Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

AMD Launches FirePro V3900 Professional GPU

By - Source: AMD PR | B 30 comments

AMD has announced the launch of its new FirePro V3900 professional graphics card.

AMD has released its new entry-level V3900 professional graphics card, which replaces the V3800. The V3900 is priced at $119, which puts it directly up against the Nvidia's Quadro 400. It sits roughly $50 less than the Nvidia's Quadro 600 and $20 more than the V3800.

 

From the specifications, V3900 looks to be a nice update to the V3800 and is basically the business version of the Radeon HD 6570 DDR3. The V3900 has double the memory at 1GB and is based on the "Turks" GPU. The card's 128-bit DDR3 memory gives it 28.8GB/s of memory bandwidth compared to the V3800, which had a 64-bit interface providing half the bandwidth at 14.4GB/s. It supports the latest versions of OpenGL and OpenCL (4.2 and 1.1, respectively). Based on various test conducted by AMD, the card shows performance increases over both the V3800 and Quadro 400.

Image Credit: HotHardwareImage Credit: HotHardware

The card will ship with an optional full-height bracket to allow it to be installed in standard form factor systems. The AMD FirePro V3900 has received certification for a variety of applications including AutoCAD, UGS NX, PTC Creo, SolidWorks, and Autodesk 3Ds Max. It is backed by a 3-year limited product repair / replacement warranty.

Read more on the AMD V3900 professional graphics card at its product page.  

Display 30 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 6 Hide
    vir_cotto , February 9, 2012 3:25 PM
    Come on where are the CAD benchmarks? :p 
  • 0 Hide
    lockhrt999 , February 9, 2012 3:40 PM
    Now days applications have evolved a lot. Maya, max run great on our normal gaming cards. Instantaneous renderers like vray, mental ray etc,. are directly dependent on computational performance (in other words number of cores). They don't bother to check the card is professional or not.
    I happened to work on a workstation carrying quadro fx 4800 which alone costs ~900$ and I didn't find any difference. I don't know why they are over hyped.
  • 5 Hide
    xspkbstr , February 9, 2012 3:43 PM
    No one has posted "But will it play Crysis?" yet?? OMG...the world is ending I think.
  • 1 Hide
    Anonymous , February 9, 2012 3:49 PM
    @lockhrt999

    you obviously have not tried to work with a large scene/assembly, the difference between a pro card and a gaming card becomes very apparent when you do. Most CGI folks only spot render on the local machine, all production renderings are sent to the farm so for day to day working a pro card pays for itself, unless your just working on small stuff, at which point whats the worth of using Maya/Max......
  • -7 Hide
    crysex , February 9, 2012 3:51 PM
    Who need this junk? My GTX580 + Realview hack in Solidworks just run fine for me. Not sure how it is perform compare to Quadro 5000 tho.
  • 8 Hide
    restatement3dofted , February 9, 2012 4:17 PM
    xspkbstrNo one has posted "But will it play Crysis?" yet?? OMG...the world is ending I think.


    Good thing you were here to make sure someone had said it within the first three posts.
  • 2 Hide
    wiyosaya , February 9, 2012 4:30 PM
    I paid a very high price for a pro card once. :(  I presently do not see myself doing that again.

    I'm not a pro, however, my opinion on this is that unless you are doing serious work in the pro field, pro cards have little value over consumer cards. Even if you are not a pro, one solution to rendering large models is to take a hike while it renders. :)  I often did exactly that. On a large or potentially long-running job, I let the computer run while I did other things.
  • -7 Hide
    cbrunnem , February 9, 2012 4:38 PM
    but can it play BF3...?
  • -4 Hide
    stevelord , February 9, 2012 5:36 PM
    The people that have no idea what these types of cards are designed for always make me laugh.
  • 4 Hide
    lamorpa , February 9, 2012 6:09 PM
    SteveLordThe people that have no idea what these types of cards are designed for always make me laugh.

    You're easily amused.
  • 0 Hide
    jgutz2006 , February 9, 2012 6:43 PM
    SteveLordThe people that have no idea what these types of cards are designed for always make me laugh.

    Same here... What do you mean its slower than the Radeon 7990, its a Pro card isnt it?

    I could see this being quite useful for entry level Hyper-V with RemoteFX as i paid a bit more for a v4800 and v5800 in a couple of situations and it definitely helped virtualized performance/end user experience
  • 1 Hide
    pixelpojken , February 9, 2012 6:57 PM
    You sure you didn't miss a 0 in that price?
  • 2 Hide
    lockhrt999 , February 9, 2012 8:07 PM
    ProStuff@lockhrt999you obviously have not tried to work with a large scene/assembly, the difference between a pro card and a gaming card becomes very apparent when you do. Most CGI folks only spot render on the local machine, all production renderings are sent to the farm so for day to day working a pro card pays for itself, unless your just working on small stuff, at which point whats the worth of using Maya/Max......


    Actually I have worked on large(as heavy as few hundreds of MBs and sims of multiple of TB) scenarios and still I couldn't find that much of the difference.

    I agree that with pro cards textures look more accurate in hardware view. But then it doesn't bring much to the table. It doesn't accelerate rest of the things. For Maya, max except rendering rest of the tools are single or double threaded.
    Seriously autodesk need to get their a$$es kicked.

    Some other applications like Vray, Houdini deliberately use graphics cards for specific use. But they score more
    with gaming cards as they do have more CUDA/stream cores than pro cards. Here more means performance escalation in 3-4 folds. If I have 590 I get get 4x more performance than qaudro fx 5800 and still save my limbs.
  • 1 Hide
    masterasia , February 9, 2012 9:02 PM
    looks good. wonder how they compare to nVida Quadro NVS 295?
  • 0 Hide
    vaughn2k , February 9, 2012 11:02 PM
    SteveLordThe people that have no idea what these types of cards are designed for always make me laugh.

    You amused me...
  • 0 Hide
    mildgamer001 , February 10, 2012 12:08 AM
    what, exactly is the difference between a gaming card and a pro card? other than gaming cards having more clockspeed and cores (as far as i can tell) etc etc.?
  • 0 Hide
    jecastej , February 10, 2012 12:30 AM
    The difference is antialiasing, precision, better color and contrast, virtually "0" artifacts and faster work on heavy polygon scenes and on viewport 2.0, at least in Maya. The Quadro looks nice with no artifacts but the GeForce looks rough with slower menus and windows redraw. The geForce cards lack precision and when the scene gets very complex with a lot of curves, particles, textures and geometry you want this precision working for your eyes.

    An entry level Quadro 600 costs $150-170 and works perfect so there is no excuse to use an expensive $400-600 gaming card for professional applications and you can use both (Pro & gaming cards on W7) on the same machine. This is what I am doing and also my experience over 2-3 years.

    If you see no difference with a Quadro is because you need to adjust the settings on the Nvidia control panel. Also Nvidia develops special drivers for every major Pro app so please don't say there is no difference with all that dedicated engineering and programing going on.
  • 0 Hide
    lordstormdragon , February 10, 2012 2:40 AM
    I'm on the fence these days about Pro cards, but not about this class of pro card. They're very much not worth the money on the low-end, and diminishing returns as you approach the high-end. The Quadro 6K costs roughly half its namesake, and for what? An underclocked gaming card GPU with more RAM. Why not just make RAM modular and let us add our own?

    Jecastej, I've heard similar remarks from a few people (BoostAbuse, a few other professionals in the industry) about the pro cards, but have yet to see one outperform a Geforce with the overrides enabled, in the Nvidia control panel. I've clocked most of them with Everest now, as well. Nvidia doesn't have drivers for special apps, however - you're just plain wrong there. They don't have drivers for Maya specifically, nor for Rhino, Mudbox, Silo, etc. They may have driver profiles, but that's not the same thing. Those are just override profiles you can access already in nvcpl.

    The problem is that it's simply hardware locking from the driver end. The Quadros sport the exact same chips as the Geforces - but you pay the premium for better QC and also for professional-grade support and replacement should one fail. So it's justifiable if your product fails or you have problems, sure.

    Maya is such a specialized app and with so many, many variables and issues with the application itself (it's my bread and butter), it's almost impossible to actually diagnose how a card will perform unless you use it, tweak it, try various drivers (the Microsoft-suggested or Nvidia-suggested or Autodesk-suggested ones are never, ever the best ones; it's always the slightly older ones).

    I'm pushing 20M polys at 15fps with a GTS250 in Maya, and almost twice that with a GTX460. There's simply no reason to purchase a FireGL or Quadro at this price point for Maya. I spent a year chugging along on a 380FX and it was just pathetic; the GTS250 demolished it and was an excellent replacement, even if it is just a retooled 8800GT.
  • 0 Hide
    Draven35 , February 10, 2012 2:59 AM
    Nice, did they improve their OpenGL drivers?
  • 0 Hide
    juncture , February 10, 2012 3:17 AM
    I want to open up a full assembly model of a car with all the threads on every screw shown and maximum image quality opened into Solidworks 2011 and see if I can at least rotate it with a framerate greater than 1fps with this new FirePro V3900 lol would be fun to see
Display more comments