Hot Hardware QuadroFX 3000 review

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 09 September 2003   #1
Hot Hardware QuadroFX 3000 review

Hot Hardware QuadroFX 3000 review:
Old 09 September 2003   #2
I wish they included 1000 and some XGL cards. And ran SpecAPC for Maya. Their conclusion - the most expensive Nvidia card is a little bit faster than the one that costs a little less.

Also, would still be nice to see max results under OGL as well. 5900 is doing pretty good with just OGL - competitive with older Quadro4s with Maxtereme I would guess.
Old 09 September 2003   #3
yeah, i find a lot of pro 3d card reviews seem to leave out the juicy bits we really want to see.

who gives a toss about unreal tournament benchmarks on a quadro, after all?
Old 09 September 2003   #4
Good point. The thing is the reviews are written by either gamers or techies with no experience in supporting, let alone using, 3d applications.

Umm... There's gotta be a way to get some hardware review site based on the CGTalk franchise...
Old 09 September 2003   #5
i'm sure if someone wanted to loan me a quadroFX 1000, 2000 and 3000 i could do a half decent review on a number of platoforms for it.

although, i only have access to 3dsmax and maya. an all-over benchmark with the top 10 3D applications would be a great start.
Old 09 September 2003   #6
Actually, I'd love to see some of these boards benchmarked with both pro 3D apps and games. I'm struggling to find a pro board that will both run well with Maya and run Half-Life 2 well.

-- Mark
Mark R. Wilkins
author of MEL Scripting for Maya Animators
Old 09 September 2003   #7
mark the QuadroFX are great with maya but nvidia has problems with the dx9 integration the ps2.0 are very slow - here is a nice test
Old 09 September 2003   #8
Yeah, and FireGL is bad with OpenGL!

I'm going to wait a few months and see what driver updates bring. I suspect it will be easier for Nvidia to wring out good HL2 performance than for ATI to improve their high-end drivers, but we'll see.

-- Mark
Mark R. Wilkins
author of MEL Scripting for Maya Animators
Old 09 September 2003   #9
I agree mark,
I think Nvidia will really show an appreciable speed improvement in their 50 series drivers.

I think on the gaming card front, nvidia won't be able to catch up to ATI in dx9 least not till 51/52 series drivers. However, on the proGL front, I think nvidia can get enough juice out of the Quadros to make HalfLife 2 playable, if not really fast.

As far as I'm concerned, I'd rather have awesome pro speed and features with average gaming performance, than great gaming and buggy pro support.
...that's just me though
1011010 1110010 1001111 0101101 0110001
In the end it all comes down to 0 and 1.
1011010 1110010 1001111 0101101 0110001
Old 09 September 2003   #10
Quote: Originally posted by swag
mark the QuadroFX are great with maya

Any proof of that? The only comprehensive benchmark I've seen shows that just about ALL nvidia cards are equally good in Maya, with old Geforces Ti trailing 10% or so behind (as if anyone would notice):
Old 09 September 2003   #11
the 50 series of drivers are getting nvidia into a whole load of trouble.

the whole problem is that their particular pixel shader 2.0 implementation is not exactly to spec with the official DX9 spec. therein lies the problem that any custom code nvidia writes/compiles will run well, but any DX9 code that runs to spec will aways run better on cards that adhere to the specifications fully (ie: the radeon 9500 through to 9800 pro cards).

nvidia are trying to fix this by writing application-specific code into their drivers, starting with the 50 series. this is all good and fine, but nvidia are going to be playing catch-up for the next few months on any game that is released. the other problem is their image quality will suffere greatly due to these problems.

the NV40 is supposedly a new core design, and as such should perform MUCH better under true DX9. i'm assuming nvidia will also make a professional accellerator series from this card, which should satisfy the CAD/CAM/DCC users out there who also wouldn't mind playing a game or two between modelling sessions.

as i've mentioned in other posts: if half-life 2 is the most important thing in your world right now, then rush out today and get yourself a radeon 9800pro.

if however you can handle not playing this game with all eye-candy turned on at blistering framerates (or not playing the game at all), and actually care about getting work done, stick with the cards you own now, and wait for the next generation of professional 3d accellerators.

the 50 series of drivers will be nvidias blunder coverup for the geforceFX cards and true DX9 games. it won't offer any gain for anyone else, and at this stage is looking like a bit of a white elephant.
Old 09 September 2003   #12
Everyone should ignore 90% of what Elvis just said.

Old 09 September 2003   #13
Quote: Originally posted by CgFX
Everyone should ignore 90% of what Elvis just said.

CgFX, once again you prove yourself to be nothing but an annoying post troll. either shit or get off the pot.

the web is full of speculation at the moment regarding the situation i talk about above. only time will tell what the true story is. if you care to comment do so, but you can leave your smart-arse throw away comments at the door.

valve are the main contributors to all of this fuss. go for a quick browse around any of the current major hardware sites (anandtech has a great artcle on it) and see what's occurring and why, and what nvidia and ati are doing about it.
Old 09 September 2003   #14
and for those who find it difficult to search for these things themselves:

Quote: - Valve is pissed at all of the benchmarking "optimizations" they've seen in the hardware community;
- Half-Life 2 has a special NV3x codepath that was necessary to make NVIDIA's architecture perform reasonably under the game;
- Valve recommends running geforce fx 5200 and 5600 cards in dx8 mode in order to get playable frame rates.
- even with the special NV3x codepath, ATI is the clear performance leader under Half-Life 2 with the Radeon 9800 Pro hitting around 60 fps at 10x7. The 5900 ultra is noticeably slower with the special codepath and is horrendously slower under the default dx9 codepath;
- the Radeon 9600 Pro performs very well - it is a good competitor of the 5900 ultra;
- ATI didn't need these special optimizations to perform well and Valve insists that they have not optimized the game specifically for any vendor.
Old 09 September 2003   #15
and some more:

i won't quote from that. you can go read it for yourselves.

and folks, i do stress the following if it's not already obvious: this entire fiasco pertains to the default microsoft directx 9 codepath particular moreso to gaming than anything else.

openGL performance, and performance within your pro 3d apps will probably not even feel the ripples generated by all of this crap.

Last edited by elvis : 09 September 2003 at 12:56 PM.
Thread Closed share thread

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Society of Digital Artists

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:30 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.