X1900XT slow?

[deathman20]

Well it might seem slower due to the fact that the X1900XT won't go into 3D clocks in programs that don't go to full screen mode.

Which it will run slower but should still be faster then the X700. Did you make sure to clean off all the drivers before, registery cleaner, then install the new ones?

[xstijn]

Well i didn't even install other ones, i justed reinstalled windows and then the first drivers i installed where the ones from omega... I know it won't go in to 3d mode but it must indeed be quite a lot of better than that x700. Any other ideas?

[xstijn]

Anyone? It really irritates me...

[xstijn]

No one has encountered such a problem? Or could help me? Please!

[lots]

ATI hardware is generally not the best when it comes to CG. Most people you will see will recommend an Nvidia card.

As to your problem I cant really give you any help as I dont use Maya. Though keep in mind that viewport performance is pretty much linked to the type of interactions you are using. It is also relativly CPU intensive rather than video card. For example, the use of bones cause more CPU usage, and thus can slow your UI experience down, evne if you have the biggest video card out there.

[xstijn]

THanks for your answer!

But still, i know nvidia maybe is a bit better when it comes to cg but beceause i still game quite often i choose this one (at that time the best bang for the buck, i think still) And it's ok that's a bit slower, but a x1900xt way slower than a x700 pro! :O

Do you think it help if i reinstall maya or get new drivers, just please tell me..

[GregHess]

I don't know about maya, but you should probably make sure it hasn't defaulted back to some sort of software default renderer (in the viewport). Sometimes when you switch video cards and drivers, most of the programs will default to the most compatible interface, which is generally software in 3d applications.

Other then that, your only recourse is to try different driver sets. Though I'd assume you are already using the latest.

Try running a graphical benchmark program (like cinebench 95) to ensure that your hardware acceleration is working properly indepedently of maya.

[newman]

The video card, as was suggested above, is not nearly as important for viewport performance as raw CPU power. Now, when you compare the CPUs you mention, here's what you get - on one hand you have a PIV, 3 GHz single core. On the other, you have a 3800+, which is a dual core CPU. I could be wrong about this, but I think Maya only uses one of your cores for viewport performance, and two cores for rendering. So basically, in terms of viewport performance, you're probably down to a single 2,0 GHz core with 512 KB L2 cache. I don't know how this compares to the PIV 3,0, but if it's slower, it could be the cause of your problem.

[xstijn]

I will take a look at the drivers used in the viewport, and try different drivers.But i'm a bit stupid but where can i see in maya wich driver it's using, and what is the best one to use?

About the processor, i have a single core processor so i think it will be faster than that p4 3.0 ghz. Also if it was a x2 it wasn't true cause a 2,0 ghz amd 64 is compared to a 3 ghz p4 processor, probably even better...

I will try out some things, but if anyone has a better idea please tell me!

[imashination]

The 3800 is a dual core as far as im aware, and yes, a 2ghz amd will run at about the same single corse speed as a p4@3ghz

[deathman20]

The 3800 is a dual core as far as im aware, and yes, a 2ghz amd will run at about the same single corse speed as a p4@3ghz

There is single core 3800's as well.

[xstijn]

Nope i have a 3800 single core.. :P

So anyone knows where i can change the maya renderer (for the viewport) and what's the best?

[lots]

The 3800 single core is a 2.4 GHz CPU, it should give higher performance than P4 based CPUs at 3.2 or even more (I'd imagine..)

[perham3d]

i had the same problem when i upgraded from a nvidia 6200le to an ati v5100.it wasnt any faster than my nvidia in the viewports but when i switched the driver in 3ds max from opengl to direct x the card was super fast.uve probably tried that already but if u aint give it a go.it might work :D

[lots]

Its good to metion, that in most cases, if you want good OpenGL (what every major 3D app supports) performance, Nvidia is the direction to go in. When it comes to Direct 3D, it is more of a toss up between the two. Mostly because ATI's driver focus has been on DirectX all these years and not as much OpenGL development (as can be seen by how well thier drivers work with the API ;))

I imagine with AMD at the helm, this will change a bit for ATI, but as of now Nvidia is still the winner in the OpenGL area.

[perham3d]

totally agree.i was surprised tho becuase the v5100 is supposed to be an opengl based card yet runs about 60-70% faster in directx.wtf? i even downloaded the specific max8 drivers for the card but they were pants so i stuck with directx :D

[lots]

Well keep in mind that all the big Pro cards are derrived from gamer cards, which are DirectX focused (in general). In fact, there are usually very few things that are different on the Pro cards and gamer cards. In 3DSMax, a Quadro or FireGL will still perform faster in DirectX mode. This may have more to do with the way Max handles OpenGL and Direct 3D, but many forum users tend to use DirectX mode due to its speed. However, I hear that some visibility is lost by going this route, while the OpenGL views are all correct.

[xstijn]

Thanks all, but i can do nothing if i don't know how to change the driver in maya (opengl, directx etc.) So PLEASE, someone tell me :rolleyes:

[lots]

Well that may be a question better suited to the maya forums, as I know nothing about the inner workings of maya :)

[perham3d]

maya gives me heart palpatations whenver i see its gui (sooooo scary and daunting)

[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.