Help me Obiwan.. VideoCard Question

[MaDSheeP]

well, i did read that the 980XGL Quadro card performed on par with a 4600

:shrug:

[harmonic01]

I had an ATI FireGL 8800 before and I had problems with some games because the card is OpenGL only. No Direct 3D, so rule that card out.

[loop29]

That´s the problem with all ATI professional cards, they use different set of drivers as the gaming cards like Radeon 7/8/9x00. That may change in the future since ATI is shifting to unified driver architecture like nvidia has with the detonators. However, the Quadro based cards are mostly on par with their gaming brethren in games.

regards

[kex]

yep yo new quadro fx line fairs in performance to the new geforce fx 's and as u know nvidia is stable on software front go with them. try getting the best quadro fx for games and 3d

[Aearon]

the first independant doom3 benchmarks came up around E3 this year, and despite it's sometimes sub-par performance in current games the NV30/35 had much higher frame rates than the latest ATI cards... and face it this way, performance in future games is what really counts, as you can play any current game on a gf3/4 without problems

nvidia also has the better reputation for professional use, so i would seriously consider buying a quadro fx if you have the money

on the flipside: if your main concern is future games like hl2 and doom3, you'll be better of waiting until they actually arrive... i'm very happy with my softquadro'd gf4 in the meantime

[3dan|dk]

Thank you all for answering

I guess Ill forget about ATI and go for some sort of NVidia solution.

Heard the upcoming FX-5900 Ultra should be pretty "Evil", and much more promesing than the 5800. And maybe in the near future I can patch the drivers and get som Quadro abilities :drool:

So the choice is now between the Geforce FX5900 or QuadroFX 500.. hmm

[icpstudios]

forget about the quadro fx 500....

it's based off the sub-par mx line but for the fx series....

go with the quadro fx1000 or if u can't afford that go with the gf fx ultra series cards.....

trust me when I say that if u want games and 3d performance, don't go with the workstation cards that are based off the company's cheap chip line....

I put a quadro 900xgl card in mine and it plays the games fine and on par with the gf4 ti 4400-4600 series

[CgFX]

Originally posted by icpstudios
forget about the quadro fx 500....

it's based off the sub-par mx line but for the fx series....

What? totally wrong. The FX 500 has nothing to do with a NV17/NV18 based GeForce MX.
go with the quadro fx1000 or if u can't afford that go with the gf fx ultra series cards.....

Oh, yeah? How does a FX 5900 compare to a FX 500 in Maya? Max? viewperf? We all want to know.

[Sieb]

Uh oh.. don't get him started..

:banghead:

[3dan|dk]

Now im confused!! :hmm:

[kex]

scrunchs up face, hides head in sand here it comes :shame: :shame: :shame:

[icpstudios]

I meant that the quadro fx 500 is based off nvidia's low end geforce fx series...the 5200 I think like how the older quadro series has a counter part with their perspective series...and the mx reference was meant as an example

sorry if I confused u

So again I would go with a mid-range to high-end geforce model or a older high-end quadro card like a 980xgl (8xagp) if u need an 8x card...or a 750xgl (4xagp) is good if u can still find...but please don't get a quadro fx500....don't get me wrong....the quadro series is the way to go if u want 3d app performance as well as gaming

[CgFX]

Originally posted by icpstudios
...but please don't get a quadro fx500.

Can you tell us more about your testing or workstation reviews you have found?

[icpstudios]

well take a look at the standard specs straight off nvidia's site for the fx 500

http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?PAGE=quadrofx


Then look at the standard specs off the quadro xgl series

http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?PAGE=quadro4xgl

the 750xgl is on par if not a little better than the fx500

but u wanted a 8x agp card so go with a 980xgl....

I currently using a 900xgl for 3ds max 5 and it seems to be working fine...I would have went with the 750xgl if I could have found one when I waas shopping for one...

try the3dshop.....they have the 750xgl for I believe $365

http://www.the3dshop.com/productinfo.asp?a_prodid=850

or a 980xgl for $553

http://www.the3dshop.com/productinfo.asp?a_prodid=1073

although the 750xgl is a 4xagp card only it is a very good performer for the price...

I'm very happy with the performance of my 900xgl I bought 8 months ago for work and games....

plays warcraft3 on high res just fine and does my 3dmax stuff fine

maya stuff I wouldn't know though...but should work fine too

[CgFX]

Originally posted by icpstudios
well take a look at the standard specs straight off nvidia's site for the fx 500

http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?PAGE=quadrofx

Then look at the standard specs off the quadro xgl series

http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?PAGE=quadro4xgl

the 750xgl is on par if not a little better than the fx500

but u wanted a 8x agp card so go with a 980xgl....


The 750xgl and 980xgl are just great. That wasn't my point. You enphatically said avoid the FX 500 at all cost for entry level and instead go with a GeForce FX 5900 Ultra (which is more expensive and not in the same entry level price range).

I wanted to know what testing and benchmarks you based such a concrete opinion on?

In the quadro family we have been told to expect fx 500 to be faster than the 580xgl it replaces. It will also be a little slower than the more expensive 750xgl but provide DX9/OGL1.5 features that some users may require.

[icpstudios]

ok..I guess alot of miscommunication going around

I appologize

What I'm trying to say and been trying to say is that this person wants a gaming/workstation card for both card and games.....we established that the quadro line is the way to go.... now for about the same price as the quadro fx500 which is by the way like you said an entry-level card but the gaming performance is about the same as a geforce fx value card which I heard didn't do so well.....this person could get a quadro 750xgl for about the same price which by the way you also pointed out that it's a mid-range card and it's gaming performance should be about the same as the geforce ti mid-range cards plus to top it off the 750 xgl has a slightly better performance rating than the fx500 for about the same price....now because this person wants a 8x agp card...I would honestly still perfer a 750xgl 4xagp card over a fx500 8x agp card...just my opinion though....ultimately up to the buyer to decide which is more important....gaming or 3d app performance....Now about the added newer features that the quadro fx500 has that the 750 xgl doesn't....the directx9 feature and the others would be help for the programs that use it...however I personally would wait for the mid-range cards to come down in price if those new features was an absolute must have...because like I said...the gaming performance of the fx500 is about the same as the low end value geforce fx cards which I heard didn't do so well

sorry for the misscommunication...hope this will clarify things enough for u

[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.