there are certified cards and there arent. if you want to pay
your bills with the work you are going to do in xsi i wouldnt hesitate
and go with certified hardware, regardless if its faster or even
slower. stability is MY main concern. if its for "home" use, why not
try ;)
i stopped trying and daddling around with hardware some years ago and
i didnt regret. i have a fx1100, no crashes that are obvioulsy
graphics related and that is all i have to say :)
ciao
franky
Saturday, June 3, 2006, 2:01:20 PM, you wrote:
>> I really don't mind paying for a FX card, provided its much faster than the
>> games counterpart. 7900GT is ~$400AU, FX3500 is $1699...if the performance
>> is 2 or 3 times higher, then its worth it no?
TL> I don´t know if the performance is that different.
TL> All I know is, there´s currently the 7600 GS/GT, 7900 GT and 7900 GTX.
TL> Based on the same chipdesign, these cardtypes have more or less pixelpipelines,
TL> come with more or less RAM and may support advanced features like Dual link,
TL> SLI and shadermodel 3.0 in a more or less ideal fashion.
TL> The pro-version range of cards can only derive from the above (or maybe it´s
TL> the other way around), therefore any newly available workstationcard should
TL> pretty much line-up in terms of performance to their gaming counterparts.
TL> The main difference is the driver (some features that may be checked/enabled)
TL> bringing profiles for the major 3D packages plus the lack of a gaming bundle.
TL> E.g., if you can match the FX 1500 to it´s gaming counterpart, you can calculate
TL> it´s price/performance ratio pretty accurate.
TL> Personally, I wouldn´t pay three times the money to get a pro-card that comes
TL> close to the 7600 GT instead of buying a 7900 GT. But, as I said, this depends
TL> on being able to correctly match the types. Where I´m not sure I can currently.
TL> Cheers
TL> tim
TL> ----- Original Message -----
TL> From: "James Dc (Gmail)" <james.decolling(at)gmail.com>
TL> To: <XSI(at)Softimage.COM>
TL> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 12:01 PM
TL> Subject: RE: graphics board recommendation
>> So price/performance is defiantly in the games cards camp then?
>>
>> I really don't mind paying for a FX card, provided its much faster than the
>> games counterpart. 7900GT is ~$400AU, FX3500 is $1699...if the performance
>> is 2 or 3 times higher, then its worth it no?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> James,
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of
>> Tim Leydecker
>> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 7:44 PM
>> To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
>> Subject: Re: graphics board recommendation
>>
>> An addon,
>>
>> could well be that the Quadro FX 1500 is closer to the 7600 GT
>> card range, I may have mixed that up, in that case, the 7900GT
>> would of course have a better price/performance ratio than the
>> FX 1500. I find it sort of difficult (guess that´s what marketing
>> is all about) to identify the gamer vs. pro counterparts of the
>> nvidia based cards currently. Some of the QuadroFX cards
>> still belong to the older chipsetrevision the 7800 GTX comes
>> from, while others are allready based on the 7900 GTX chipset
>> family. I can´t point out which is what. That said, I´m happy with
>> my 7900 GT card.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> tim
>>
>> P.S: One way to discern the 7800´er flavours from the 7900´er
>> flavours is to compare the productimages, as most cards use an
>> nvidia reference design (with just minor designtweaks to the fan´s
>> printing) that should at least give you a hint.
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Tim Leydecker" <BauerOink(at)gmx.de>
>> To: <XSI(at)Softimage.COM>
>> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 10:43 AM
>> Subject: Re: graphics board recommendation
>>
>>
>>> Hi James,
>>>
>>> just recently bought a 7900GT card, had some driver problems
>>> using the current WHQL certified nvidia driver for when having
>>> XSI (5.1) and Maya (4.5/6.01) open simultaneously.
>>> Installing the 9.x.x. series betadrivers solved this.
>>>
>>> Am pretty happy with it, shaded mode is very fast, been able
>>> to handle geometry in the 250 000 -750 000 triangle range
>>> for cleanup and refinement without lag. Unfortunately, this
>>> didn´t apply to "wireframe in shaded" and wireframe mode.
>>> Experienced significant slowdown when setting that. Umh.
>>> Funny enough, NURBS wireframes are very fast (on Maya)
>>> while NURBS in shaded gets very slow. Pretty much the same
>>> inverted way everything else is between XSI and Maya :-)
>>>
>>> Price of the card, ~300 Euros including taxes and shipping.
>>>
>>> The pro counterpart for the above card would be the QuadroFX 1500,
>>> chipwise they should be pretty identical but the pro card has a different
>>> driver. If you can, either give the quadro a testdrive or see if you´d be
>>> willing to shell out an extra ~200 Euros for that card. Right after I had
>>> ordered my 7900 GT (slightly overclocked), the cheapest Quadro FX
>>> 1500 would have cost ~475 Euros (oem, bulk). I´d have taken that then...
>>>
>>> Can´t comment much on the ATI cards, we have some at our lab,
>>> there´s no serious glitches anymore as there where with earlier driver
>>> builds but I can´t really say which model or drivernumber that´d be.
>>>
>>> Hope that helps somewhat,
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> tim
>>>
>>> I´d buy another 1-2 (greyish, stripped down) renderslave(s) instead of
>>> putting the money in a top of the line graphics card, but that´s
>> preference.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "James Dc (Gmail)" <james.decolling(at)gmail.com>
>>> To: <XSI(at)Softimage.COM>
>>> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 9:51 AM
>>> Subject: graphics board recommendation
>>>
>>>
>>>> Howdy list, im just about to get a new card and wondering what people are
>>>> finding good these days.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Choices are -
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nvidia 7800 / 7900GT / GTX
>>>>
>>>> QuadroFX 3450 / 3500
>>>>
>>>> FireGL 7100 / 7350
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Normally I don't look at ati, but right now their prices are pretty good.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So I guess the questions is - does XSI make use of the Quadro series as
>> much
>>>> as say Max / Maya do? I know back in the ol soft3d days a pro was the
>> only
>>>> way to go, games cards were just too slow.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Also, should I bother with SLI at all? (I run dual monitors, so I think I
>>>> cant, it'd just end up being 1 card per screen right?)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Lastly.is there a XSI benchmarking test somewhere? Specbench have tests
>> for
>>>> Max / Maya + numerous cad apps..but not sure which score relates to xsi
>>>> performance in anyway.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> James,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
>>> unsubscribe xsi
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
>> unsubscribe xsi
>>
>>
>> ---
>> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
>> unsubscribe xsi
>>
TL> ---
TL> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
TL> unsubscribe xsi
---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi
