Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Gaming cards vs professional cards

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
March 6, 2013 11:18:55 AM

i am building a machine for running ACAD, revit, adobe product and rendering engines. Reviewing some of the proformance test it appears the GTX 680 card outperforms many of the quadro cards till you get the 5000 series or so. The price difference is fairly significant. It seems even if the GTX fails in a year or two buying another one or would be better option then spending the initial cost for the upper level quadro cards...looking at machines w/ single xeon e5-1620 or e5 1650 proc. any thoughts?
a b U Graphics card
March 6, 2013 11:26:30 AM

is this machine going to be used to generate income? if the answer is YES, 80-100% of the time, then a top of the line Quadro card is in order. They are designed to be run 100% of the time, a standard gaming card is not.
You might also want to look into a dual xeon workstation board. check the rendering programs' website for compatible GPU's and start there.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
March 6, 2013 11:27:41 AM

The GTX 680 outperfomance in what area? In gaming or 3D programming? The GTX 680 will surely be better for any game out there but professional cards comes with drivers specific for some 3D application, which makes it quite difficult to compare the normal consumer cards with professional cards in pure benchmarking.
m
0
l
Related resources
March 6, 2013 11:40:19 AM

thanks for the quick response
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
March 6, 2013 11:43:25 AM

First, let me say I am no authority in this matter.

After some research, here is what I believe:

1. The GTX680 is a much more powerful piece of hardware.
2. The professional cards have better double-precision performance. The use of this is restricted to a few specific applications. I do not believe it to be your case.
3. The professional cards (Quadro, not sure about FireGL) use ECC memory.

In all, professional cards will yield results more reliably. They should almost never cause crashes and also be able to run scientific applications faster (think protein folding simulation).

In my opinion, they are not worth all that money. They should be reserved to GPU compute aplications and heavy duty precision processing.

Its worth noting that a AMD card will have a lot better computer performance, since Nvidia crippeld that in favor of higher single precision performance. Not sure you will use that, though.
m
0
l
March 6, 2013 11:55:20 AM

the rendering app we will be usinig is Lumion 3.0...in their forum they indicate to stay away from quadro and firepro cards...looking for passmark of 1500+ and recommend gaming cards, however all autodesk products recommend the quadro card. Our primary use is ACad and Revit for production...Lumion is used just as a rendering engine.

Sounds like the pro cards are more reliable and designed to handle the day to day use, while the gaming cards are less stable but perform well, however it is difficult to assess whether a gaming card will outperform pro cards in a CAD environment...does this make sense?
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
March 6, 2013 12:13:25 PM

estyer said:
the rendering app we will be usinig is Lumion 3.0...in their forum they indicate to stay away from quadro and firepro cards...looking for passmark of 1500+ and recommend gaming cards, however all autodesk products recommend the quadro card. Our primary use is ACad and Revit for production...Lumion is used just as a rendering engine.

Sounds like the pro cards are more reliable and designed to handle the day to day use, while the gaming cards are less stable but perform well, however it is difficult to assess whether a gaming card will outperform pro cards in a CAD environment...does this make sense?


Sounds like a fair conclusion. It wouldn't be suprising if the Quadro and Firepro were optimized for Autodesk and not for Lumion, which creates the difference in the two fora.
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
March 6, 2013 2:00:59 PM

I believe the stability concerns make a lot more sense in long computational tasks. As per the last example, imagine you need to run a protein folding simulation for 24 hours on a machine and it suffers a single failure during the process. You just lost a day's work.

It's not like a gaming card has awful stability, many people (myself included) run very demanding tasks for hours long without issues. CAD work is not a constant heavy load, it's actually a lot easier on the VGA than gaming.

Even if CAD is optimized for Quadro cards, which is done by a dirty driver trick, not hardware, it will only make a difference if you are working with huge complex designs. I really can't imagine a CAD scenario where a GTX680 would be lacking.

Read this review if you haven't already:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/graphics/display/nvidi...
m
0
l
a b U Graphics card
March 6, 2013 3:40:14 PM

i think you need to find a better rendering engine so that the card you choose that excells in AutoCAD, will also excell at rendering...

after reading through the lumion information, it almost seems like they catered their software to the low end gaming market of cards - otherwise they would've developed using the FirePro and Quadro cards and drivers pertaining to them
m
0
l
a c 170 U Graphics card
a b 4 Gaming
March 6, 2013 4:02:54 PM

http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/AutoDesk-Auto...

*If you don't play games, note how high even a cheaper GTX650 scores so if you only use the card for AutoCad don't get a GTX680. (If you do game, I recommend the Asus GTX 680 DC2T which is a 3-slot card which performs about 10% better than stock and is very quiet under load.)

ADOBE:
I know even the latest Photoshop has only specific features GPU-accelerated. What about video encoding if that's your thing?

Read this:
http://www.studio1productions.com/Articles/PremiereCS5....
*Note: there is more than one page and most of it you can skim over (there's unlocking info on page two I believe).

Notable is two things:
1) little difference between a GTX660 and GTX680
2) this comment: "The only reason to use a Quadro video card with Adobe Premiere is if you are using a 10 bit monitor like the HP Dreamcolor or similar or you need SDI output. Otherwise, the Quadro’s are under powered and over priced."

Don't take just my word as I'm no expert on the subject.

Other:
- video editing requires a minimum amount of RAM to run best (will vary but I'd probably use 32GB. Both the motherboard and version of Windows must support this.)
- SSD's can benefit greatly in video editing however you must do further reading on HOW to do this which I won't get into here.

Summary:
- GTX650/660 if non-gaming
- GTX680 if gaming as well
- Quadro appears overpriced (at least in these applications)
- OPENCL will eventually be used more but regardless it just matters what cards give the best value for the programs you use now
- UNLOCKING your card via editing a file or files may be required in some applications
m
0
l
!