Jump to content


Photo

Quadro 2000 vs. GTX 580?


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 Spunj

Spunj

    MoGraph Superstar

  • Members
  • 165 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 August 2011 - 04:50 PM

I'm in the market for a new computer....or perhaps just a new video card. For the past year or 2 I have been using a Geforce 9800 GTX, and it is ok. I've noticed that the Geforce GTX 580 is about the same price as a Quadro 2000. Although I may not get a whole new system and perhaps go for the Quadro 4000 - which is roughly double the price.

The problem is I keep hearing so many different things about each card. Some people say that Quadro (non low-end) is better for Maya. How is this for C4D? My friend has a better system than me and he also has a Quadro FX 1800 but he scores lower in Cinebench OpenGL than me.

Me (GeForce 9800 GTX): 38.72 fps
Him (Quadro FX 1800): 23.21 fps (I almost think something is wrong with this low score)

I believe at the time, the Quadro was a little more expensive than the card I got. I'm a little confused as which direction to go. Anyone have any more experience with this?

#2 destro

destro

    Mograph Deity

  • Members
  • 946 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 August 2011 - 05:13 AM

Power per dollar spent is all that matters in this choice.
Geforce cards are aimed at gamers, Quadros are aimed at graphics pro's. The difference (other than price) between the two is minimal.

#3 misanthrope.

misanthrope.

    MoGraph Demi-god

  • Members
  • 445 posts
  • Location:Longmont, Colorado

Posted 03 August 2011 - 05:25 AM

Wasn't the Quadro 1800 based off the GeForce 8600? I am thinking it was it was an entry level card in the pro world. Classically, Quadro cards shine not in standard view port performance tests, but more as when they are used as a dedicated processing unit in dynamics simulations and rendering. I seem to recall that they did quite well in higher polygon count scenes (10million+), as they usually contain much more on-board ram. It's been some time since i looked at them though.

#4 T02

T02

    MoGraph Superstar

  • Members
  • 138 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:munich, germany

Posted 03 August 2011 - 02:21 PM

The only Quadros that are worth the money (and even that's relative) are the new Fermi-based series.
The old architecture's been eating GForce's dust for some time now.


..basically, looking at the bandwidth should give you a hint about what's what.

Edited by T02, 03 August 2011 - 02:23 PM.


#5 Beaver

Beaver

    Mograph Deity

  • Moderator
  • 1,108 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 August 2011 - 03:05 PM

I agree with the sentiment here. I don't understand the Quadro... It's more expensive "pro" gear, but the performance is usually no better and sometimes worse. I have always gone GeForce myself. Spend the extra money on a bigger monitor. :)

#6 Spunj

Spunj

    MoGraph Superstar

  • Members
  • 165 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 August 2011 - 04:31 PM

This is my problem. I see some people say Quadros are the way to go for pros. And others saying don't waste the money GeForce is better. It's funny how there isn't an absolute consensus. If I were to go purely on Cinebench scores (Which I assume to be aimed to tell you how good your setup is for C4D) Then the quadro fails bigtime. I can't find anything about Quadros and C4D except obviuously if you buy the highest end, then you're good to go. Although the highest end is ridiculously out of my price range. I thought the Quadro 2000 would be a good way to go, but I am leaning toward the GeForce GTX 580. I just need some major speed in the viewport.

#7 Beaver

Beaver

    Mograph Deity

  • Moderator
  • 1,108 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 August 2011 - 05:41 PM

This is my problem. I see some people say Quadros are the way to go for pros.


Who are these people? Video card engineers? Cinebench scores seem like a more trustworthy measure of performance. :)

#8 Spence

Spence

    Eats, sleeps, drinks MoGraph

  • Members
  • 1,688 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NYC

Posted 03 August 2011 - 09:51 PM

If money's an issue that I'd say the first thing you'd cut from your budget would be a Quadro. The performance to price increase has always been suspect in my opinion.

#9 destro

destro

    Mograph Deity

  • Members
  • 946 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 August 2011 - 11:36 PM

Quadros have certified drivers. They go through tests on professional gear before they are released (at least that's my understanding).

If you use Geforce cards you need to test all your software after each driver update to make sure everything still works. The Quadros are "pro" because they give the user confidence that the drivers will work straight out of the box in a pro environment. Plus they do have a bit of extra hardware grunt under the bonnet.

If you have the time and knowledge to do your own testing and tweaking you can save a small fortune by going with Geforce over Quadro. For big businesses it's worth paying the extra cash for Quadros just for the piece of mind.

#10 AndrewKramer

AndrewKramer

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 24 posts

Posted 04 August 2011 - 08:50 AM

Well, after doing a lot of research I'd like to share some thoughts... The Quadros are mainly used for machine certification on specialized systems and supposedly offer some piece of mind... to some. But, after spending way too much time and money on Quadro cards I would say skip the Quadros. They are much slower (especially when comparing price) and although they are supposedly "tested" more, it seems to be a myth on whether or not that is helpful. I find there to be more problems with these cards than regular more popular gaming cards that are updated more frequently since bugs and problems are reported much quicker by many more people.

Some people have a specific need or requirement for the Quadro cards, but if you don't need one or are not sure, stick with the Geforce and high-end ATI cards.

This benchmark is not a Gold standard but should help illustrate the comparative performance.

http://www.videocard...h_end_gpus.html

BTW, if you are running a quadro card on a mac Nvidia just released an update that fixes some various issues you may want to get.
http://www.nvidia.co...f01-driver.html

#11 Spunj

Spunj

    MoGraph Superstar

  • Members
  • 165 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 August 2011 - 07:55 PM

Well, I just bought myself a GeForce GTX 580 3GB. It's pretty sweet. I decided since I am spending this much on a card, I should get a new computer to go with it. Built a new machine with an i7 2600K cpu on a P67 Sabertooth motherboard. I should have maybe splurged a little more on the motherboard, it only has 4 RAM slots, and since they had an excellent deal on Gskill 4GB sticks, I only have 16 GB of RAM in the system at the moment. First thing I loaded on it (besides the graphic drivers) was Cinebench.

Score right now is:

58.89 fps
7.49 cpu

Pretty sweet. Well, compared to what I was using :D.

My next step with this machine (after I've ran it for a while) is to get more RAM and get an aftermarket cpu cooler to overclock this bad boy. I've seen cpu Cinebench scores on overclocked 2600K's into the 9's.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users