FirePro v7750 for entry level? No way dude, not at all. The v7750 is a high end solution. I'm working on a review for it right now, and that card has topped the Quadro FX 3800 in every single benchmark so far. It is an outstanding product. At $899, it's not an entry level piece. The Quadro FX 1800 is an accurate entry level product though.
You're right on the Quadro FX 570 though, Photodude. That kind of GPU is primarily used for 2D graphics production and applications like nonlinear video editors. Hardly a good solution for 3D graphics, which is exactly as you said, the reason why the gaming card is beating it.
FirePro v7750 for entry level? No way dude, not at all. The v7750 is a high end solution.
ya, I've been trying to figure what a good entry level for the Firepro line would be. I chose the v7750 based on it's 1GB GDDR5 of memory which was the closest to the QuadroFX1800 which has 768MB GDDR3. My other option was the v5700 with 512MB GDDR3
I still wouldn't call the v7750 a high end solution, Based on your comment; I would put it as midrange with the QuadroFX3800 (even if v7750 is beating the fx3800)
depends on the program, Some programs Rendering is programed for graphics cards, other programs rendering is primarily CPU. You have to know which is better for your program (sometimes it's hard to find accurate information to know which is better)
Right now there are very few GPU accelerated renderers, Gelato was the only real player until the last year or two and while there are a bunch of GPU based render engines in the works there still aren't that many that have actually hit the market yet. Especially non-proprietry hardware based ones like the Caustic Graphics solution.
Hey Bobby Miller,
You wrote that you didn't test it with Softimage. Do you happen to know which SPECViewperf benchmark would resemble Softimage's performance best that of Max or Maya? Any clue?
I got it to work in XSI 6.5 without problem. Pretty sweet benchmark. If you try to run the script in Softimage 7 or higher, some edits need to be made to the script. Edits are listed in that forum thread a few posts down.
Now, if you don't have Softimage, It's hard to say which benchmark on SPEC Viewperf would be closest. Out of all of the included benchmarks, 3DS Max and Maya are the two that are going to be closest. Now, Maya has been extremely refined, as it is the defacto standard in 3D. From my own experiences in Softimage with workstation GPUs, I have a feeling benchmark results would be closer to 3DS Max than they would to the astronomical results in Maya.
@ Photodude, no kidding the Quadro 570 is a low end card you hack- obviously it's in the same price range though so wouldn't it suffice to compare the 2? instead of a $400 card vs a $1,500 card? This article is lame and biased! Next time try comparing things by their price tag as most consumer reports would do and not by their meaningless manufactering number!
Thanks for your response. The tool on XSI Base will only let me compare scores of Softimage on different configurations. I'm more interested in the benchmarks which are run in different tests like SpecView so it's easier to compare different GPU's instead of pc-setups.
I have a FireGL V7600 right now and nowadays you can get a FireGL v7700 or a newer Quadro FX 3700 for prices along those of high-end gamecards (with twice the RAM and GB/s). I reckon a current generation workstation card performs better than a current gamecard (like your test shows) but I'm looking for the best bang for the buck and a HD 5870 might outperform the V7700 and FX3500 even though the drivers and OpenGL performance are not optimized. Stability is also a factor of course but there are even 3d companies that run on gamecard in stead of Quadro's and FirePro's and gamecards do support later shadermodels and DirectX.
You may find interest in the numbers on our recently benchmarked FirePro v7750. The v7750 is the incremental step from the v7700. It performed incredibly well in Maya.
It's an outstanding product with great all around performance, and has become the go-to product I recommend to anyone sitting on the fence.
Though, then again, if you aren't looking to pay close to one thousand dollars, you may be better off with a desktop grade card. Myself, I wouldn't skimp myself as an atist after testing these GPUs. I do, however, understand the issues that the financial implications can bring.
I'm still looking for a better Softimage solution for benchmarks...
I bought a HD 5870 card will say that it is still pretty fast, but I had a goal to work in 3dMAX while enjoying the new games. So the speed and quality of rendering 3dMAX pleased me especially under Windows 7, respectively, the game also fly. But when modeling complex objects still comes aisle when work is no longer possible - so still prokarty win here, but only at the expense of drivers. STREAM can hope for, and prescribe the most wood for optimization 3dMAX - it will pull on Nobelevku)
Hi Bobby, I'm sure the FirePro 7750 performs well but the FireGL V7700 had a price cut recently and is available for less than 200 dollar which seems like really good value.
Still curious if a HD5870 would out perform a V7700 in DCC though.
I have a question . What if you compare this 400 dollar 5870 to a workstation card that has a 400 dollar price point. Studios might not have an issue with going fr a 1800 card. But someone like me who is just starting to freelance 1800 is to big. So i would like to see thae same test done with a card theat has the same price point as 5870 and probably one that has the same price point as 4890 the card i have right now
Comments
You're right on the Quadro FX 570 though, Photodude. That kind of GPU is primarily used for 2D graphics production and applications like nonlinear video editors. Hardly a good solution for 3D graphics, which is exactly as you said, the reason why the gaming card is beating it.
ya, I've been trying to figure what a good entry level for the Firepro line would be. I chose the v7750 based on it's 1GB GDDR5 of memory which was the closest to the QuadroFX1800 which has 768MB GDDR3. My other option was the v5700 with 512MB GDDR3
I still wouldn't call the v7750 a high end solution, Based on your comment; I would put it as midrange with the QuadroFX3800 (even if v7750 is beating the fx3800)
You can get a v7750 for about $600 which is more on the entry level "workstation" price with better then entry level performance.
Right now there are very few GPU accelerated renderers, Gelato was the only real player until the last year or two and while there are a bunch of GPU based render engines in the works there still aren't that many that have actually hit the market yet. Especially non-proprietry hardware based ones like the Caustic Graphics solution.
You wrote that you didn't test it with Softimage. Do you happen to know which SPECViewperf benchmark would resemble Softimage's performance best that of Max or Maya? Any clue?
I was able to find a user script that runs an FPS benchmark in XSI, so if you have the software, you can benchmark with it:
http://www.xsibase.com/forum/index.php?board=15;action=display;threadid=36978;start=0
I got it to work in XSI 6.5 without problem. Pretty sweet benchmark. If you try to run the script in Softimage 7 or higher, some edits need to be made to the script. Edits are listed in that forum thread a few posts down.
Now, if you don't have Softimage, It's hard to say which benchmark on SPEC Viewperf would be closest. Out of all of the included benchmarks, 3DS Max and Maya are the two that are going to be closest. Now, Maya has been extremely refined, as it is the defacto standard in 3D. From my own experiences in Softimage with workstation GPUs, I have a feeling benchmark results would be closer to 3DS Max than they would to the astronomical results in Maya.
That is, of course, all speculation.
Thanks for your response. The tool on XSI Base will only let me compare scores of Softimage on different configurations. I'm more interested in the benchmarks which are run in different tests like SpecView so it's easier to compare different GPU's instead of pc-setups.
I have a FireGL V7600 right now and nowadays you can get a FireGL v7700 or a newer Quadro FX 3700 for prices along those of high-end gamecards (with twice the RAM and GB/s). I reckon a current generation workstation card performs better than a current gamecard (like your test shows) but I'm looking for the best bang for the buck and a HD 5870 might outperform the V7700 and FX3500 even though the drivers and OpenGL performance are not optimized. Stability is also a factor of course but there are even 3d companies that run on gamecard in stead of Quadro's and FirePro's and gamecards do support later shadermodels and DirectX.
You may find interest in the numbers on our recently benchmarked FirePro v7750. The v7750 is the incremental step from the v7700. It performed incredibly well in Maya.
http://tech.icrontic.com/articles//ati-firepro-v7750-review/
It's an outstanding product with great all around performance, and has become the go-to product I recommend to anyone sitting on the fence.
Though, then again, if you aren't looking to pay close to one thousand dollars, you may be better off with a desktop grade card. Myself, I wouldn't skimp myself as an atist after testing these GPUs. I do, however, understand the issues that the financial implications can bring.
I'm still looking for a better Softimage solution for benchmarks...
Translation:
Still curious if a HD5870 would out perform a V7700 in DCC though.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y99mD_A1uug
BTW Guru3d has a great thread about softmodding Radeon cards to FireGL/PRO.
just google it up...