AMD Launches FirePro V3900 Professional GPU

[Guest]

@lockhrt999
though the pro cards do help with the bigger frame buffer it is not what makes the biggest difference, the biggest difference is in stability, serious manipulation of large scenes/assemblies puts a heavy strain on the system, even with pro cards your guarantee a crash at least once a day, with gaming cards that statistics rapidly goes up, i stress these cards are not made for performance, they were made for day to day working

@juncture
I have yet to come across a setup that can display a complete CAD assembly of a car (every component), including fasteners this can easily add up to 1000+ parts, even with a beast of a setup the best ive seen is the complete engine assembly with some power train and maybe some of the chassis if your feeling lucky. i have yet to see anyone top 400ish parts in an assembly without the machine baulking, a better question would be why would you need to the complete CAD model for a car in one session. FYI fastener CAD models are actually not modeled with the threads if you do not know what a type 3 M8 bolt is then you really in the wrong profession, a simple cylinder with a hex head is good enough for CAD stuff

 

[juncture]

[citation][nom]lordstormdragon[/nom]Tell me, which graphics card you have used can do such a thing? [/citation]I haven't tried it on any computer. I was just curious about a hypothetical situation that would put stress on this new video card.
[citation][nom]lordstormdragon[/nom]who decides what "hi resolution" is? If a screw ... is triangulated at viewport-rendertime, on a decent 22" or larger screen, how many pixels of the screw are being rendered? If the answer is less than half a pixel (which it is, period, if you're viewing the entire car on any modern monitor, period) then it needn't be rendered at all.[/citation]
The size of the monitor has nothing to do with anything we're talking about rather it's the monitor resolution. A video card will still calculate a screw in a model regardless if you can see it on the screen in full model view or not.
[citation][nom]lordstormdragon[/nom]I can answer your non-question idiotic statement: no, it cannot[/citation]
Good to know. I guess I can just take your word for it and I don't have to test it! ^.^'
[citation][nom]lordstormdragon[/nom]And before you say, "My Radeon/Geforce can!"[/citation]
My Geforce can't!
[citation][nom]lordstormdragon[/nom]Precision modeling (real precision) for CAD/CAM has nothing to do with viewport display except for error-checking and machine prep.[/citation]
If viewport display is what the user sees on the screen and precision modeling is the LOD and how exact the model looks on the screen, do they really have all that much not to do with each other?
[citation][nom]lordstormdragon[/nom]It's like you just dropped the word "Solidworks" expecting people to think you're cool. You're bragging about something you had no hand in creating, and "dissing" something you know full well can't do what you're bragging about.[/citation]
LOL, no this isn't the case. I use Solidworks in school which is why I was specific and did not refer to all CAD programs because they differ in their capabilities. I wasn't dissing the videocard for something I honestly didn't know the outcome to. I don't see how saying a CAD program name would be considered bragging. I wasn't bragging.
[citation][nom]lordstormdragon[/nom]...(to use your shitty example)...idiotic statement...that's because you suck at modeling...[/citation]I don't appreciate insults and if you want to validate your point and keep credibility to others it is best to use a rationale approach excluding ad hominem fallacies.
[citation][nom]ProStuffIt[/nom]@juncture
I have yet to come across a setup that can display a complete CAD assembly of a car (every component), including fasteners this can easily add up to 1000+ parts, even with a beast of a setup the best ive seen is the complete engine assembly with some power train and maybe some of the chassis if your feeling lucky. i have yet to see anyone top 400ish parts in an assembly without the machine baulking, a better question would be why would you need to the complete CAD model for a car in one session. FYI fastener CAD models are actually not modeled with the threads if you do not know what a type 3 M8 bolt is then you really in the wrong profession, a simple cylinder with a hex head is good enough for CAD stuff[/citation]
I found your response interesting enough to ask what was under this beast of a setup that let you view the complete engine assembly with some power train and maybe some of the chassis? I'm curious because I have a dream to create a beast of a computer that would handle my hypothetical situation of viewing a full model car assembly. I do realize this isn't a practical assembly and know that threads are huge resource hogs and the toolbox that allows you to substitute real threads with images of threads but I have still to wonder how would one know for sure before building a prototype that every part fits together perfectly. I'm a student taking my second Solidworks class for fun while my major is web developing. I have a background in high school of using AutoDesk Inventor for 4 years but decided engineering wasnt for me. This is far from my profession.

 

[bin1127]

[citation][nom]xspkbstr[/nom]No one has posted "But will it play Crysis?" yet?? OMG...the world is ending I think.[/citation]

It won't play crisis. That much we know.

 

[Draven35]

Yes, it would play Crysis, just about as well as an ATI consumer card of the exact same specs would.

 

[Guest]

@juncture

I have used a variety of machines, the earliest example was a sun blade with 2 CPU, 8GB of RAM, 2 gfx cards each with 512MB, and that was 10 years ago, more recent examples would be a dual quad core xeon with 16GB RAM and a Quadro with 4GB, neither would come even close to loading a complete car CAD assembly into a single session.

Threads are not a worry, they conform to a standard, which dictates tolerance, a M8 x 1.25 bolt must fit a nut of the same type, otherwise it cant be called an M8 x 1.25 bolt.

For general fit engineers perform a tolerance stack analysis, which basically takes the worst case scenario, basically if all the parts happen to end up being at the top and bottom of it's tolerance parameter and checks if all the parts still fit together.

if you intend to try and fit as many parts as possible into a cad assembly then you need to go 64bit OS with 64bit CAD application throw lots of RAM into the system and get a gfx card with he biggest memory capacity you can afford, and you still end up short. Now the real interesting thing is you dont need fully defined CAD data, for example if your running tolerance stack analysis or interference checks, then tessellated data is just as good, basically they take all that cad data (which has heaps of mathematics behind it) and converts it into 3D spatial information (in the form of tessellated triangles, much like games, except with an accuracy of 0.001mm or thereabouts, really cant recall off the top my head lol), you can easily get a whole car in tessellated data into a single session with actually pretty moderate hardware specs too

 

[mildgamer001]

^^^^^^^ most of replies above me.. technical stuff very confusing=very interesting=keep arguing please.lol