Questions about the Professional Graphic Cards on Architecture Software

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
A

archsamzh

Reputable
Apr 10, 2014
7
0
4,510
I have some questions about the Professional Graphic Cards on Architecture Software

What hardware determine the performance in the following software

3D Modelling-

Sketcup Rhino Autodesk REVIT

Maybe REVIT needs CPU. How about the others ? K2000VS GTX760 which would be better?


2D Graphic and drawings

AutoCAD Photoship Illustrator and InDesign

CAD definely perform better with professional graphic card like K2000/4000

what about the adobe software?


Rendering

Maxwell Vray

CPU determines the performace??


Anyone is familiar with architecture software?

Thanks a lot

 
Solution
unknownofprob
The K2000 or K4000 isn't a huge benefit, so it most likely isn't worth it.

Your i5 2500k is fine for the meantime but if you do heavy multitasking or extreme 3D rendering maybe a i7 4770/k would be a good choice with a Z87 motherboard.

Your GPU is sill decent enough but having more GPU cores does help in some applications, the GTX 460 doesn't have a whole lot but going for a R9 290 later on would be a really beneficial upgrade

the GTX 460 only has 336 GPU cores whilst the R9 290 has 2560, quite a big difference. The R9 290 is actually a pretty good card for the price and much better value then the R9 290X for sure, you can get custom cooled models for under $450, that's pretty good for what you get.
Sort by date Sort by votes
unknownofprob

unknownofprob

Illustrious
Oct 3, 2013
8,409
0
38,960
all you'll need to worry about with the 3 is your CPU, ram and GPU (smaller priority then others). Some of these apps run better with SSD's also. I use these kind of apps just like you, and have tried a good balance of designer.architecture apps with the occasional game, but those K2000 cards are no big deal really (thought they help a little), and a GTX 760 is fine. (I run a R9 290X 4GB)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

archsamzh

Reputable
Apr 10, 2014
7
0
4,510


So u think the professional graphic cards like K2000/4000 is not necessary fot the architecture apps?

R9 290x is great and very expensive though. Good for you to have it.

I plan to buy a new cards maybe in Jul. or Aug. Anything recommended or worth waiting for ?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

archsamzh

Reputable
Apr 10, 2014
7
0
4,510


I bought my desktop 3 years ago.

i5-2500K p8z68 motherboard 16GB ram and GTX 460 any upgrade suggestion?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
unknownofprob

unknownofprob

Illustrious
Oct 3, 2013
8,409
0
38,960
The K2000 or K4000 isn't a huge benefit, so it most likely isn't worth it.

Your i5 2500k is fine for the meantime but if you do heavy multitasking or extreme 3D rendering maybe a i7 4770/k would be a good choice with a Z87 motherboard.

Your GPU is sill decent enough but having more GPU cores does help in some applications, the GTX 460 doesn't have a whole lot but going for a R9 290 later on would be a really beneficial upgrade

the GTX 460 only has 336 GPU cores whilst the R9 290 has 2560, quite a big difference. The R9 290 is actually a pretty good card for the price and much better value then the R9 290X for sure, you can get custom cooled models for under $450, that's pretty good for what you get.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
Solution
A

archsamzh

Reputable
Apr 10, 2014
7
0
4,510



Thanks for ur advice. If I'm going to upgrade my CPU, is E3 a valuable choice? maybe E3 is more stable and solid, I think..

I know ATI cards has more GPU cores (usually 3 times than the same series of NV cards) and I also know the efficiency of each core is different. NV's cores are much efficient. That's why I raise this issure, I dont know which one is more beneficial to the architecture apps above. More cores with lower efficiency or Less cores with higher efficiency.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
unknownofprob

unknownofprob

Illustrious
Oct 3, 2013
8,409
0
38,960
3 times as much is way out of proportion, that's 300%, it tends to be a 25% core increase in GPU's of the AMD manufacturer. AMD Cores aren't as bad as you may think, 2000 AMD cores perform slightly better then 1500 Nvidia cores, this in a simple comparison is like a R9 280X vs the GTX 770, but the R9 280X is so slightly on top due to AMD Mantle in games as it is becoming more widely used. The efficiency of AMD cores is less (not a whole lot), but with the price you pay for a whole lot more cores with AMD tends to have a vaster variety of benefits, as AMD tend to have their cards cheaper for competition. At the moment bitcoin/litecoin mining is making this price competitiveness a rarer one as AMD prices on their GPU's have skyrocketed dramatically.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

archsamzh

Reputable
Apr 10, 2014
7
0
4,510


Thanks. It seems u r a huge fan of AMD haha. I like ur answers. BTW, r u an architecture student or staff in AMD :)

Moreover, I know the mac pro still using w300/500/700 cf. I plan to upgrade my desktop in Aug. Maybe I will go for AMD. through new egg perhaps.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
unknownofprob

unknownofprob

Illustrious
Oct 3, 2013
8,409
0
38,960
good idea, I tend to like AMD more which you may have guessed.

I am a app designer/3D Designer/3D rendering/2D designer (2D models to 2D images) and a programmer, doing the lot is busy work.

The best AMD card for the price right now would be a R9 290, so if you ever can save up $450~, get that card.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom