Huge Proffesional-3D Card review.

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

3Dchips has a <A HREF="http://www.3dchips.net/content/review.php?id=63" target="_new">nice complete review</A> of 14 different workstation cards and two gaming cards (GF4ti / R9700). A nice round-up with a LARGE number of tests.
A few interesting things are: The poor performance of the FireGL 8800, The poor showing of the Quadro series in Maya 4.5 Hardware rendering, the large diff. when using Athlon MPs (what I use) and Xeons in the Maya 5.0 tests, the hit to the XEON FXs to Athlon FXs was small but the switch to Athlon GLs seemed sign. IMO, and some of the results like Inventor are just brutal.

A very good in depth look IMO. And shows very clearly that the best choice card for you depends on your specific needs (program) and platform.

<A HREF="http://www.3dchips.net/content/review.php?id=63" target="_new">http://www.3dchips.net/content/review.php?id=63</A>


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! <A HREF="http://www.redgreen.com" target="_new"><font color=green>RED</font color=green> <font color=red>GREEN</font color=red></A> GA to SK

 

[cleeve]

Wow... amazing article, Ape.

The Ati FireGL drivers have really come a long way since they were known for sucking so bad. The new cards have a very good showing.

Still would like to see how a Quadro FX would do though.

------------------
Radeon 9500 w/256 bit memory bus @ 367/310
AMD AthlonXP 2000+
3dMark03: 3439

 

[reever2]

Quadro FX is in the review, and it doesnt look like its doing so well in the review, compared to THG reviews where it always dominates any other card out there. In this one its getting beat by some really old cards and in the end the FireGL gets a better score

 

[cleeve]

I'm a blind idiot. Not quite sure how I missed that.

I think I partially expected it to give the X1 and X2 such a disproportionately massive whooping that I didn't notice it.

Why is THG getting such different results from everybody else? And vice versa?

------------------
Radeon 9500 w/256 bit memory bus @ 367/310
AMD AthlonXP 2000+
3dMark03: 3439

 

[reever2]

Because THG limits its testing to SPEC tests, the Quadro does recieve a better score in these tests. But in this review, when it comes to actual rendering with real programs the FireGL does better

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

The thing is that the THG reviews are a little old (this market changes faster than most IMO). Ati released some better driver a while back (coinciding with the CAT 3.4 or 3.5s) which improved GL performance, these were later incorporate in the actual CATs (3.5 or the recent 3.6s) for OGL gaming. It increased GL performance sometimes by 30% which is a big boost.

While I like the Fire GLs (hey I can get them at a discount a the Univ.) I think there is no clear winner. The GLs have improved and do VERY well in the MAYA 4.5 hardware test, but they still lag in the MAYA 5.0 stuff. That's why I think it truely depends on what your toolset is, because even the CPU made a huge difference to me (sadly as I have Athlon MPs [well converted XPs]).
The Quadro stil shine in alot of suff, and surprisingly even the low-end Wildcats (the top Wildcat IVs still rule IMO) had a great showing (especially once again in 4.5) despite their usual poor benchmarking elsewhere. I just wish they had pulled a Wildcat-IV out for this.
I also wish they had been able to get an early T2 as that will be a soft-mod option for me with my R9600P.

Still I'm just glas I didn't get the R8800 last year when I had the chance. Damn that really surprised me (by it's poor showing).



- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! <A HREF="http://www.redgreen.com" target="_new"><font color=green>RED</font color=green> <font color=red>GREEN</font color=red></A> GA to SK