Workstation Shootout: Nvidia Quadro 5000 Vs. ATI FirePro V8800

Test Configuration

When we reviewed the previous generation of workstation cards, we were faced with an unsatisfying situation. Although Widows Vista had been on the market for quite a while at that point, we were forced to fall back on Windows XP for testing. After consulting with several contacts in the CAD sector, the reason became clear, though. Due to instability and security concerns, only very few professionals were willing to make the switch to Windows Vista. Over the past year, this situation has changed.

Windows 7 has received a much warmer welcome than Vista. On top of that, most professional users are making the big switch, upgrading not only to Microsoft’s newest OS but choosing its 64-bit version at the same time. This promises better performance, as well as improved memory management.

At any rate, we‘re quite happy to move our OpenGL test platform to the new OS so that we’ll be using the 64-bit version of Windows 7 Enterprise in this review. There are already some scripts for 64-bit apps available for download at www.spec.org, although they seem to be appearing only very slowly.

System Hardware
CPUIntel Core i7-965 Extreme
MotherboardAsus P6T (rev 1.01G) with Intel X58 Chipset
System Memory (RAM)6 GB (3 x 2 GB) Corsair DDR3 1600 MHz @ 8-8-8-24
Optical Drive
Samsung SH-D163A , SATA 1.5 Gb/s
Power Supply
Zalman, ATX 2.01, 510 W
Hard Drive
Western Digital WD1500ADFD 150 GB
System Software And Tests
Operating System
Windows 7 Enterprise 64-bit
DirectXDirectX 11.0
Intel Chipset Software
Version 9.1.2.1007
ATI FirePro Driver
Catalyst 8.723
Nvidia Quadro DriverQuadro 258.98
SPEC Benchmark Settings
Application settings according to SPEC Project Group Rules, driver using application optimizations if available 
SPEC Benchmarks Being Used
SPECViewperf 11
SPECapc Autodesk Maya 2009  v1.0
SPECapc Newtek LightWave 9.6
SPECapc Autodesk 3D Studio Max 9 1.2
Create a new thread in the US Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
63 comments
    Your comment
    Top Comments
  • You need to remember, Fermi is designed not "Just" for games, but was also designed, from day one, with computing in mind as well.
    20
  • Why isn't the Quadro 6000 and the FX 5800 in the benchmarks?
    17
  • That graphics card cost more then both of the computers I own. O.o
    15
  • Other Comments
  • That graphics card cost more then both of the computers I own. O.o
    15
  • if amd put a little more work on their drivers (i.e crossfire and firepro performance)they would be the clear performance champion.
    -9
  • I really wish I knew what these numbers meant.

    For someone who doesn't do 3-D design these benchmarks are kinda confusing.
    15
  • The cooler for the FirePro card is really attractive imo.
    0
  • You need to remember, Fermi is designed not "Just" for games, but was also designed, from day one, with computing in mind as well.
    20
  • I'm impressed to find nvidia beating amd in power consumption.
    6
  • Why isn't the Quadro 6000 and the FX 5800 in the benchmarks?
    17
  • Once again the arguement regarding AMD Drivers is brought to the fore. But more than this, when AMD has a line of products that could be said to 'miss' they absolutely FAIL. nVidia on the otherhand seem to have learned their lesson well from the 5xxxFX series and can still produce products that can compete at least at some level, ie: GTX460. Although these are Workstation products, nVidia have a complete package with GPUs and Drivers that work from the off.
    3
  • I'm sure you'll be hearing from AMD pretty soon publishing those kind of results.
    -2
  • sort of interesting, but why is there no comparison to mainstream boards? There is a massive premium of cost here but nothing to be able to say 'hey boss, the onboard graphics we use really don't cut it any more, how about a quadro'.
    (or have I sped-read past the reason why ;) )
    7
  • "AMD's best approach would be to commit more resources to its driver team to rectify the situation."

    Hence why I'm selling my HD5770 and getting a GTX460. Much as I like their hardware, ATI sucks balls on drivers...this card won't even shine on M&B and BF2 is a nightmare.
    6
  • L0tus"AMD's best approach would be to commit more resources to its driver team to rectify the situation."Hence why I'm selling my HD5770 and getting a GTX460. Much as I like their hardware, ATI sucks balls on drivers...this card won't even shine on M&B and BF2 is a nightmare.

    Why do you even want to compare 2 different cards that have different price range ? At least in my country GTX460 costs almost twice as much as 5770. I wonder why nobody can force Nvidia or AMD to bring the workstation optimization found in Quadro - FirePRO drivers to normal cards ... we all know about the past Quadro mods from normal gaming cards ... most of the time all that differes between the 2 cards is amount of memory.
    -7
  • ohimWhy do you even want to compare 2 different cards that have different price range ? At least in my country GTX460 costs almost twice as much as 5770. I wonder why nobody can force Nvidia or AMD to bring the workstation optimization found in Quadro - FirePRO drivers to normal cards ... we all know about the past Quadro mods from normal gaming cards ... most of the time all that differes between the 2 cards is amount of memory.


    Because then Nvidia wouldn't have their Quadro lines would they?

    It's mostly for money, they just change a product a bit and market it as a completely different thing, this rakes in more money, and i know you can turn GTX2** Series card's to Quatro's because iv'e turned my GTX285 into one before.
    4
  • It may be an older card, but I hate the Quardo FX3700 that's in my workstation. I can run Inventor and Solidworks far better at home with an HD4870. ...And if you say your paying for durability or service hours, I don't buy it. You could buy 8 "gaming" cards for the price of my Quadro.
    1
  • Gin FushichoI really wish I knew what these numbers meant.For someone who doesn't do 3-D design these benchmarks are kinda confusing.


    what teh ehck you mean ? lol i'min school for gameart design work in 3ds max 2010 all teh time, and i still can;t make much sense of tom's benches here , are tehy mesuring in render time or what ?? who the f--- they get the scroes ect ect , i want to see actual render times , would i benfit at all , if i replaced my gaming card with one of these ? sorry toms but epic fail on this comparison this time , why on earth you show 3ds max render tiems for comercial card benches but not work station cards is beyond me. just makes no sense, especially sicne consumer graphic cards DO NOT make a damn difference in 3ds max because when you use a comercial vid card all renders are done on the cpu not the gpu.
    -15
  • AMD Drivers fault? Big shocker there
    5
  • Maybe the ati cards just suck. Anyways fermi is designed for compute power is almost apples to oranges. This is no surprise to me knowing that fermi rapes g200 in folding.
    -3
  • "AMD's best approach would be to commit more resources to its driver team to rectify the situation."

    A true statement if i ever heard one, since AMD merged ATI and fired lots of ATI personnel.
    1
  • more or less a twin? could we have more riddles and less actual description of the components next time?

    what is it, not what is it more or less
    0
  • This isn't a secret the Nvidia’s Quadro series is an amazing card against his contenders I just wish that this amazing performance was used in the Fermi series :lol:
    0