also tests the 9700 to give you an idea of what you can expect from a regular card

Thanks...Man was that what I was looking for or what????

 

[imported_TheCadMan]

Duvie the reason you spend more on the worstation class graphics cards, is because you get worksation techinical support on certified hardware. If you were to spend say $30,000 on a CATIA package spending an extra $400 to protect your envestment and minimize downtime, is certainly justifyable. In a business setting the Worstation card could save you thousands in reduced downtime.