PDA

View Full Version : QuadroFX 4500 on mac


okfir
03-22-2006, 07:27 AM
We decided to upgrade our workstation at work
currently we have
Quad G5 4gig ram and geforce 7800gt

We use the workstation for heavy industrial animations like drilling and milling etc.
and the animations are really heavy on the workstation and I mean really heavy
and its really stops our workflow.

Do you know if quadrofx 4500 will be our solution? Or maybe something else will do the trick?
we cant update the processors since we have the top, or maybe its the ram we need to update.

Let me know what you think

leif3d
03-23-2006, 12:55 AM
It depends on what software you are using. Maya for example will benefit greatly from the OpenGl implemetation of the 4500 in these calculations, on the other hand Lightwave or cinema4d will not take advantage of the OpenGl features of the card too much.

enygma
03-23-2006, 02:59 AM
It depends on what software you are using. Maya for example will benefit greatly from the OpenGl implemetation of the 4500 in these calculations,
Not on the mac it won't. I haven't come across any real advantages of using the QuadroFX 4500 on the mac over a GeForce.

In benchmarks I have run, even the QuadroFX 3400 on the PC (Linux or windows) greatly outperforms the QuadroFX 4500 on the mac, and benchmarks that I have seen also show a nominal improvement of the 4500 over the 7000gt. By nominal improvement, I mean nowhere near the money you will be spending on the Quadro bu a really really long shot. At least, not at this time.

leif3d
03-23-2006, 03:36 AM
I would have never guessed that Video Card power could have been bottlenecked by the OS. Even though that makes no sence to me, only because the application should take the VC's power however it wants, I trust in your opinion. :)

okfir
03-23-2006, 04:38 AM
than what do you think is my problem?
I am using cinema4d
maybe its the ram? I have 4gig
there's got to be something to improve our workflow

enygma
03-23-2006, 05:08 AM
I can only assume it is a driver issue, or some issue with how Quartz interfaces with the GPU with other apps. I'm baffled myself really, and I can't seem to get any hints of what the issue may be from Apple. I have a Quad G5 with 4GB memory myself and benchmarked against a PC with 4GB ram, dual Opteron 250 and a QuadroFX 3400.

I benchmarked using Maya test scenes, SPEC Viewperf 8.1 and Cinebench. It was pretty consistent across the board. The lesser video card on the PC won in all cases. The QuadroFX 4500 is truly a bomb right now on the Mac. I really, really wish it weren't considering the money I invested in it.

motoxpress
03-23-2006, 07:22 AM
Are you sure it's not just a very tasking set of geometry? How many polys are in the scene? Also, when you say "heavy" is it slow to render or is it sluggish during the modeling?

-gl

reForm
03-23-2006, 05:19 PM
We did some cinebench comparisons in the office here...

Rigs :- G5 quad 2.5Ghz with Quadro 4500
Dell M70 laptop with Quadro 1400go
Boxx 2x265 with Quadro 3400

OpenGl HW test : The M70 whipped all the other machines ! The mac was the slowest.
Render Test multi_core : mac came in at around 1200, boxx (overclocked to 2.1.Ghz) 1150, m70 280 :(
render test single_core : mac=?, boxx=371, M70=281

I'd like to know if there are any benchmarks that will show any advantage of the quadro 4500/3400 over the 1400... for basic scenes like in the cinebench test, there is no advantage.

motoxpress
03-23-2006, 05:22 PM
Your kidding right? The quad G5 rules the roost when it comes to Cinebench....even your results show that.

The M70 was a distant 3rd from what I could see. I will grant you that the OpenGL drivers on the mac seem to suffer when compared to the Nvidia drivers in XP.

-gl

jbo
03-23-2006, 05:45 PM
Your kidding right? The quad G5 rules the roost when it comes to Cinebench....even your results show that.

The M70 was a distant 3rd from what I could see. I will grant you that the OpenGL drivers on the mac seem to suffer when compared to the Nvidia drivers in XP.

-gl

read the post again... he's saying that the m70 was fastest on the openGL test, not the render tests.

MattClary
03-23-2006, 05:54 PM
I don't use a Mac, but what you are saying fits with everything I have ever read, that Macs have poor OpenGL implementation. NOT a slam on Macs, just my understanding of the situation.

enygma
03-23-2006, 06:10 PM
Are you sure it's not just a very tasking set of geometry? How many polys are in the scene? Also, when you say "heavy" is it slow to render or is it sluggish during the modeling?

-gl
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=300275

Here, you can also look at the link in my signature.

All OpenGL related benchmarks showed that the QuadroFX 4500 is worthless on the Mac for its money.

The benchmarks I did within Maya I measured in frames per second. You can also find the links to the scenes I used for testing Mayas viewport performance on both the PC and the Mac.

There is no real workaround to improving the OpenGL performance on the Mac. Like I said, it is most likely a problem with the drivers. Not the hardware.

Kinda bummed myself. The money I could have saved by going with the 7800gt could have gotten me a Wacom 21ux or a 30" cinema display instead of the 23" cinema display I'm using currently.

motoxpress
03-23-2006, 06:20 PM
read the post again... he's saying that the m70 was fastest on the openGL test, not the render tests.

Yes, I realize that. That's why I added the OpenGL comment.

-gl

motoxpress
03-23-2006, 06:21 PM
Kinda bummed myself. The money I could have saved by going with the 7800gt could have gotten me a Wacom 21ux or a 30" cinema display instead of the 23" cinema display I'm using currently.

Can't you just sell the Quadro?

-gl

enygma
03-23-2006, 06:23 PM
I like to hope that Apple will improve the drivers sometime soon... :D

MattClary
03-23-2006, 06:53 PM
I like to hope that Apple will improve the drivers sometime soon... :D

Is Apple responsible for the drivers? I would think nVidia would be the one writing them....?

enygma
03-23-2006, 06:58 PM
I think I heard that AMD gives apple the driver spec. The drivers are generally rolled in with the operating system. Updates are usually part of OS revisional updates (like 10.4.4 -> 10.4.5).

okfir
03-24-2006, 05:54 AM
OK, so as I understand, the quadro will not improve my work in such a way that worth the money and as I know I am up to date with the drivers.
what do you think will improve the work? maybe more ram (I have 4gig).

As my boss told me I have an open check so money is not an issue.

enygma
03-24-2006, 06:46 AM
More ram won't help your GPU performance. You only really need more RAM if you feel that it is getting used up.

If you really want the OpenGL performance and a slightly more powerful workstation, might be worth looking at a dual Opteron 280 workstation. You will see a true performance advantage with OpenGL taking the PC route. CPU performance on the 280 is marginally better than the Quad 2.5GHz G5 so you won't see a huge difference there. You will see a big difference though comparing the 7800gt on the Mac to a QuadroFX 4500 on the PC. If you run with Linux, provided your applications support it, you will see even slightly better OpenGL performance over Windows.

Currently, your Quad G5 is the most powerful system you can get for a Mac, until Apple releases Intel workstations. More memory will only help you if you are maxing out your current 4GB. You can tell this if you notice your hard drive having to be used a lot for tasks that normally reside in memory.

amplitude
03-24-2006, 10:54 AM
Hi guys,

Regarding Maya and the quadro on the mac, it appears you have manually unlock quadro features to enable Maya to take advantage of it.
Here is a quote from barefeats.com:
February 23rd, 2006 -- Quadro FX 4500 supports CGfx in Maya 7, but only if you enable it. I found this on the Maya 7 support site:

NOTE: The Quadro FX 4500 has been tested and qualified with CG enabled in Maya 7.0. The use of CG is not on by default and must be turned on using environment variables added to the Maya.env file. This file exists in your HOME/Library/Preferences/Alias/maya/7.0 directory. The environment variables are as follows:

MAYA_ENABLE_HWR_CG_PROGRAMS = 1
MAYA_HWR_CG_FRAGMENT_PROFILE = arbfp1

When we defined those variables, our Quad-Core with FX 4500 not only completed "production quality" HW renders as much as 216% faster, but the final product looked better.

And there's more! We discovered that the GeForce 7800 GT supports CGfx, too, and can assure you it does HW renders just as fast as the Quadro!



Hope this helps.

CGTalk Moderation
03-24-2006, 10:54 AM
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.