3d graphics, maya and so on - Nvidia or ATI?

[CgFX]

GFX 5700 Ultra is faster than 9600 Pro/XT.

[Lorecanth]

ATI and professional don't mix. Even their pro cards suck. I picked up a geforce fx 5900 for 225. Runs maya wonderfully. If your bro is thinking about any 3d app at all just don't go ATI. I've seen and been part of far to many horror stories.

[bingowah]

Thanks guys. Seems like I'll be going for the Gainward Golden Sample Nvidia 5700 Ultra available nearby here unless there is anything that comes up to deter me from recommending it to my bro. Thanks CGFX -- I didn't actually know it was faster than 9600 XT, is there a good benchmarks page? -- and Lorecanth for your help!! :)

[CgFX]

Originally posted by bingowah
Thanks CGFX -- I didn't actually know it was faster than 9600 XT, is there a good benchmarks page? -- and Lorecanth for your help!! :)
Yes, don't take my word for it. There are literally hundreds of benchmark pages. The winner will very by game so look at a game that is very very important to you but even at a wash the GeForce FX 5700 will be better for 3D work.

I also agree with those that are getting GFX 5900 cards for $225 or less.

[bingowah]

Thanks again. I don't think games will be as important as serious artistic work for my brother, so if Nvidia is the winner when it comes to that, then we're going Nvidia.

I haven't seen a 5900 for that good a price up in Canada . . . it's quite faster than the 5700 Ultra, right? Guess I'll have to take a look at some benchmarks and whatnot !

Thanks again :)

[lots]

Look for a geforce fx 5900 non ultra.. (not SE) its only slightly slower than a 5900 ultra but much faster than the 5700 for about the same price.. (maybe 10-20 dollars difference)

[3Dfx_Sage]

actually, the 9600 Pro is faster than even the 5900 Ultra when running shader-intensive DX9 games such as Half-Life 2. However, you're taking a huge chance with pro apps when you get an ATi. If you can- wait a few months for nVidia to get out their new chips and hopefully have respectable PS/VS 2.0 and 3.0 speeds. If you can't wait, sacrifice that games and get a 5900 non-ultra.

[bingowah]

Thanks lots and 3dfx_Sage.

Unfortunately all the prices up here in Canada seem to indicate the 5700 Ultra is far cheaper than the 5900 which looks VERY expensive up here... :(

[3Dfx_Sage]

What about having it shipped to a friend in the US and then they ship it to you? I know a lot of people who have done that. You can find them on pricewatch for $170.

[CgFX]

Originally posted by 3Dfx_Sage
...when running shader-intensive DX9 games such as Half-Life 2. However

Looks like $6M worth of PR has worked here.

Seriously, Half-Life2 will make a great NV50 showcase title. :-)

[bingowah]

3Dfx_Sage... that's a good idea, I'd do that except I'd like to get the whole computer as a package for my bro and save hassles and worries... but if the price diff is substantial enough, perhaps we will opt for this. It's a shame they're so expensive in Canada. Maybe it's because ATI is a canadian company that their cards are much cheaper? I don't know. Hmmm.

[3Dfx_Sage]

Originally posted by CgFX
Looks like $6M worth of PR has worked here.

Seriously, Half-Life2 will make a great NV50 showcase title. :-)

Actually, nVidia wanted to get that deal and they offered more than ATi did Valve chose to give the deal to ATi because the ATi cards run the game the way they want it to. And if Valve was so biased towards ATi then why did they spend an incredible ammount of time on an nVidia-specific path so that the game would be playable on FX cards? Also, why was it that after Valve made public how slow the nVidia cards were that so many other developers started piping up saying the same thing? I have had more than one tell me that they wanted to say something but were afraid to, once a huge name like Valve did it the door was open to let the truth out. And Half-Life 2 is not the only DX9 game that the FX series pales in comparison to, it's just the biggest name. Need I point you to Tomb Raider: AOD, the first game out to make substatial use of DX9 class shaders? We were all hoping that the game was just coded badly for the nVidia architecture, but as more DX9 games came out it quickly turned into a very clear pattern- ATi has faster PS/VS 2.0 hardware than nVidia.

As for Half-Life 2 being a great game to show off the NV50, it barely touches what the NV50 will be capable of.

[bingowah]

Hey again 3Dfx_Sage
thanks for your help again... do you know offhand how much faster a 5900 is than a 5700 Ultra on the whole? I'm trying to dig up benchmarks and other numbers but all I can find right now are 5900 Ultra to 5700 Ultra comparisons and such. So many models, this really is confusing. We'd get a Quadro if it was in our price range but unfortunately that is not the case.

What I understand now is that, to summarize:


-Quadros are best and certified by Alias and others for "rendering and modelling" and things of that nature

-Quadros are unfortunately above our price range

-searched through this board to come up with a lot of helpful info, then started this thread ;)

-5700 Ultra is obviously, noticeably faster than 5600, 5700 (non ultra)

-5700 Ultra (Gainward brand) seems too expensive for $300 Cdn.

-5900 (non ultra) can be had for much cheaper, less than $200 U.S. but I'll have to find a place that's border-cross friendly and won't pound us with brokerage and duty. Sigh, to be new at this and learn to crawl! LOL.


It's been far easier to find gaming info than info about doing graphics work with video cards . . so posting here is really appreciated. :D

[3Dfx_Sage]

well, I don't really have any workstation benchmarks to point you to but the 5900 Ultra is barely faster than the 5900- about 1 percent difference on low resolutions to maybe 7 or 8 in higher res.

[bingowah]

Thanks. That seems negligible... I meant the 5700 Ultra vs. the 5900 though... I found this page:

http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/searchtools/item-Details.asp?EdpNo=617440&sku=P56-2718

But unfortunately the rebate expires too soon :( Oh well, not a bad canadian price anyway.. is that variant brand, PNY any good, or is that a buyer beware?

Thanks.

[3Dfx_Sage]

and just to throw more fuel on the fire, Cg-FX did you know that ATi how has slightly more graphics marketshare than nVidia? Sure, it's only a tenth of a percen but only a year ago nVidia still had a very firm grasp on second possition (Intel, of course, being in first because of their integrated graphics). Certainly not good fir nVidia....

[3Dfx_Sage]

well, you said that all you could find was 5900-U to 5700-U comparisons, so now you can use that info to make a very close comparrison between the 5700-U and 5900-NU.

And, yes, PNY is a very good brand for nVidia products- they are actually the only company that handles Quadro's so you know they make good boards.

[bingowah]

Ah. Sorry, I am REALLY green at this. I wasn't thinking. Thanks!

[CgFX]

Originally posted by 3Dfx_Sage
Actually, nVidia wanted to get that deal and they offered more than ATi did Valve chose to give the deal to ATi because the ATi cards run the game the way they want it to.
Hahahahaha... Wow. "What a Gull-a-Bull."
As for Half-Life 2 being a great game to show off the NV50, it barely touches what the NV50 will be capable of.
My joke (which you missed) was that HL2 will finally release when NV50 is in the market (let alone NV40) so all of ATI's $6M and all the 9800 purchases will turn out to have been a total waste.

[CgFX]

bingowah, on pricewatch.com:

Quadro4 380 XGL = ~$160
Quadro4 580 XGL = ~$190
---------------------------------- (I would stay with what is below this line)
Quadro FX 500 = ~$ 230
Quadro4 700 XGL = ~$ 330
Quadro4 980 XGL = ~$500
Quadro FX 1100 = ~$630 (would be my pick for 5700 level gaming and much better maya)

[3Dfx_Sage]

Originally posted by CgFX
Hahahahaha... Wow. "What a Gull-a-Bull."
what, you think that nVidia would not have absolutely loved the deal that ATi got? Don't you think that it really hurt nVidia to have Half-Life2 bundled with ATi cards (even though it didn't actually happen, really doubt they could have known)? Don't you think that nVidia could have paid many times what ATi did?

And you never addressed why nVidia is loosing marketshare to ATi, and why nVidia is actually third now trailing behind ATi. If nVidia's technology really was as superior as you believe it to be then the only thing that could be holding them back is marketing, and they have a vastly larger marketing budget than ATi.


And, yeah, I don't expect half-Life 2 to come out really soon either... but that doesn't prevent other games from being released that make heavy use of 2.0 shaders.

[CgFX]

Originally posted by 3Dfx_Sage
Don't you think that nVidia could have paid many times what ATi did?
Could or would? Certainly they could but I understand they chose not to.

I am not sure what market share has to do with our discussion and you are talking about a mouse hair difference when historically ATI always was ahead of nVidia until the most recent couple of years. However, why don't you address research firm numbers we have been given that show nVidia now owns 75% of the workstation market. 0% to 75% in about 4 years. FireGL is on the reverse trend of that. I can guaranteed that FireGL was not responsible for the increase in market share and this is a pro-3D message board.

[3Dfx_Sage]

Originally posted by CgFX
pro-3D message board.
then why are you constantly talking about how ATi is completely and totally broken, from their chips to their drivers to their engineers to their management? Their tremendous gain in marketshare over the past year proves that this is certainly not the case.

Why does overall marketshare matter? Because it shows that they are really turning around and doing things right, and since nVidia has 75% of the workstation marketshare you can bet that ATi has their eyes on that next.

And of course you were told that nVidia chose not to pay that much for a HL2 deal, why would they admit that they didn't get it because Valve didn't want to give it to them? Do you realize how many cards ATi has sold because of that deal!? I'll bet nVidia does, and if they are so foolish as to not have realized how much ATi getting that deal would hurt them then there is truely no hope for the company.


nVidia has more money, more engineers, more marketing, more technology, and more resources. Why then is it that they have lost so much so fast unless they simply have bad chips.

[CgFX]

Originally posted by 3Dfx_Sage
then why are you constantly talking about how ATi is completely and totally broken, from their chips to their drivers to their engineers to their management? Their tremendous gain in marketshare over the past year proves that this is certainly not the case.


Because their workstation products are broken and their strategy in that area (gaming chips on workstation cards, a lack of focus on workstation drivers and workstation applications) is broken.

I have never said anything about their engineers or management.

[bingowah]

Unfortunately... or not... it looks like I might be going for a Radeon 9800 Pro and figuring how to soft mod that for my bro's system. There will be problems no doubt but in the price bracket and for the hassle here, really, we can't really do at all well with something like those expensive Nvidias (as good as they are... :( apparently ATI is a canadian company and I don't know if that has something to do with their prices up here). Maybe in the future we will have the $$$ to get a top of the line Quadro, but for now we're going to have to make do with the best bang for the buck.

$350 Cdn. for Radeon 9800 Pro
$300 Cdn. for GeForceFX 5700 Ultra

I've seen some cheaper 5900s around Canada but with shipping and everything else it doesn't work out very favorably compared to U.S. pricing. I don't think I will be ordering one from the U.S. because of the hassle and the fact that I've been charged too much before on nasty surprises like brokerage. Ouch.


Anyhoo. Going to look for Radeon 9800 Pro soft mod to FireGL instructions now... what's the software called again, RivaTuner SoftQuadro? Or is that the Nvidia one?

[3Dfx_Sage]

Originally posted by CgFX
Because their workstation products are broken and their strategy in that area (gaming chips on workstation cards, a lack of focus on workstation drivers and workstation applications) is broken.
well, it used to be broken. Also, nVidia has used the same strategy of gaming chips on workstation cards. Only recently have they made difference chips and that was to put a stop to the rampant use of SoftQuadro. It's actually much more economical to design and produce a single chip. And the have a recently renewed focus on workstation cards, drivers, and apps. They have been making a lot of internal changes to get their FireGL line up to snuff.

[3Dfx_Sage]

Originally posted by bingowah
Anyhoo. Going to look for Radeon 9800 Pro soft mod to FireGL instructions now... what's the software called again, RivaTuner SoftQuadro? Or is that the Nvidia one?
ouch, that's pretty expensive for you poor Canadians. RivaTuner used to be a program for tweaking nVidia cards, it had the ability to change a GeForce into a Quadro. Then, nVidia drivers got some protection against doing that and SoftQuadro came along to get around those protections. SoftQuadro is a script that you run from within RivaTuner, there are also lots of other scripts you can get that will do other things. Anyhow, as the days went on and ATi became the number one for gaming the RivaTuner people decided to make the app able to tweak both nVidia and ATi cards. RivaTuner can convert the Radeon to FireGL just as it used to be able to convert the GeForce to Quadro. I don't believe that there are any scripts like SoftQuadro needed, but if there are I'm quite sure that they come with RivaTuner (just like SoftQuadro does).

[CgFX]

Originally posted by 3Dfx_Sage
well, it used to be broken.
No, it is still totally broken.

Have you even used a FireGL X1 or X2? They are gaming junk. Are you just going by what your cubical neighbor in the workstation drivers group in your Toronot office is telling you?

[pockets]

I've had nothing but bad experiences with ATI drivers and pro apps. I know of more than one FX house that had to swap every single FireGL board for Quadros because the ATI GL performance and stability in professional applications like Maya and Houdini was terrible. This is on both Linux and Windows. BSoDs were (multiple) daily occurances.

At home I've had to replace my RADEONs with GeForce cards because, likewise, performance outside games was horrible and I would get BSoDs each and every time I worked in a 3D app. I've had not a single crash due to GL issues since installing a GeForce Ti4400 about a year ago.

This is a shame because ATI's 2D and color performance has always been better than NVIDIA. Also, when you look at round after round of benchmarks on Tom's Hardware ATI consistently tops NVIDIA with each revision to the RADEON line. A few games will swing back to the GeForce cards, but overall ATI's hardware, with each revision, is faster than its contemporary GeForce. But their drivers aren't updated with the same regularity and professional 3D stability doesn't seem to be a priority next to squeaking out higher FPS scores.

For the multipurpose home machine, where you anticipate some gaming and some high-end enthusiast work or the occasional freelance job, training, playing, etc., I'd suggest getting the fastest GeForce you can afford and a copy of RivaTuner. If the performance difference between a highend GeForce and a low-end Quadro is less than 20% I'd say the more general purpose board is the clear winner. With RivaTuner you'll be able to turn on options like hardware antialiased lines, etc. I think they're still working on a version for the FX generation of boards but, give them time.

[3Dfx_Sage]

Originally posted by CgFX
their strategy in that area is broken.
their strategy is not broken. they are working on fixing their drivers, it takes time to do these things. their strategy used to be broken, now it's not. They can't miraculously fix their drivers overnight. They have recently focused more on their workstation products and their strategy is fixed, now they are putting it to work to fix their products.


I think that you must not have been involved in the 3d hardware industry very long because you seem not to understand how quickly things change. In December of 1998 3Dfx was the undisputed champion of 3d accerlerators for PC's, arcade systems, and simulation systems; noone could touch them. And nVidia was only a small team of engineers with hardware that was far from being able to take even second place. Then, in early 2001 (feb I think it was) 3dfx collapsed and nVidia bought most of their technology and assets. A little company called Rendition had probably the most advanced chip available (supposedly a full RISC core) and was playing a very close second to 3Dfx in the speed game, but they got bought out by Micron in 1999 and havn't been hear of since. In less than 6 months the industry can do a complete 180 and leave any company in the dust while another one rushes from playing pick-up to being in the limelight. Stop thinking in the past and accept it when the tide turns.

[3Dfx_Sage]

@pockets
you're absolutely correct, I will not even attemt to debate the quality of current ATi drivers. What I am trying to do is inform that ATi *will be in the near future* able to compete with nVidia because they have totally redone their workstation card driver development. Now, I'm not saying to buy an ATi now assuming that they will fix things, because that would be foolish. I just want to dispell the rumor that ATi can't fix things.

[pockets]

Oh yeah, they've proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they _can_. They're smart guys. But they have to make it a priority. And they're going to have to show longterm dedication. And they're going to have to do a lot to win back people that have already been burned. The harder task for ATI will be to prove to people that they can be trusted to deliver, and keep delivering.

ATI needs to do what the Detonator series of drivers did for NVIDIA. I remember when NVIDIA first started this program and it was a big deal to all of the sudden get near 50% more speed out of a TNT board once thought to be ready for retirement.

[bingowah]

Thanks for the heads up 3Dfx_Sage, that clarifies things a lot for me. Yeah, Nvidia cards are quite expensive over here... ack.

pockets thanks for your personal experience and stories. OUCH that sounds painful. I'm really in a hard place here still... ugh... it's a big what-if for sure, but do you think it's likely improved Catalyst drivers for the current round of ATI cards will be able to greatly alleviate these problems in the near future? I've found no real good deals on Nvidia cards up here... the comp I'm helping my bro get is from NCIX.com with the "PC Builder" option and they have a good priced Radeon 9800 Pro but no good priced Nvidias like I said... and things like the 5700 Ultra seem to have a number of problems from what I've read on here!!

I looked in their clearance area and the old Ti series cards they do have are ridiculously expensive! OUCH again. I know installing a graphics card shouldn't be a big deal but we're not big hardware buffs and don't want to deal with too much hassle right now. Of course, like you said, we might have to pay for that later with an unstable Radeon... arghhh

[bingowah]

Oh, by the way...


Does Maya have any particular incompatibility problems running on AMD (i.e. Barton 2500+)?

[3Dfx_Sage]

Originally posted by bingowah
do you think it's likely improved Catalyst drivers for the current round of ATI cards will be able to greatly alleviate these problems in the near future?
NEVER buy a card assuming that future drivers will fix existing problems. Also, the Radeon drivers will likely continue to have bad pro app support for some time; it's the FireGL's that are intended for workstation use and it's those that will get fixed. Now, you can always softmod your Radeon into a FireGL but that's still not going to give you any guarantees... ever. Might I suggest ebay? Many US sellers would be willing to chip to Canada, as well as the ebay.ca site. I found a GeForce4 Ti 4200 new in box (untested, sold as-is) for 72 Canadian dollars, with 5 hours left. That's a pretty dang good deal.

edit:
and, no, Maya had no problems with AMD. Maya actually loves AMD CPU's.

[bingowah]

Thanks yet again 3dFX Sage. I've had some sour eBay experiences in the past, but I'll have a look there. Thank you. Glad to hear about the AMD stuff too.

If I can get my hands on a cheap 5900 though, that shouldn't be too bad should it ;)

BTW my understanding is the GeForce Tis and FXs will run Maya "pretty well" on the whole without needing to be softmodded, but it's pretty much a necessity for the Radeons right?

[3Dfx_Sage]

Originally posted by bingowah
BTW my understanding is the GeForce Tis and FXs will run Maya "pretty well" on the whole without needing to be softmodded, but it's pretty much a necessity for the Radeons right?
right. However, something you should note is that teh GeForce4's and FX's wont be quite truely a Quadro (except for the FX 5800, but in order to fully mod that you have to do some soldering... ick) but the Radeon will indeed be fully a FireGL.

I may be willing to let go of my XFX GF4 Ti 4200 that overclocks 100% stable to 300 core, 610 memory... but I'm not really sure if I want to

[pockets]

Originally posted by 3Dfx_Sage
I may be willing to let go of my XFX GF4 Ti 4200 that overclocks 100% stable to 300 core, 610 memory... but I'm not really sure if I want to

You big tease.

:)

[bingowah]

LOL 3DFX Sage... ahh okay. But on the whole the FireGLs aren't much to be happy with compared to Quadros anyway, so... all weighted it seems like still slanted towards Nvidia.

LOL I think I may have found a solution, so you can hang onto your Ti4200. But that's overclocked pretty well is it? Is it as fast as a stock Ti4600?

[3Dfx_Sage]

well, the memory is a little slower than 4600 stock. And, actually I forgot the core can do 305 (big deal, 5mhz more...). 4200 stock is 250/500 and 4600 stock is 300/650.

[erazal]

I myself have a choice between the Quadro FX 1100 for $914 and Quadro FX 3000 for $1800 all in Canadian dollars.

Those prices are the best i have seen so far and now it's just a matter of choosing which one to get. I just dont know if the extra $1000 for the Quadro 3000 is worth it.

Granted compared to the normal price of $2600, it's a pretty damn good deal....but still it's also a $2000 videocard.

oh yeah, and FireGL's are definately out in terms of 3d apps?

[3Dfx_Sage]

what apps will you be using with it

[erazal]

Mostly 3d Studio Max and probably not maya, but i'd like to keep the option open for it.

[3Dfx_Sage]

you might be able to get away with an ATi, but it could turn out to be a rather expensive mistake. Still, I'd go with an nVidia (GF 5900's are pretty cheap these days).

[loop29]

Originally posted by 3Dfx_Sage
@pockets
you're absolutely correct, I will not even attemt to debate the quality of current ATi drivers. What I am trying to do is inform that ATi *will be in the near future* able to compete with nVidia because they have totally redone their workstation card driver development. Now, I'm not saying to buy an ATi now assuming that they will fix things, because that would be foolish. I just want to dispell the rumor that ATi can't fix things.

It´s about time that they fix their workstation drivers, don´t you think ? Now, just to clarify things up, nvidia is not producing 2 different chips, they are producing drivers that can detect SQ4 or nvstrap modifications and code buggy behaviour into their drivers if it is detected. Which will cause BSOD or reboot, but they are not different in basic functionality. And you don´t have to solder for a Quadro FX 2000, drivers 44.xx and 45.xx with nvstrap-antiprotection will do the work to Quadro FX 2000. But you´re right that you have to move that one resistor on the chip to use forceware drivers. Even the GF FX 5700 Ultra can be forced to become a full copy of a Quadro FX 1100. But you will have to throw everything at it that is available for modifications. I´ve seen a mod on a chinese or korean site where they did an ugly soldering job and then applied SQ4 and nvstrap-antiprotection to forceware drivers (53.03 I think). That did the trick. My guess is that forceware drivers are checking hardwired PCIdevice ID.

regards

[3Dfx_Sage]

I believe that there is a physical difference in the newer chips, and I believe that is what the drivers are checking for. I think it's something other than simply PCI ID, like maybe some extra register or something. The reason is that you can still use a hardmodded GF2 with the newest drivers but not a hardmodded GF4. Or maybe I'm wrong...

[GregHess]

Last I checked, starting with the Geforce4's, the Quadro line had different transistor counts then the consumer line.

If you need any further proof...take the heatsinks off.

The silkscreens are actually different on the quadro cards (they obviously had to split off the line somewhere for that).

If you do the same thing for a quadro2 or quadro dcc, the chip actually says "geforce3" or the respective consumer equviliant chipset.

[loop29]

You counted the transistors? How come, these are tiny things : )
I´m gonna find out for the Geforce FX 5800 what´s under there, I have to remove the heatspreader for getting to the resistor. The Memory of the FX 5800 gets so damn hot you can´t touch those, but the core stays around 45 degress, that´s weird.

regards

[3Dfx_Sage]

yeah the chips are fabbed, then put in packaging, then the packaging is silkscreened. all you have to do it grab a handfull out of the bucket and say "make these quadro's" (well not really that easily lol)

[JasonA]

I'd just like to mention that I'm running an old ATI 8800 FireGL with maya and max and it works pretty good. I *have* had a couple of graphics-driver related crashes in the 1.5 years I've had this card, but for the most part its done me well and this has been a very inexpensive card.

[Solesurvivor]

i own a softquadro 900gxl(ti4600) myself, but if ati can deliver stable drivers and _good_ opengl performance in the professional market, not games, than i might do the switch.


but i have a question for quadro fx or fire X1/X2 owners. Do you have a decent fps when you have about 300.000 polygons in your viewport? Cuz overhere when i have about 300.00 polygons in my viewport, things really really start to slow down a lot, average fps of about 3 or 4.

[loop29]

Do you have any free available scene with over 300.000 poly´s so I can make a test for you? I´m a mechanical engineer so I don´t use Maya that often, more focus is on developing parts and assemblies.

regards

[Solesurvivor]

i'll try to upload the scene and give you a pm then :)
thnx in advance

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.