Morten, would you have a test scene (random spheres or something) that we
could run to give comparative results? I'd love to know what kind of
performance numbers a 4600 / 8800 gets over the cards here.
Softimage crew- what about a little xsi benchmark (standalone like Cinebench
would be stunning :)) would certainly take the guesswork out of hardware
decisions.
Cheers
James,
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of
Morten Bartholdy
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 11:48 PM
To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
Subject: Re: hardware - which card is certified?
The Quadro was 2-3 times as fast, yes. I have a GeForce 7800 GTX on my
current workstation and I am pretty happy with it. I can orbit millions of
triangles at reasonable speeds and I have no trouble either with overlays
nor in FX Tree, so it is definately not a bad card for XSI work. The only
thing I might point out is lacking Z-buffer precision when several objects
occupy pretty musch the same space, like eyelids on eyespeheres. This is
seen at combinations of larger viewing distances and certain FOV. Also i
have noticed strange and changing OGL lighting when there are many
lightsources in a scene, but as long as this is not crucial to what you are
doing in XSI it is possible to live with it at the pricepoint of this card.
I am about to load the test scene here on my own workstation and test it
with the 7800 - then I can tell you how the 8800 performed in comparison -
perhaps tomorrow.
Morten Bartholdy
3D & VFX Artist
----- Original Message -----
From: "Antonin Messier-Turcotte" <amessier(at)flystudio.com>
To: <XSI(at)Softimage.COM>
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 4:25 PM
Subject: Re: hardware - which card is certified?
> Just as a side question, you say the quadro is 3 times as fast, but are
> the peformances of the 8800 gtx still acceptable? I'm thinking about
> getting one of those...
>
> Thanks!
>
> Antonin
>
> Morten Bartholdy wrote:
>> I just tested a GeForce 8800 GTX vs. a Quadro 4600 on the same machine
>> today. These cards are supposedly based on the same gpu and have the same
>> amount of texture memory - 768 MB RAM. I used the latest GeForce standard
>> driver and the correct Quadro set to XSI ogl, and found a baffling
>> performance difference in favour of the Quadro!! It was 2-3 times as fast
>> as the GeForce in most tests - wireframe, hidden line, depth cue, shaded
>> and textured. I made a test with about 3000 objects and 1,6 million
>> triangles and one with one object and the same triangle amount - a merged
>> version af the first scene. Actually the Quadro was relative faster at
>> handling the scene with many objects thna the merged one. I am guessing
>> it might be possible to find a better OGL setting for the GeForce driver
>> and perhaps increase the performance some, but still, the difference is
>> remarkable.
>>
>> I wonder if someone here has had a chance to make more thorough
>> camparisons between GeForce and Quadro hardware twins, and can offer some
>> insight? I am really beginning to wonder if the Quadro isn't worth the
>> extra pricetag - actually it makes sense - it is 2-3 times faster and
>> cost about 3 times as much as the GeForce.
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Morten Bartholdy
>> 3D & VFX Artist
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Todd Alan Peleg"
>> <todd(at)theholdingcell.com>
>> To: <XSI(at)Softimage.COM>
>> Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 11:24 PM
>> Subject: Re: hardware - which card is certified?
>>
>>
>>> i have a bad experience with 2 fx3500's and the fx3000's
>>>
>>> there are 2 of them here at the place i am at and the performance of
>>> them has been whipped by my 5 year old laptop's nvidia
>>>
>>> (i have yet to explain it)
>>>
>>> some other people have offered MANY options to fix what seems to be for
>>> no reason.. i haven't had time to investigate it.. but.. for it to be
>>> the case in multiple machines... i doubt its a rare thing..
>>>
>>> for what its worth
>>>
>>> todd
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jeff McFall wrote:
>>>
>>>> Trying to pick cards for new machines and we are looking for some
>>>> clarification regarding the QuadroFx3500.
>>>>
>>>> On the Softimage support site the QuadroFx3500 is not listed as
>>>> "certified"
>>>>
http://www.softimage.com/support/xsi/certified_graphics_cards/xp32/default.a
spx
>>>>
>>>> However on the workstation page
>>>>
http://www.softimage.com/support/xsi/certified_workstations/default.aspx
>>>> The 3500 is listed as certified (at least for 5.11) in a Dell 690 and
>>>> Dell 490
>>>>
>>>> Trying to get some solid info as to why this is.
>>>>
>>>> Is this just an oversight or something that should be considered given
>>>> changes in XSI 6. ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Also curious if there are any major performance differences between the
>>>> two cards.
>>>>> From the specs it appears the 3500 may be more adept at handling
>>>>> textures.
>>>> Any other points to consider if we went with the lesser card?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for any feedback or suggestions
>>>>
>>>> Jeff
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> 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
>>
>
>
> ---
> 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
