Closed

EVGA gtx 560 ti SLI vs QUADRO 2000 or 4000

I am a complete noob. please bare with me. I am an architecture student whom uses MAYA, autocad, and rhino mostly. I recently bought a pc from cyberpower and love it. or Until I started getting high res poly models in maya. I currently have a i7-2600k with a evga gtx560ti. I need better modeling power. Is it better to do an SLI with another gtx560ti or to go with a quadro 2000 or 4000? I am trying to be cost efficient so i know the 4000 is best but need the reasoning. Also is it possible to run a gtx560ti with a quadro 2000 or 4000? if so does it make it better? thank you for reading. please help!!
42 answers Last reply
More about evga quadro 2000 4000
  1. 560ti sli, but for now overclock that 560ti and you should see a significant increase in performance.
  2. @jframiro, nVidia Quadro GPU series are designed for such a work. 3D applications, animations, rendering, accelerating CAD & Maya and so on ....

    If you notice, Maya, mudbox, Cad never list regular GPUs (or list them at the last place) in their system requirement manuals, they always list the nvidia Quadro and ATI FirePro GPUs.

    So definitely you're better with one of the nVidia Quadro, if you're a beginner stick with Quadro 2000, if you're a professional go with Quadro FX 4000/5000 series but they are pretty much expensive.
  3. ^^^
    Great Advice ilysami

    Workstation cards are much better at those types of apps
    Not only better optimized drivers but even the architecture of the card
    is better designed for that work especially high res polys

    think of a gaming GPU like a Ferrari
    think of a workstation card like an offroad 4x4 vehicle

    you wouldnt use the Ferrari to go up a mountain

    a gaming GPU is designed for FPS
    will sacrifice accuracy for the FPS
    it doesnt need to have every frame perfect
    just put them up there fast


    this a good read on workstation vs gaming cards

    http://cadworkstationguide.com/Workstation-Graphics-Cards-Vs-Gaming-Graphics-Cards.html
  4. Again the Gtx 580 and 480 outperform the Quadro even used as workstation graphics. The Gtx 580 beat the Quadro by about 2 seconds. Not bad for a card with a price tag off 1200usd less
  5. gnomio read the link I posted

    only amateurs use gaming cards for workstation app purposes

    for a home user using a gaming card is alright
    but gaming card arch and drivers are different than workstation cards

    it might render it faster but not as accurate
    and when one little mistake especially in AutoCAD
    can destroy a project
  6. king smp said:
    gnomio read the link I posted

    only amateurs use gaming cards for workstation app purposes

    for a home user using a gaming card is alright
    but gaming card arch and drivers are different than workstation cards

    it might render it faster but not as accurate
    and when one little mistake especially in AutoCAD
    can destroy a project

    Not amateurs king. Professionals with commen sense
    http://ppbm5.com/DB-PPBM5-1.php

    Those are all professional workstations King

    Quadro cards are consumer cards thats just underclocked for precision.
  7. @gnomio even though i don't understand anything from your links but i see that you wanna compare workstation GPUs with Dekstop GPUs, so give a look at this

    GTX 580 is the modified GTX 480, even the Quadro FX 580 beats it, can you see now the difference between Quadro and GTX ?
  8. quote

    Cad applications typically cost between $1000 to in excess of $10,000 per license. Cad applications need workstation graphics cards that can manipulate complex geometry that could be in excess of a billion triangles. They need to be able to deal with real world real size geometry that could include bridges, skyscrapers or a jumbo jet for example.

    They need to be able to produce geometry that can be measured to many decimal places in anything from microns to miles. Getting it wrong could result in product recalls or even failure for example. At a higher level some Cad applications require workstation graphics cards where the graphics card utilise GPU computing. That is when the workstation graphics card actually performs more calculations than the workstations actual processor(s) themselves.

    Workstation graphics cards and their specialised graphics software drivers are typically designed and configured to deliver anything up to 5x faster performance, computational data integrity and accuracy and up to 8x faster computational simulation for a broad spectrum of design, animation and video software applications. Typically depending on the particular software requirements workstation graphics cards are priced at circa $150-$5000.

    Cad graphics cards can seem to be expensive but in the main most Cad workstations and application would only require one in the lower quartile of the potential price spread. But that said, hopefully you can now understand that the question of workstation graphics cards Vs gaming graphics cards for your cad workstation should never be asked. If you have spent thousands on Cad software for your business, make sure it runs on a decent cad workstation with a recommended workstation graphics card.



    from link I posted
  9. gnomio, all of the benchmarks you are posting are for Adobe Premier, the mercury playback engine is simply CUDA enhanced so which ever has the most power will do better, but premier isn't exactly what i would consider a workstation app, and certainly isn't a relevant comparison to Maya and other CAD applications.

    Tom's did a review a few years ago, and if you compare the specs the 280 should be faster in every way than the FX 4800, but the FX 4800 kicks its ass in modeling applications like Maya and Solidworks
    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/quadro-fx-4800,2258-10.html

    Singular benchmarks never prove anything so stop picking and choosing your benchmarks to only show what you want.
  10. +1 to hunter

    I can tell you with first hand experience that a quadro will work better than a gtx it's based off of for modeling (the quadro having less cudas and lower clocks). You can't compare this with video editing benchmarks, that's a whole different ball game. Also when rendering 3d, most renderers are purely cpu based so gpu is irrelevant there. Cad, maya, max, rhino software renderers and as well as mental ray are all cpu only. He said "modeling power" meaning viewport performance so why bring up rendering performance.

    This argument always comes down to price/performance but before I continue with the argument jframiro, you need to check you're gpu and cpu usage, there were some incidences where for some reason the gpu would stay in low power state (2d mode) giving bad performance. I've especially had this happen in maya and just used msi afterburner to set it to full speed.

    King smp, can you post that other link, the older one. Your new link is similar but if you read every page, some of the stuff he says is over-exaggerated and wrong, so I see it as unreliable. "each core can process thousands of threads at the same time" Where can I get in on this?
  11. Thinking of that statement I see your point k1114
    true enough when dealing with GPGPU processing you are dealing with many
    "cores" or stream processors
    so in a parallel coded operation like encoding the GPGPU can handle
    many threads (frames) at one time
    but that statement you quoted is misleading

    looking at this
    quote

    These questions are understandable given that GPUs like the ATI Radeon HD 4870 and the ATI FirePro v8750 appear to have the same GPU (RV770) and hardware configuration, but Alexis explained that there are several significant, but unapparent hardware-level differences.

    First and foremost, workstation GPUs are different from desktop GPUs at the ASIC and board level. If you were to place a workstation ASIC (the actual GPU chip) in the equivalent consumer grade board, the card would exhibit different behavior. In other words, the GPU dies are not simply interchangeable.

    Alexis continued by explaining that workstation hardware offers features that can’t be benchmarked, but really matter to users and cannot be had on desktop hardware. Such features include 30-bit color depth, framelock/genlock functionality, and hardware stereoscopic output


    source - http://tech.icrontic.com/article/the-real-difference-between-workstation-and-desktop-gpus/

    it gives a more detailed explanation of differences between wkstn and gaming cards
  12. hunter315 said:
    gnomio, all of the benchmarks you are posting are for Adobe Premier, the mercury playback engine is simply CUDA enhanced so which ever has the most power will do better, but premier isn't exactly what i would consider a workstation app, and certainly isn't a relevant comparison to Maya and other CAD applications.

    Tom's did a review a few years ago, and if you compare the specs the 280 should be faster in every way than the FX 4800, but the FX 4800 kicks its ass in modeling applications like Maya and Solidworks
    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/quadro-fx-4800,2258-10.html

    Singular benchmarks never prove anything so stop picking and choosing your benchmarks to only show what you want.

    let me say this one more time. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE QUADRO AND THE CONSUMER CARDS.

    difference between consumer and"profesional" cards, except for the bios and drivers.. thats it..
    Quadros and Tesla cards are lower clocked because stability/long term use that are needed in the industry; different standars to be fullfilled

    In the end a GF 100 is A GF 100. Quadro 4000 is A Gtx 460 and will always be one. It won't through some miracle beat a 580 because it doesn't have the Vram nor the Cores to do it. Doesn't matter what application. Hardware mpe it will use its cores and the one with the more faster cores will win. Doesn't matter what software you use. You can't add shaders, triangles per second or bandwidth with drivers. That's already on the card. To compare it for you nicely. The Quadro 4000 can draw around 1 and a half to 2 triangles per cycle. The Gtx 580 can draw 2 to 3 triangles per cycle.

    The Quadro isn't some other architecture. Its a GF 100 or GF 101. That's it.
    With Maya there's no performance gains using the Quadros that justify the price difference, and they share the same chips as their Geforce counterparts - you just pay a premium for even more crappy drivers.

    Quadro cards are released clocked at 600mhz where geforce are clocked at 700 to 800. There's your difference. And the 4000 doesn't even have ECC ram like the Gtx 5xx series does!!!!

    The on-board memory is critical but the number of CUDA cores and their speed is also critical. The more CUDA cores (Stream Processors) your GPU has, the better. The faster they are, the faster your scenes will render. Doesn't matter what program. They all work on the same concept.

    Quadro comes comes with lots of ram something nvidia are not keen to give to their consumer cards. The 580 got 3gb onboard ecc ram and has 512 CUDA Cores!!!!
    The Quadro 5000 got what 352 Cuda cores. Its got less bandwidth its got less Cuda cores its slower. The 5000 got ecc not the 4000 which specs is even poorer.
  13. Its amazing what improved optimizations in drivers and the BIOS can do, have you not read any of the links that other people have posted? Did you look at the chart in the article i linked to that compared the GTX 280 to the technically weaker FX 4800 where the GTX 280 gets its ass handed to it in workstation applications?


    If you don't think that driver optimization for them add anything, then im sorry, but you are delusional. If you can provide links to benchmarks to prove ANYTHING you are saying then i will accept that im wrong, but you have yet to post a link to back up what you are saying, merely links to benchmarks for a totally different type of application because Adobe premier has about as much in common with maya as a pony has in common with a Ford Mustang.
  14. QUOTE

    First and foremost, workstation GPUs are different from desktop GPUs at the ASIC and board level. If you were to place a workstation ASIC (the actual GPU chip) in the equivalent consumer grade board, the card would exhibit different behavior. In other words, the GPU dies are not simply interchangeable.

    source - AMD Senior Marketing Manager Alexis Mather
  15. king smp said:
    QUOTE

    First and foremost, workstation GPUs are different from desktop GPUs at the ASIC and board level. If you were to place a workstation ASIC (the actual GPU chip) in the equivalent consumer grade board, the card would exhibit different behavior. In other words, the GPU dies are not simply interchangeable.

    source - AMD Senior Marketing Manager Alexis Mather

    no king
    G100 is GF 100.
    Please read this. This is how a gpu works. Fermi G100 to be precise
    http://www.beyond3d.com/content/reviews/55

    This is how Cypress works. Its a bit technical but I know you got the head for it.
    http://www.beyond3d.com/content/reviews/53

    Gtx 580
    http://www.nvidia.com/object/product-geforce-gtx-580-us.html

    Quadro 4000
    http://www.nvidia.com/object/product-quadro-4000-us.html

    There is no contest IMO. The Quadro might be a great CAD solution, but the GTX 580 trumps it by a factor of two in raw encoding power.
  16. gnomio said:
    The Quadro might be a great CAD solution, but the GTX 580 trumps it by a factor of two in raw encoding power.


    So you say a quadro is better at cad but a gtx is better at encoding? What is this thread about again? No one is refuting it's advantage in raw encoding power.

    They are based off the same architecture but they are not the same. How does an i7 2600k differ from a i5 2500k, is there some simple switch to turn on ht? The same concept applies to gtx to quadro, there are minute differences that make them different. If what you say is correct, then why is it not possible to flash a gtx to a quadro? I'm not talking about driver softmods.
  17. k1114 said:
    So you say a quadro is better at cad but a gtx is better at encoding? What is this thread about again? No one is refuting it's advantage in raw encoding power.

    They are based off the same architecture but they are not the same. How does an i7 2600k differ from a i5 2500k, is there some simple switch to turn on ht? The same concept applies to gtx to quadro, there are minute differences that make them different. If what you say is correct, then why is it not possible to flash a gtx to a quadro? I'm not talking about driver softmods.

    no I'm saying it might be a great CAD card but it doesn't touch a Gtx 580. Remember the Gtx 580 3gb is limited by Vram like the others and has the double the processing power. Its so simple. 1Gb more Vram double the processing power what proof do you need more.

    But people who use them don't look after they're cooling as I imagine they can run hot with the higher clocks

    The thread is about geforce vs Quadro cards. Quadro 4000 2x times more expensive than a Gtx 580 3gb version.
    Which is the better bang for buck?

    Quote:
    “Using a Quadro FX 4800 with 1500MB of dedicated video memory:

    1000 x 1000 = 425 mb

    2000 x 2000 = 555 mb

    3000 x 3000 = 750 mb

    5000 x 5000 = 1125 mb

    6000 x 6000 = 1200 mb artifacts start to appear as memory limits are reached

    7000 x 7000 = render fails”

    http://area.autodesk.com/blogs/shane/the_iray_faq/comments

    Vram is very important with these cards as you see the above.
  18. http://download.autodesk.com/us/qualcharts/2011/maya2011_qualifiedgraphics_win.pdf

    Autodesk puts out hardware specs for maya, direct quote from their section on consumer graphics cards
    "Important: Although Autodesk tested the NVIDIA GeForce and ATI Radeon consumer
    graphics cards, it is Autodesk, NVIDIA, and AMD policy to only recommend and support
    the professional NVIDIA Quadro, ATI FirePro, and ATI FireGL graphics family cards.
    See the NVIDIA Quadro vs. GeForce GPUs White Paper [PDF]. "

    If you follow the link to the white paper it goes over all the difference between the quadro and consumer graphics card, there are quite a few. Now can we stop trying to claim that the cards are identical when they clearly are not dadiggle?
  19. Quote
    from gnomio
    The thread is about geforce vs Quadro cards. Quadro 4000 2x times more expensive than a Gtx 580 3gb version.
    Which is the better bang for buck?


    when it comes to profession workstation running apps that cost thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars
    and the workstations can easily cost tow thousand just in Xeon/Opterons

    and projects that you are doing are worth million dollar accounts

    Why would you worry about "Bang for Buck"?

    saving you $500 on a card
    could easily cost you a 100K project
    do you want to be the IT that recommended a Desktop GPU to save a few hundred bucks and when it fails and somebody has to be held accountable?
  20. @hunter 315
    I know gnomio, always arguing with no clues and all he's sayings are based on personal analysis.
  21. http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/graphics/display/20110406235438_Nvidia_Quadro_400_for_169_Outperforms_GeForce_GTX_580_by_Five_Times.html

    Correction: it's gtx vs quadros in cad, maya, and rhino.

    We still can't really say what's best without knowing the project details it's being used for.
  22. hunter315 said:
    http://download.autodesk.com/us/qualcharts/2011/maya2011_qualifiedgraphics_win.pdf

    Autodesk puts out hardware specs for maya, direct quote from their section on consumer graphics cards
    "Important: Although Autodesk tested the NVIDIA GeForce and ATI Radeon consumer
    graphics cards, it is Autodesk, NVIDIA, and AMD policy to only recommend and support
    the professional NVIDIA Quadro, ATI FirePro, and ATI FireGL graphics family cards.
    See the NVIDIA Quadro vs. GeForce GPUs White Paper [PDF]. "

    If you follow the link to the white paper it goes over all the difference between the quadro and consumer graphics card, there are quite a few. Now can we stop trying to claim that the cards are identical when they clearly are not dadiggle?

    yeah yeah but that still doesnt make the quadro a better card. Its GF104 and GF106. They use the same methods.
    Quote:
    In fact, we struggled with many potential theories, until a fortuitous encounter with a Quadro made the truth painfully obvious: product differentiation, a somewhat en vogue term over at NVIDIA, it seems. The Quadro, in spite of being pretty much the same hardware (this is a signal to all those that believe there's magical hardware in the Quadro because it's more expensive – engage rant mode!), is quite happy doing full speed setup on the untessellated plebs
    We can only imagine that this seemed like a good idea to someone. Sure, there's a finite probability that traditional Quadro customers, who are quite corporate and quite fond of extensive support amongst other things, would suddenly turn into full blown hardware ricers, give up all perks that come with the high Quadro price, buy cheap consumer hardware and use that instead.


    http://www.beyond3d.com/content/reviews/55/10

    while you there read how a GPU really works

    I dunno who you referring to but its the 2nd time someone has mentioned that word or whatever it is. Check my ip or whatever you do. I cant really help it if my isp make use of 1 ip for all their customers.
    f you use the HTTPS, HTTP or FTP connection model and your network provider only uses a single official IP address for all its customers (like for example MTN) you should configure a "keepalive interval" of maybe 3000 milliseconds instead of using the default 20,000 milliseconds. This will ensure your underlying TCP streams will not be re-used for other users after being idle for a few seconds, and if it happens anyway both server and client notice more quickly. Do this if you see a lot of "can't read from server connection" debug messages in the message log.
    http://www.your-freedom.net/index.php?id=mobile

    We have to pay for IPs
    http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php/304569-Inbound-Connections-Unrestricted-APN-%28Now-Testing!%29

    So please keep your allegations in your pocket
  23. And that post deals with this discussion how? Do you have anything else to add that is might actually be helpful for the OP or are we done here?
  24. What is really comes down to:

    is your usage scenario
    in an enterprise environment where possibly millions are at stake
    using Autocad Maya etc
    then you have to go with the Workstation card
    whether or not there is architectural differences can be debated
    but the tech support and driver support for the workstation cards
    is way beyond what gaming GPUs offer
    and in a mission critical financially dependent project the option for
    gaming GPUs doesnt make sense

    Now in a small business or home uage scenario then going with a gaming GPU
    does make alot of sense

    I can use myself as an example perfectly
    I have a small one man computer repair business
    been doing for years now
    now I want to expand my revenue potential by expanding
    into video work
    all small time stuff
    it is taking peoples home movies either VCR-DVD conversion,digital media
    etc and editing/adding audio soundtrack (music),titles,wipes,fades
    etc
    then rendering/encoding to produce a DVD
    I decided to go with Cyberlink PowerDirector 9
    first it uses GPU acceleration with ATI Stream
    plus it has a great GUI and is easy to learn and produce good video
    and the cost of the software much more reasonable than
    Adobe

    so going with cost vs performance vs end results

    I went with a HD 5670 for now
    has 400 stream processors (?) and gives decent results
    10 minute video rendered and burnt to DVD in about 15 minutes
    this is with a C2D 3ghz and HD 5670
    this is minimalist cost effective hardware for a minor task

    for small to medium businesses the Desktop GPU is a good choice
    for enterprise leve applications the workstation is the right choice

    to quote the OP

    I am a complete noob. please bare with me. I am an architecture student whom uses MAYA, autocad, and rhino mostly. I recently bought a pc from cyberpower and love it. or Until I started getting high res poly models in maya. I currently have a i7-2600k with a evga gtx560ti. I need better modeling power. Is it better to do an SLI with another gtx560ti or to go with a quadro 2000 or 4000? I am trying to be cost efficient so i know the 4000 is best but need the reasoning.


    so in the parameters of the OPs question
    as a student the gaming GPU is a good choice
    I wouldnt do SLI since I dont believe those programs scale well
    sell the 560ti and go with a 570/580 would work out most cost effective

    or if the OP is going to use the rig professionally then go with the 4000
    but only if the the work and profit can justify it


    SO

    we are all right

    there is no reason to argue

    gnomio has a point
    in a smaller business than a Gaming GPU makes alot of sense

    others are right that in a mision critical corporate environment
    the workstation card makes sense
    nobody wants to be the Head IT who cheaped out with a gaming card
    and a million dollar project went bad


    so we are all right


    Now can we all just get along?
  25. My point really is price vs performance

    This card
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133325&Tpk=quadro%205000

    gives you the same performance as this one
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125399

    And if your really serious about it then you will get a 980x to go with that Quadro. Thats when time really means money.

    But I mean on the side paying 700usd for a card that does the job slower than a 500usd card its a no brainer. Op is already using a 560ti and looks for more performance from the gpu. The 560ti processor is weak according to a 580 and has one third the ram on it
  26. true
    and according to OP original post
    you are actually right for his circumstances
    as a college student for assignments and studying
    the gaming GPU makes alot of sense

    Myself and others got caught up in the enterprise way of thinking

    in a corporate million dollar project

    cost vs performance and "bang for buck" doesnt make sense

    in that situation trying to save a penny is costing you a dollar

    so actually going by OP question

    I would say going with a 580
    and selling or using 560ti for secondary system makes alot of sense

    I am not sure how 560Tis SLId would scale in Maya Autocad etc
    Would have to research it
    but hard to find data/benches on that
  27. from googling
    it seems that SLId cards dont help

    and really taking a Gaming GPU and modding it with a Workstation
    bios and using the workstation drivers is a viable option
    for somebody technically experienced

    really need the drivers optimized for OpenGL for Maya,AutoCad etc

    major reason workstation cards are expensive it the amount of
    time put into the drivers being specifically optimized for those workstation
    apps

    just like a new game needs the drivers optimized
    so does workstation apps
    which gaming drivers just dont do
  28. king smp said:
    from googling
    it seems that SLId cards dont help

    and really taking a Gaming GPU and modding it with a Workstation
    bios and using the workstation drivers is a viable option
    for somebody technically experienced

    really need the drivers optimized for OpenGL for Maya,AutoCad etc

    major reason workstation cards are expensive it the amount of
    time put into the drivers being specifically optimized for those workstation
    apps

    just like a new game needs the drivers optimized
    so does workstation apps
    which gaming drivers just dont do

    Read rivatuners help file king
    Quote:
    When I install the NVStrap driver and select "Quadro" graphics adapter identification mode, my systems starts responding slowly after few minutes of work, then it completely hangs. Any clues?
    A: The symptoms you are describing are the results of NVIDIA's protection against the NVStrap's PCI DeviceID override, which was introduced the Detonator 30.82. When the driver detects that PCI DeviceID was changed via the NVStrap, it iteratively increases internal delay counter and purposely spend time in internal wait loops, emulating progressing system slowdown and finally system hang. You must use RivaTuner's NVStrapAntiprotection patch script in order to use the NVStrap driver with the latest drivers. GeForce FX and newer display adapter owners may also use "Use ROM straps for PCI DeviceID programming" option, which allows to work around this protection without patching the Detonator / Forceware driver.


    Nvidia locks things away in their drivers basically. You have to pay 700usd for a underclocked GTx 460 to get them unlocked
  29. also Nvidia and ATI only certify workstation drivers and cards
    same with the software devs

    in an enterprise level large IT departiment situation
    You CANT use non certified equipment
    Well you can
    but if something fails
    you have minmal support
    and it is your butt on the line
    when all equipment and softwares are certified
    you arent liable in a way
    they cant blame you if it fails
    and you have the support from hardware vendors

    now small single owner busineesses and home users
    that doesnt apply
  30. king smp said:
    also Nvidia and ATI only certify workstation drivers and cards
    same with the software devs

    in an enterprise level large IT departiment situation
    You CANT use non certified equipment
    Well you can
    but if something fails
    you have minmal support
    and it is your butt on the line
    when all equipment and softwares are certified
    you arent liable in a way
    they cant blame you if it fails
    and you have the support from hardware vendors

    now small single owner busineesses and home users
    that doesnt apply

    Im not going to tell a big business to get a 580. Dont even think they will bother to come and ask here lol
    Nor will they bother with cooling for the card unlike a single rig at home
  31. gnomio said:
    Read rivatuners help file king
    Quote:
    When I install the NVStrap driver and select "Quadro" graphics adapter identification mode, my systems starts responding slowly after few minutes of work, then it completely hangs. Any clues?
    A: The symptoms you are describing are the results of NVIDIA's protection against the NVStrap's PCI DeviceID override, which was introduced the Detonator 30.82. When the driver detects that PCI DeviceID was changed via the NVStrap, it iteratively increases internal delay counter and purposely spend time in internal wait loops, emulating progressing system slowdown and finally system hang. You must use RivaTuner's NVStrapAntiprotection patch script in order to use the NVStrap driver with the latest drivers. GeForce FX and newer display adapter owners may also use "Use ROM straps for PCI DeviceID programming" option, which allows to work around this protection without patching the Detonator / Forceware driver.


    Nvidia locks things away in their drivers basically. You have to pay 700usd for a underclocked GTx 460 to get them unlocked



    good info
    didnt know that
    but agrees with what I said
    it is possible for the advanced use to mod the gaming card into workstation
    but also very risky
    not something you would want for software reliability
    and also would want the CEO finding out about it

    it is fact

    1) workstation drivers are optimized for the workstation apps

    ever have a new game run badly until NVidia/ATI release driver patches?

    gaming cpus are optimized for games not Maya Autocad etc

    workstation gpus are optimized for those apps


    2) workstation drivers certified for use with those apps

    in an IT department in a corporation you MUST have that certification

    realize that software designs bridges,buildings,equipment etc

    not only money but possibly peoples lives are at stake

    when they come head hunting to cover their butts for a mistake

    you are wide open to liability if your equipment/software was not ceritified and you approved it

    possible lawsuits and damages

    scenario - You have a 100k budget for 10 workstations (not your money)
    You will be doing projects that are mission critical
    huge sums of money and peoples lives are at stake

    Do you try to save a few hundred dollars and risk liability?

    now for a home user or small business owner
    it is very cost productive to use a gaming GPU
    unless your project involves high risk factor

    This topic is very situation based

    thinking on a home user/small is different that an enterprise level
    where redundant RAID arrays and ECC ram are the standard
    there is a reason workstation mobos are different than gaming mobos also

    from purely a cost vs performance relating to non mission critical work

    YOU ARE RIGHT

    but on enterprise business level you are wrong

    there is no simpler way for me to put that

    I really have no more to say on this subject

    if you cant see the facts right there in front of you

    than I am wasting my time

    thank you
  32. gnomio said:
    Im not going to tell a big business to get a 580. Dont even think they will bother to come and ask here lol
    Nor will they bother with cooling for the card unlike a single rig at home



    posted too fast for me LOL


    nevermind last post

    as the question the OP asked

    as a college student doing projects

    a gaming card makes alot of sense :)

    if it will help since sometimes the game cards dont load up properly with some workstation apps

    I would definitly run a system monitor to watch the GPU utilization in any app used

    sometimes if it is 2D based the card wont be used

    but in situations where the card is being taking advantage of

    then using a gaming card for a college student is the way to go

    man my hands are cramped LOL
  33. The Op has a 560ti. He/She can tell us his/her experience with the card and if he/she has any problems except for it being a bit slow and low on ram
  34. I just stumbled upon this thread while looking at 5010m and the GTX580m, and I wondered......;
    If the quadro cards are really overprised because of the reputation they have in f. instance the Architectural design circuits, professional support solutions etc... Now let's say I am an architect in a small office - which I am. Is there any reason why I should get single quadro's instead of f.ex gtx580 in sli ?
    I mean, who doesn't like bang for their buck ?
    Gnomio ?
  35. etb said:
    I just stumbled upon this thread while looking at 5010m and the GTX580m, and I wondered......;
    If the quadro cards are really overprised because of the reputation they have in f. instance the Architectural design circuits, professional support solutions etc... Now let's say I am an architect in a small office - which I am. Is there any reason why I should get single quadro's instead of f.ex gtx580 in sli ?
    I mean, who doesn't like bang for their buck ?
    Gnomio ?

    Higher memory bandwith, higher calculations per polygon etc.
  36. etb said:
    I just stumbled upon this thread while looking at 5010m and the GTX580m, and I wondered......;
    If the quadro cards are really overprised because of the reputation they have in f. instance the Architectural design circuits, professional support solutions etc... Now let's say I am an architect in a small office - which I am. Is there any reason why I should get single quadro's instead of f.ex gtx580 in sli ?
    I mean, who doesn't like bang for their buck ?
    Gnomio ?

    Because with Geforce cards we accept the odd crash and so. In the industry with businesses its unacceptable. Home user doing it part time or as a hobby or like in the OPs case a geforce card is a better choice. But professionally those systems run 24/7 which means your gpu is going to cook. But the quadros are slower clocked and they use to sport more ram. They still do. The topline quadro sport 6GB of vram. You wont find that on a consumer card
    SLI is a gaming feature. CAD programs dont make use of it. Dont even support it
  37. ^+1 agree
  38. Thanks for all the info guys. Most helpful when trying to decide witch to go gtx 580 or a quadro. Its for my home pc in which I will be teaching myself Maya, CS5, and Catia. Have already taught myself how to use Autocad and my 5850 worked fine,but just bought the farm. I also game and use my pc in place of a cable box. So it seems 580 may be the better route.

    Would I benefit from running a entry level quadro as well?


    Nevermind dumb question
  39. Well especially since you game too, go with the 580. In a home environment, there's really no need for a quadro unless a consumer card can't handle the project. That pretty much sums up the whole thread.
  40. ^-1 disagree

    1) stability

    2) liability issues from not using a certified product which can cause you to lose your job

    3) performance- some of the workstation apps will no use a gaming gpu
    because the gaming driver wont recognize and raise clocks
    you can work around by manually forcing clocks but not optimal
    in a enterprise environment

    4) loss of support from software developers and hardware vendors

    to sum up

    a home or small business owner/operator in a non-mission critical project can
    possibly use desktop card

    a major corporation or institution must use a workstation card

    that sums up the whole thread :)
  41. I'm a Gaming Architect and just wanted to add 2 cents into the mix based off my own experience- as a Gamer and an Architect, not as a computer guru, because I'm not one.

    I've used CADD, 3D Studio Max, Photoshop and Illustrator, both to do my thesis project, on two computers: An Athlon 2 core 64 Alienware with (some?) model Gforce, and a Dell Centrino Laptop. (This is 2005, 2006). I tended to take the laptop to the Studio and work on the modeling there, and then go home and work on the modeling, OR do the rendering, on my desktop. Both functioned alright- My computer set up was at least 2-4 times faster than the terrible computers the School Lab offered. AutoCAD is a dinosaur, and I'm sure its Code is about as efficient as a Model-T, but its still just a bunch of lines in 2D. I had a 800Mhz Dell - I think with a VooDoo GPU - back sometime ago, and I was drafting CADD with that back then.

    The point being that any computer you buy today should be blowing away the Spec requirements for any type of 2D CADD drafting. For 3D BIN modeling like Revit, I was doing well enough at my last job with a no-frills AMD computer which was a year or so old- and I know that thing didn't have a 1000$ + graphcis card in it- I wish I'd bothered to see what it did have.

    I've heard alot of talk about 'accurate' computing and frankly I don't know what these arguments are about. There are vertices in space you manipulate. Autocad can get stupid with accuracy down to the billionth of an inch if you want it to. Thats why when drafting Architects put 'snaps' on and set the accuracy of the drawing- usually to about 1/4, 1/8, or 1/16 of an inch. Some carpenter is going to whip out his measuring tape and if it isn't a tick mark on his tape, I guarantee he isn't worrying about .01 inches, let alone .00000000000000000000001 inches. And I don't care what kind of GPU you have, if you set a line to be 2'-0" long, the GPU won't somehow make computational errors such that the line will stop being 2'-0" long. Ditto with BIN modeling in Revit, or a more contemporary Architectural program.
    As for rendering, you set up the parameters and you click the render button- am I supposed to believe that the reflection of the 'glass' material looks better with a corporate line GPU than a gamer GPU? If so then I can't tell.

    If you've got a good enough graphics card to do the 'current' games, I suspect you'll be just fine, for the practice of architecture and its drafting/ modeling requirements. If you've got a 580 and its 'not enough', I'm just wondering what else could be going wrong. Are you being RAM limited? I've worked on files regularly approaching 1GB in size. The projects aren't any bigger, but somehow the files these CAD programs save just get bigger and bigger.

    If I were you I'd look at Beefing up RAM as an option- I admit I don't remember what you said your RAM was. Memory access is also extremely important- as you know if you've had to do a lot of drafting, file copying, saving, loading- maybe a better hard drive set up would help access memory faster. Also try all the usual system-cleaning solutions, like Reformat, if you've got a system which SHOULD handle some CADD work but doesn't seem up to snuff.

    Cheers,
    -A
  42. This topic has been closed by Hunter315
Ask a new question

Read More

Graphics Cards Quadro Graphics Product