nVidia questions - ti4600, Quadro DCC, Quadro 4

[baulddude]

Maybe someone can help me out. I've been reading all the nvidia card comparisons in here and where I was sold on the Quadro DCC before, now I'm not so sure. I am just getting into 3D work and using it with video compositing, as well as making game models. This being said, is more of a hobby at the moment. Professionally, I design web sites and compose music for interactive projects. This is my dilemma:

As I said, I was sold on the Elsa Quadro DCC (and have been looking at 750's on ebay) but a couple of things have me concerned. One, was a post on here regarding problems with creating image planes and how it slowed their computer down to a crawl using the DCC no matter what drivers they used (nvidia bug). The other has to do with the fact that it being designed for highend production work, it's slower as a game card....well, how much slower? Will Quake III be a total drag to play?

On the other hand, there's the ti4600. Cheaper....a great game card....and people seem to be using it with maya without any serious problems, despite the fact that it's not certified by Alias. Since 3D is more of a side project at the moment, would it be better to invest in this?

If anyone has any advice, I'd love to hear it!

--Kuya Pete

[tb582]

Well, you're comparing apples and oranges here...

ti4600s were designed for optimal game performance and DirectX functionality. But people realized that this was also a great card for doing stuff in 3D.

On the other hand you have the DCC which came out last year. Designed mainly for 3D content creation. Which means it can handle more hardware particles, wireframe deformation on heavy models in real-time with textures showing in openGL etc... for twice as much.

These more expensive cards are assumed that people will buy them in companies for their employees etc... hardcore users. Whereas, the other was for the general public. You have to decide what bang for the buck you get.

For me, The performance of a card comes first... then the price comes second.(How much can this card do for me?)

In reply to:
I am just getting into 3D work and using it with video compositing, as well as making game models.

That being said, I would actually recommend a different card. It is fresh out of the market.
The ATI All-In-Wonder RADEON8500 128 $399.99

I myself was going to get a ti4600 but i dont have that cash right now. So I used my friend's computer, and he has the Radeon 8500 64DDR. This card was handling wireframes up the wazoo(very fast) plays DVDs and games awesome. So I got the Radeon 8500LE 128 for the same price. $199.99. I work with scan data, which is the heaviest wireframes out there... and I must say I am extremely happy with this card for my investment. It even rocks with Combustion and After Effects. I'm sure I'd be happier with the ti4600. But like I said, bang for the buck.

The reason why I recommend the
AiWRadeon8500 128 is because of it's 2D and 3D power for what you pay... The same price as a ti4600, and it's targeted for A/V as well as Games. Not just games.
The ti4600s beat the 8500 when it comes to low detailed graphics... but when you raise the resolution, and increase monitor resolution, the 8500 is not far behind the ti. You can even hook up your dv cam and tv to the card.

If money is not an option, then get the Quadro4 which is in the $1000 price range.

http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/vide...cle.php/1013941

[baulddude]

Thanks for the advice. After doing a little more research and a bit more thinking. I've decided to stick with either the Quadro DCC or the Quadro 4 750 or 900 since I've seen OEM versions on Ebay for a little over the price of an 8500 or ti4600....maybe $100-150 more. I'd rather have something that will be more beneficial when rendering scene backdrops for video compositing.

Kind of silly bringing up game playing with a high-end card I know...I was just curious in how bad gameplay would be affected in something like quake III due to low fill rates. When I think about it though...I have an ancient machine right now with a matrox millenium...almost ANYthing would be a step up...

I'm glad the 8500LE is working out for you. I had stayed away from that as they seemed to get a lot of negative feedback in general. I do see your point on getting the most bang for the buck. I'm already getting a firewire card for my new box so that was really the only other thing it had that I thought was appealing.

--Kuya Pete

[1000101-]

A quadro's fill rate is going to be about the highest for a workstation board. Since iit shares most of its architecture with its GeForce based brothers. You'll notice maybe 5fps difference in most games between the quadro and the geforce. The geforce is marginally faster. DirectX isn't even likely to be affected. Fill rate is identical or sometimes higher due to higher clock speeds on many quadro cards. But the drivers are more concentrated on bringing you an accurate visual representation of wht your working on.

if you wanna keep it under 300; the ti4400 and ti4200 should serve you well also. Not being noticably slower than the ti4600 with apps and still one of the faster cards out there.
Gainward has a ti4600 with dual DVI out (comes with 2 DVI-VGA converters as well for your old monitors :>) video in; video out; and 4 firewire ports for around 400 bux.
Its the gainward 750XL golden sample or somesuch.

[hohehohe2]

Personally, I have a GF2ti200 that I have hardware modded to a quadro2pro with no probs. Some say this does not work at all, that maxtreme won't install, but it's a crock of bs paid for by nvidia. Maxtreme installs and performs absolutely the same as it would on a Q2P with the same performance as such. Maybe they changed a simple instruction on the gpu since GF4, but I doubt it, not if they are raking in extra thousands of dollars for free! The gf and quadro chips came out way too close together to be different chips... Nvidia was too small of a company at that time to own or to pay two fab plants to produce these chips in such an abundant quantity. Think of processors, does intel and amd manufacture more than one technology at a time? or two? And proc companies are way bigger than a little upstart game card company...

On numerous occasions I have seen Nvidia ic designers state that this is, in fact, the exact same chip on the exact same die. My experience is that it id, in fact, give me a performance boost in dcc (maya, 3dstudio) and lowered performance in games accordingly. It is the driver that changes everything, not the hardware. I was using maya and artisan used to slow to a crawl in simple scenes and now runs smoothly until things get too complicated. I would imagine that the newer cards are the same if it allows you to install the quadro bios and drivers! It would crash constantly otherwise! The bios is the BASIC INPUT OUTPUT SYSTEM, if it were incompatible with the hardware, it would be fried afterwords, and mine isn't. Just something to think about kids!

-=[P E A C E]=-

[phoebus]

I personally have a Quadro 4 900 XGL....

I just can say it runs AWSOME in 3d....... had a quadro2pro before, the difference is evident to the max
and I am a hardcore player.... the 900 XGL is 100% a gaming card too, I play unreal tournament, TRibes 2 ( most gfx dependents ) at a incredible speed at full resolution with full details... if you can get a 900 XGL or even a 750.. go for it.. you wont be disappointed

[dvornik]

I switched from Gainward GF 4600 to a Quadro4 750 ($420 for an open-box, heh-heh) and I'm very happy with it. Benchmarks look nice. Gaiming performance (3DMark 2001) is on par with Ti 4400. That said you can get Gainward Ti 4600 for $325 from mpcparts.com - firewire card and all.