I will be going to pratt for an marchII this august 2007
it requires a dell m90 with a NVIDIA® Quadro FX 3500M, 512MB (dedicated), OpenGL. Do you think it is worth it?it is a very heavy computer. So i opted for two other dell machines.
all things are equal except the graphics card
one is the :
NVIDIA Quadro FX 360M, 512MB Turbo Cache memory (256 dedicated)
and the other the:
256MB NVIDIA® GeForce™ 8600M GT
which one do you think is better? Is it worth the $400 difference in price of the laptops.
What difference to they make? (vs. a 8800GT for example)
Most rendering (I use Maxwell mostly) is done by CPU, right?
I was under the impression that the main difference graphic cards make is when you're in the (for example) main editing screen of MAX...rotating your model when there are many onscreen objects etc...
Graphics card is purelly for dealing with what is on your screen while modeling. It has no affect on rendering.
The difference be tween the workstation cars and the "game" cards is primarily in the drivers. The high end GeForce and Quadros are essentially the same in terms of the cards "architecture" but GeForce are geared towards Direct3D which is what the games tend to use, and the workstations cards are geared towards OpenGL.
If you are using a game card set your max graphics to Direct 3D NOT OPEN GL. If you are using a workstation card use OpenGL.
Now which one to buy? 3D studio max is really geared more towards Direct3D you will generally see a loss in performance when using OpenGL. A workstation card in OpenGL will possibly be as good as a game card in Direct3D.
So my adivice: If you will be using 3DS Max primarily I would reccomend saving your money and getting a game card. If you're going to be using maya or something else you might need to do some research but I believe Maya is more OpenGL. If you play games at all a game card might be nice. Also if you look around there are some game cards that can be "soft moded" to run as a workstation card and get the best of both worlds though I have no first had experince with this.
The reality is I have one machine that has a really old crappy radeon on it and unless it is a super huge model file it's capable of doing the job (particulalry for school work) and if you're carful with layers and the like you can even deal with the massive stuff. It might crash from time to time but it's not that big of a deal usually. I also have a GeForce 7800GTX that I like quite a lot and a machine with a Quadro FX1500 and I haven't had any real problems with it either.
That's the first time I have ever heard of running Max in Direct3D!
I've always run it in OpenGL and everywhere that I've worked has too (including some med/large 3D houses).
p-m - I am curious where you got the info for that conclusion?
maraki - I have the Dell M90 you are referring to. The thing is wonderful, I highly recommend it. The only draw back is that it weighs a ton.
While I have not compared it to other Dell's side by side, I have heard that the Precision laptops are built much better and to higher quality standards than their reg laptops. Don't know, but I do know that construction wise it is the best laptop I've seen.
Stick with the Quadro it comes with. If you need to save a bunch, then go to the gaming cards. Max is generally bad when it comes to OpenGL performance (again, never heard of using it in anything else), so any help you can get there is much better. Aparently they are working on this or have (I am primarily using Max 8, Max 9 on one computer but staying with tried-and-true for now)
Buy the M90, it's the best out there. $400 will seem like nothing a year from now (always buy the best you can afford at the moment, you'll always regret trying to save a $100 a year or two from now).
Just make sure your laptop bag has a nice padded shoulder strap! ;-)
The whole 3D max openGl/D3D thing is really, really complicated. Depends on OS, what series card, what version Max, and what drivers as well. And speed isn't the only thing, there are some quality trade offs too. I won't go into all of it (google if you're curious)...But the simplest way I can boil it down is that if you're using vista and/or max 9, D3D will probably be better for you unless there's a feature or quality issue you use/like that works better using OpenGL.
Best bet is probably just to set up some test files and try both (and maxtreme too)
If buying a new card and using vista and/or max 9, I'd probably get an 8xxx series geforce and run D3D.
But a good point to make is that both Autodesk and Microsoft seem pretty intent on moving everything to D3D, so that's probably where we'll be 5-10 years down the line. And that's not a good thing.
Were the large 3D houses you refer to running quadros or similar workstation cards? If that is the case you probably should run in OpenGL, the reason they chose those cards is probably becuase they ran other apps. like Maya which required opengl. There may also be additional support provided to the workstation card users which can be worth the money if you have a business. The drivers are certified or something so in theory there is a sort of "guarntee" for the reliabilty supposedly...
I'm not saying dont buy opengl or workstation cards, I'm just saying make sure you really need it. And make sure the extra money is really worth it to you, if you can do the same job with a lesser card why not? You might in fact see a performance increase with a quadro over a game card in max, but in my experience it's negligible but the price differece is HUGE. I haven't had any problems with my game card so I'm not in a hurry to switch.
Oh. And I know NOTHING about Vista.
As far as citing a source for my info... this is info I've gathered from various people and sites over the past few years. The chaos group forums have a lot of experienced and helpful people. There are a LOT of threads over there that reiterate this, maybe do a serach?
They had Quadros, and a few FireGLs. We tested a few high end Geforce cards that were pretty good - no huge differences, even though some cards cost hundreds and some thousands. I've always been of the opinion that mid range is good for arch.
They only used Max - not one copy of Maya.
I have been using Max with OpenGL for about 9 years now, back when nvidia introduced the first Geforce. Funny, I don't think I've ever even tried Direct3D.
For drivers, the Maxtreme drivers make a huge difference in speed.
I completely agree about the cost of cards. A mid range Quadro should be about the same price as a high end gamin card (although I hven't looked in a whilte).
I've used the top end Quadro's and didn't notice a big difference compared to upper level gaming cards.
The only time I noticed a big difference was with real time apps - they sucked so much video ram you needed every ounce you could get (and why I think it'll be many years before real time is used in arch viz effectively). We optimized every polygon and every texture, but it was still extremely limited (and time consuming, must more than doing an animation).
Dell's business side can negotiate prices, so I got upgraded cards in both my M90 and Precision Desktop for free.
Still, I have been happy with the Quadro in my M90, so if it comes with the machine, be happy ;-)
My advice is to find someone who knows how to build computers, then buy your own parts and have them build it. Don't get a laptop unless you absolutely need the portability. In my case, I left a monitor in studio and I carted around a smaller shuttle PC. It was a little heavy, but I wasn't carrying it far.
I got a Quadro on Ebay for about $400 and it works great. As others have mentioned, the only thing a graphics card is useful for your purposes will be realtime rendering of the model on the screen. In my opinion, the card is worth having because you will probably never experience the lag time when you rotate your model on the screen (which can eat up a lot of time you may not have).
Outputting renderings is dependent on your CPU. Intel just came out with Quadcore CPUs which are in the $300 range right now. I built my computer a year ago, so I'm running a 2.18G dualcore and it is a dream for rendering.
Also, I suggest you have a minimum of 2 gigs of memory.
Aug 12, 07 9:05 am ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
graphics card dilemma
I will be going to pratt for an marchII this august 2007
it requires a dell m90 with a NVIDIA® Quadro FX 3500M, 512MB (dedicated), OpenGL. Do you think it is worth it?it is a very heavy computer. So i opted for two other dell machines.
all things are equal except the graphics card
one is the :
NVIDIA Quadro FX 360M, 512MB Turbo Cache memory (256 dedicated)
and the other the:
256MB NVIDIA® GeForce™ 8600M GT
which one do you think is better? Is it worth the $400 difference in price of the laptops.
thanks
Neither...too expensive...
Get HP dv9500t
2.2 duo core
Nvidea 8600 gt 511mb
4 gigs of ram...
lot Lower price then dell...but still can kick ass
personally, i would never buy another hp laptop in my life.
I love my nw9440 with a quadro 1500 in it...the hp business class machines are rock solid compared to the consumer products.
? Pratt does?
yes, they have a laptop program, and they suggest certain specs.
yes, they have a laptop program, and they suggest certain specs.
yes, they have a laptop program, and they suggest certain specs.
Oh suggest. I thought you typed requires. Oh wait...
I'd like to ask a dumb question...
I've never used a Quadro, so...
What difference to they make? (vs. a 8800GT for example)
Most rendering (I use Maxwell mostly) is done by CPU, right?
I was under the impression that the main difference graphic cards make is when you're in the (for example) main editing screen of MAX...rotating your model when there are many onscreen objects etc...
Or do they actually help apply textures faster?
BTW, you guys use the OpenGL option in MAX right?
Okay, just read the American Men/Women thread, and in an attempt to be non-gender discriminating, let me rephrase that...=P
You Archinecteurs use the OpenGL option in MAX, right? With NVidia cards, of course...
Graphics card is purelly for dealing with what is on your screen while modeling. It has no affect on rendering.
The difference be tween the workstation cars and the "game" cards is primarily in the drivers. The high end GeForce and Quadros are essentially the same in terms of the cards "architecture" but GeForce are geared towards Direct3D which is what the games tend to use, and the workstations cards are geared towards OpenGL.
If you are using a game card set your max graphics to Direct 3D NOT OPEN GL. If you are using a workstation card use OpenGL.
Now which one to buy? 3D studio max is really geared more towards Direct3D you will generally see a loss in performance when using OpenGL. A workstation card in OpenGL will possibly be as good as a game card in Direct3D.
So my adivice: If you will be using 3DS Max primarily I would reccomend saving your money and getting a game card. If you're going to be using maya or something else you might need to do some research but I believe Maya is more OpenGL. If you play games at all a game card might be nice. Also if you look around there are some game cards that can be "soft moded" to run as a workstation card and get the best of both worlds though I have no first had experince with this.
The reality is I have one machine that has a really old crappy radeon on it and unless it is a super huge model file it's capable of doing the job (particulalry for school work) and if you're carful with layers and the like you can even deal with the massive stuff. It might crash from time to time but it's not that big of a deal usually. I also have a GeForce 7800GTX that I like quite a lot and a machine with a Quadro FX1500 and I haven't had any real problems with it either.
That's the first time I have ever heard of running Max in Direct3D!
I've always run it in OpenGL and everywhere that I've worked has too (including some med/large 3D houses).
p-m - I am curious where you got the info for that conclusion?
maraki - I have the Dell M90 you are referring to. The thing is wonderful, I highly recommend it. The only draw back is that it weighs a ton.
While I have not compared it to other Dell's side by side, I have heard that the Precision laptops are built much better and to higher quality standards than their reg laptops. Don't know, but I do know that construction wise it is the best laptop I've seen.
Stick with the Quadro it comes with. If you need to save a bunch, then go to the gaming cards. Max is generally bad when it comes to OpenGL performance (again, never heard of using it in anything else), so any help you can get there is much better. Aparently they are working on this or have (I am primarily using Max 8, Max 9 on one computer but staying with tried-and-true for now)
Buy the M90, it's the best out there. $400 will seem like nothing a year from now (always buy the best you can afford at the moment, you'll always regret trying to save a $100 a year or two from now).
Just make sure your laptop bag has a nice padded shoulder strap! ;-)
The whole 3D max openGl/D3D thing is really, really complicated. Depends on OS, what series card, what version Max, and what drivers as well. And speed isn't the only thing, there are some quality trade offs too. I won't go into all of it (google if you're curious)...But the simplest way I can boil it down is that if you're using vista and/or max 9, D3D will probably be better for you unless there's a feature or quality issue you use/like that works better using OpenGL.
Best bet is probably just to set up some test files and try both (and maxtreme too)
If buying a new card and using vista and/or max 9, I'd probably get an 8xxx series geforce and run D3D.
But a good point to make is that both Autodesk and Microsoft seem pretty intent on moving everything to D3D, so that's probably where we'll be 5-10 years down the line. And that's not a good thing.
trace
Were the large 3D houses you refer to running quadros or similar workstation cards? If that is the case you probably should run in OpenGL, the reason they chose those cards is probably becuase they ran other apps. like Maya which required opengl. There may also be additional support provided to the workstation card users which can be worth the money if you have a business. The drivers are certified or something so in theory there is a sort of "guarntee" for the reliabilty supposedly...
I'm not saying dont buy opengl or workstation cards, I'm just saying make sure you really need it. And make sure the extra money is really worth it to you, if you can do the same job with a lesser card why not? You might in fact see a performance increase with a quadro over a game card in max, but in my experience it's negligible but the price differece is HUGE. I haven't had any problems with my game card so I'm not in a hurry to switch.
Oh. And I know NOTHING about Vista.
As far as citing a source for my info... this is info I've gathered from various people and sites over the past few years. The chaos group forums have a lot of experienced and helpful people. There are a LOT of threads over there that reiterate this, maybe do a serach?
They had Quadros, and a few FireGLs. We tested a few high end Geforce cards that were pretty good - no huge differences, even though some cards cost hundreds and some thousands. I've always been of the opinion that mid range is good for arch.
They only used Max - not one copy of Maya.
I have been using Max with OpenGL for about 9 years now, back when nvidia introduced the first Geforce. Funny, I don't think I've ever even tried Direct3D.
For drivers, the Maxtreme drivers make a huge difference in speed.
I completely agree about the cost of cards. A mid range Quadro should be about the same price as a high end gamin card (although I hven't looked in a whilte).
I've used the top end Quadro's and didn't notice a big difference compared to upper level gaming cards.
The only time I noticed a big difference was with real time apps - they sucked so much video ram you needed every ounce you could get (and why I think it'll be many years before real time is used in arch viz effectively). We optimized every polygon and every texture, but it was still extremely limited (and time consuming, must more than doing an animation).
Dell's business side can negotiate prices, so I got upgraded cards in both my M90 and Precision Desktop for free.
Still, I have been happy with the Quadro in my M90, so if it comes with the machine, be happy ;-)
My advice is to find someone who knows how to build computers, then buy your own parts and have them build it. Don't get a laptop unless you absolutely need the portability. In my case, I left a monitor in studio and I carted around a smaller shuttle PC. It was a little heavy, but I wasn't carrying it far.
I got a Quadro on Ebay for about $400 and it works great. As others have mentioned, the only thing a graphics card is useful for your purposes will be realtime rendering of the model on the screen. In my opinion, the card is worth having because you will probably never experience the lag time when you rotate your model on the screen (which can eat up a lot of time you may not have).
Outputting renderings is dependent on your CPU. Intel just came out with Quadcore CPUs which are in the $300 range right now. I built my computer a year ago, so I'm running a 2.18G dualcore and it is a dream for rendering.
Also, I suggest you have a minimum of 2 gigs of memory.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.