Desktop Graphic Cards vs. Workstation Graphics Cards

[Anonymous]

Does anyone know how much performance benefit ArchiCad 8 can achieve when a workstation class graphics card is used (like the ATI FireGL or NVIDIA Quadro series) versus the desktop class cards (like ATI Radeon or NVIDIA Geforce series)?

I am most interested in overall 2D performance, not just 3d performance.

Could the extra money these cards require be better used to upgrade other PC components instead?

[Ben Odonnell]

I don't think you need to spend the extra cash for the high-end CAD-cards to use ArchiCAD.

Couldn't agree more. I don't belive that you can't justify spending mega bucks on a workstation graphics card just for ArchiCAD.

[MarinRacic]

Pro graphic cards aren't truly supported by ArchiCAD (you just won't see the difference, except in some colossal building when working in OpenGL 3D window), but they justify their price when you import the model into some 3D visualization application like 3D Studio or Cinema 4D and use multiple lights! At that time gaming cards just can't support more than 8 lights at the same time in real-time while pro-cards rock. This is especially true with 3Dlabs cards which, until nVidia QuadroFX series was released, were more than twice as fast than direct opponents. Of course, the more light sources you use, the more is the difference between pro and gaming cards.
I can dig up some tests from computer magazines articles if anyone's interested...

[Anonymous]

<nod> Save the cash, get a gaming card, and spend the extra money on CPU, RAM, and a new HD with 8MB cache!!!

[Conrado Dominguez]

Tim wrote:
Does anyone know how much performance benefit ArchiCad 8 can achieve when a workstation class graphics card is used (like the ATI FireGL or NVIDIA Quadro series) versus the desktop class cards (like ATI Radeon or NVIDIA Geforce series)?

I am most interested in overall 2D performance, not just 3d performance.

Could the extra money these cards require be better used to upgrade other PC components instead?

Tim:
I delayed this post because I was in the process of installing some ATI Radeon(9600) in new desktop units.
At the same time we have a Dell Workstation with a FireGl working for quite some time. Both with AC8.0

I find no significant(perceived not measured) difference in both 3D or 2D between the FireGl and the ATI 9600. As a matter of fact, working in 2D when panning, the FireGL leaves behind some "streaking garbage" and the screen needs to be rebuilt. All very quick but annoying nevertheless.
So, I tend to agree with others here. The price difference, in the ATI cards, is not worth it.
I have no experience with the NVIDIA cards.
BTW the 9600, 128MB with OpenGl in 3D is outstanding.


Conrado

[Jefferson]

Well this is a very timely post for me.

Tomorrow heading into the "city" where a MSI GeForce Ti4600 @ 128MB can be had for $99. Last year's model, and if I am not mistaken there is a tweaking program, rivatuner, I believe, that boasts it can convert this thing to a quadro. Even if that's not the case can I get a quilified opinion here please, do or don't or wait or....................

As you can see from my specs My current card is tiny. Waiting on 8.1 and the paycheck after next ..............................

[Anonymous]

I think you are quite wrong in you assumptions.

The main drawback of the usual gaming cards are that they support OPENGL rendertin ONLY IN FULL SCREEN MODE.
this is a hole lot different than rendering in a window.

This was the difference at least some time ago.

If somone has both a game and o workstation card
try rendering a small video and report the times

You will definately see a difference.

[Anonymous]

There is a great review of opengl cards.
Its in 3 parts here
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,9717,00.asp

[Anonymous]

oreopoulos wrote:
I think you are quite wrong in you assumptions.

The main drawback of the usual gaming cards are that they support OPENGL rendertin ONLY IN FULL SCREEN MODE.
this is a hole lot different than rendering in a window.

Sorry to contradict you there. . .but the only difference between running in a window (at least on Windoze), and fullscreen is ALT+ENTER, or a -w on the application parameters.

OpenGL and, for example your desktop, are two seperate graphical pipes of information. OpenGL processing and desktop rendering won't even start to cross each other until you get to CPU cycles. . .and by that time, you are not even processing on the graphics card.

Now I'll agree to the fact that MOIST gaming cards do not offer any improved performance on CAD style applications that use their own 3-D engine for graphical display, however; ArchiCAD makes use of OpenGL, so it is an entirely different animal when compared to other CAD/3D style apps.

In conclusion, 'gamer' cards will work just as good (if not better) than workstation based graphics cards when using ArchiCAD, for at least half the money.

[Anonymous]

I'm sitting waiting impatiently for UT2004. Only to find out it's been pushed back to Feb 2004

I'll just have to amuse my self with UT2003 in the mean time

[offtopicmode] You should look at Call of Duty, a real intense WWII FPshooter [/offtopicmode]

[aahatimo]

chad.lawson wrote:

oreopoulos wrote:
I think you are quite wrong in you assumptions.
Now I'll agree to the fact that MOIST gaming cards do not offer any improved performance on CAD style applications that use their own 3-D engine for graphical display, however; ArchiCAD makes use of OpenGL, so it is an entirely different animal when compared to other CAD/3D style apps..

hum, i have heard the tale about putting your harddrive in the freezer, but never thought about "moistening" a vid card.

i do think that in the notebook world, the workstation cards nvidia(& probably ati m10s) do offer increased performance, both for gaming and cad. the quadro4 go 700gl 64 or 128 card found in the dell m 50 / 60 line, from what i have read are the fastest cards for notebooks. i have seen a m60 in someone's tag, how does that unit perform?
btw, the 64 meg card will work in a inspiron 8200, if you can come up w/ the $350.