Nvidia GTX-770 2GB or Quadro k2000D 2GB for Video Rendering Computer [HELP!!!]

SanduG

Reputable
Sep 26, 2014
12
0
4,510
Guys I have been looking everywhere and on many websites and forums. Everywhere there seems to be a different opinion. Im building a new computer and I'm going to be using it as a Video Workstation Machine. The Softwares I use are Blender, Autodesk Maya, Adobe Premiere Pro, Wondershare Video Converter and etc. (My budget for the computer is $2500 New Zealand Dollars). From my research the Quadro K2000D seems to be made specifically for a workstation computer but the GTX-770 seems to be more powerful at a speed rate and its suitable for gaming is well. What Card do you recommend that I get the GTX-770 or the Quadro k2000D.

These are the parts im going to include in my computer.


I7 Barebones Kit
Intel Core i7 4790 CPU
Gigabyte GA-H97M-D3H Motherboard
Kingston 16GB (2x8GB) DDR3-1600 DIMMs
2TB 3.5" Western Digital RED 1.00 134.55 134.55
Kingston HyperX Fury 120GB SSD
Asus 18x DVD-ROM Black 1.00 29.90 29.90
PC Case SilverStone Redline RL04B with 500w Enermax
 
Solution

sirstinky

Distinguished
Aug 17, 2012
644
0
19,360
Well it's pretty easy. If you're doing rendering with specialized software, then get a card that's designed for it, which would be the Quadro. The workstation cards are different from mainstream cards for gaming because have been optimized to use different drivers, have different clock rates, memory with error correction (typically more memory capacity) and other built-in error correcting functions. All that makes them more expensive. So while a mainstream card is good for turning data into pixels as fast as possible, the workstation card is good at turning tons of data into pixels as efficiently and error-free as possible. Errors in professional settings is very bad. Precision trumps speed in this case, which is why a workstation card will be outperformed by a desktop card in games. The desktop card might hold its own in professional software for rendering, but it won't do as well as the workstation cards.
 


If you are building a workstation then selection of CPU and Mobo is wrong. Stick with X99 based chipset with Intel Haswell-E based CPU.

GTX 770 is a gaming graphics card whereas Quadro is a graphics card for scientific applications (what I have stated is just a tip of ice berg).

Better grab Quadro for your stated requirements. If you want to have a card with gaming capability and professional as well, your bet is Titan from nVIDIA.
 
Be aware that there can be issues using gaming cards for workstation tasks.
This is a really good article highlighting some of these issues as well as having a number of benchmarks but not for the K2000D:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/specviewperf-12-workstation-graphics-benchmark,3778-19.html

Here is an example benchmark which includes the GTX 770 and K2000D:
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/workstation-graphics-2013/12-Maya-2013-OpenGL-Hand,3288.html
The K2000 comes in at 48.87 seconds while the GTX 770 took 297.07 seconds. That's a pretty big win for the workstation card.
I'm not sure what the difference is between the K2000 and K2000D.

More benchmarks:
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/workstation-graphics-2013/benchmarks,146.html

The likely answer is that a workstation card is going to be better for anything except games, while the gaming card will be much stronger at games.
 


There is nothing wrong with his choice of CPU and motherboard.
The X99 platform is massively more expensive and offers no benefit in this situation other than some performance gain if a 6 or 8 core processor is used.
The cost just isn't justified, this money would be better spent on a more expensive graphics card if extra performance is required..
 
Solution

someguynamedmatt

Distinguished
I do a lot of 3D rendering work, mainly in Blender - specifically, with the Cycles engine which supports CUDA. I use a GTX 760 myself on a Xeon E3-1240v3, and it works wonderfully.

Performance-wise, the K2000D is basically entry-level desktop hardware (running 384 CUDA cores) where you're paying for professional support and driver features. The 770 has 1536 CUDA cores, which is almost five times that of the Quadro... you'll notice MASSIVE performance difference in just about any situation.

You have to remember that a workstation card of the same class of hardware would probably be better, but this does not mean that a workstation card of the same price will even be comparable. The Quadro K4200 is a little closer in performance, and is a $900 card - even then, it still isn't at the same level of a GTX 770. OpenGL optimized drivers aren't going to help you in things like Blender where the determining factor in render time and performance is essentially the amount of raw data that the CUDA cores can process.

Just my opinion. Take it for what it's worth.
 


Frequency is the same, 3.6 GHz base clock speed with maximum turbo boost of 4GHz.
Xeon has slightly lower TDP.
Main difference is support for ECC RAM, but I'm not sure that this is supported by the chosen motherboard.
 

Cristi72

Admirable


I stand corrected, I am sorry about that...