The benefit of a quadro vs geforce?


#55

Here’s the GPU benchmark test for VrayRT:

In there the GTX 480 is just behind the 580 and still much faster than 2xQuadro 4000

I’ve been looking around to see how to fix the heat problem, it seems it’s OK for it to go in to the 80’s but I think that’s just too high, since I’ve got a thing I’d like to maybe set to render overnight I don’t want to be concerned that I could burn out the cards if I’m not there watching it. Looks like the voltage is set higher than necessary and lowering it can improve it. I can also lower the clock speed a bit probably without effecting the speed much.


#56

If your interested a a 580 with 3gb you better buy now. I just purchased 9 of them, a buddy bought 4 and it is slim picking. Vendors said people are buying them up fast, I had to wait a extra week for four of them. If I had to buy quadros or tesla I wouldn’t of gotten anywehere near the rendering power I have now.

I wonder how they got 9 gpu’s in a machine for that benchmark?


#57

Yeah, they had the (DR) there but I don’t know what that means.

Right now there’s a good selection of GTX 580’s at Tigerdirect (ugh) kind of expensive but they have choices.

This is the one I just added:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130766

Runs fine, I just need to rearrange things to keep it cooled. If I had experience setting up liquid cooling systems I’d go for the ones with the waterblock on there, but I don’t want to get into that type of thing.


#58

Distributed render?
I was able to add two of those to the set up. They are faster at rendering Iray than a standard 580. Louder but faster. I can do more tests but I would say at least 10% faster.


#59

Thanks for posting that. I wish it would show core speeds (ie is it over/underclocked), mem speed ect. you can overcrank a 480GTX for 3 minutes off a fresh boot in a cool room no problem :slight_smile:

You should also note that a spec 480 GTX’s core runs at 700mhz to a 475mhz core of a Q4K.

What I really find surprising is that 480+2x teslas is only 2x faster than a single 480 GTX. That is $3500 bucks compared to $350 literally an order of magnitude greater expense for only twice the speed. For that difference in price I would expect at least 4x greater performance.


#60

And I don’t know if iRay has a similar effect of gaming cards rendering much faster than Quadros, but I would imagine the case is similar.

I did manage to get my GPU’s running at a good temperature, just had to move the computer around since it was sitting in the corner.


#61

Gaming cards has got more cuda than quadro. So sure iRay runs faster on that but you don’t get much more RAM on it.

As for temperature, I noticed that when it comes to buy cards, it’s better to get cards with 2 fans. I have GTX 580 (PNY from USA, 1 fan) and GTX 570 (2 fans). When doing rendering with iRay, GTX 580 temp stays aroun 71 C and GTX 570 stays much down to 60C around.


#62

Well the tests in VrayRT are in OpenCL mode rather than Cuda, perhaps it would render even faster with Cuda.

As far as the memory. Gaming cards are limited in that way, but you’d have to go up to a Tesla or a Quadro 6000 get more than the 3GB available on the GTX 580. And then once iRay is updated then it could support the GTX 680 with 4GB of memory.


#63

While we are on the subject of gaming cards versus “proper” GPU cards (Quadros/Teslas), and we are concerned about the temperatures these cards run at versus their life span…

Has anyone actually “burned out” a GTX card running iRay or RT on it, yet? Any second-hand stores of doing so? Like any consumer product, they fail from time to time, even on a lightly used system, but given that they are being run hard for long periods doing rendering, are there any stories of killing cards?


#64

Actually gpu cards don’t get burned out but if it crosses certain temperature then graphics driver failed error will come up and rendering will be stopped. I had actually burned out my motherboard while doing iRay rendering, even though I was running CPU (i7 930) at more than 95C , CPU still was fine but motherboard died. GPU was at 80C around. This was happened at normal aircooling lol.

I never had problem of burning cards with rendering for a long time in iRay, even I did continuously for more than 3 to 4 days.


#65

I’m sure it can be an issue—like if the cards were running as hot as they were it probably would have gotten to the point of overheating. Luckily though it improved a lot just by moving the computer out of the corner to the other side of the desk so that the hot air doesn’t get stuck behind the computer.

I haven’t done much tests yet, but at work I’ve rendered quite a bit with iRay, on one machine with a GTX 460, and the other for 2 GTX 560’s And that’s like keeping the computer on for a couple weeks rendering each night and over weekends.


#66

I have rendered with 4x 480’s over the past 2 years nights and weekends with no issues at all.
480’s run pretty hot while rendering too. 90-92 degrees Celsius.


#67

hello everyone here,

I found this thread while searching through the net for graphics card comparison, and their performance in 3ds max. The opinions vary so much that making a decision, trying to choose something (especially in reasonable price range) is rather tough.
Two days ago I spotted a thread, which might be somehow helpful for people trying to find any info about viewport performance on specific cards, systems, and Max version.

http://www.evermotion.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=72251

I will be buying myself a graphic card within next two weeks, and my problem is that I didn’t get to any conclusion yet and I wouldn’t like to end up throwing some money on a card that won’t help a lot…

Maybe some of You guys could try this scene out and post Your results so that me and maybe others would be able to realize what real life results are and it would help us what to buy.

thanks!


#68

Quadro should be better performance in the viewport, but not at all good for rendering


#69

LOL and the debate goes on…

Go to the wiki page I posted and look at the nVidia GPU specs, there will lie your answer. :wink:


#70

That’s what read on couple of forums, that Quadro should be better for viewport, but for the reasonable price all You can get is quadro600 and FirePro4900. Anybody has any of them and could tell us how they work in max 2012?


#71

To make it even more complex… if you have a fixed budget for your hardware, that Quadro will have to last 4 or 5 times as long… so in the lifespan of a single quadro you could upgrade to the latest and greatest geforce a couple of times. Next gen geforce will probably be faster then current gen Quadro so take that into consideration as well… good luck! :slight_smile:


#72

In my experience it’s not worth going for a Quadro unless you get one of the better ones like the Quadro 4000

The pricing doesn’t compare to a video game GPU though, you can probably get a gaming card that will be cheaper and perform better for less up to a point.


#73

Ok, that’s about quadro600, but what about v4900? Has anyone any experience ?


#74

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.