Workstation Shootout: Nvidia Quadro 5000 Vs. ATI FirePro V8800

Features
By published

Nvidia sure didn't waste any time introducing its Fermi architecture to the workstation space. Its Quadro 5000 is one of the first models to use the company's GF100 graphics processor. How does this card stack up against ATI’s flagship FirePro V8800?

Benchmark Results: SPECapc Autodesk Maya 2009

In the 2009 version of the SPECapc Maya benchmark, this year’s cards are faster than last year’s models. Interestingly, while the Quadro 5000 beats the FirePro V8800, the situation is reversed in the previous generation, with AMD pushing ahead of the Nvidia card.

63 Comments Comment from the forums
  • Randomacts
    That graphics card cost more then both of the computers I own. O.o
    Reply
  • tacoslave
    if amd put a little more work on their drivers (i.e crossfire and firepro performance)they would be the clear performance champion.
    Reply
  • Gin Fushicho
    I really wish I knew what these numbers meant.

    For someone who doesn't do 3-D design these benchmarks are kinda confusing.
    Reply
  • TheStealthyOne
    The cooler for the FirePro card is really attractive imo.
    Reply
  • joytech22
    You need to remember, Fermi is designed not "Just" for games, but was also designed, from day one, with computing in mind as well.
    Reply
  • darthvidor
    I'm impressed to find nvidia beating amd in power consumption.
    Reply
  • reprotected
    Why isn't the Quadro 6000 and the FX 5800 in the benchmarks?
    Reply
  • SchizoFrog
    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.
    Reply
  • scrumworks
    I'm sure you'll be hearing from AMD pretty soon publishing those kind of results.
    Reply
  • davefb
    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 ;) )
    Reply