Installation & update
About program installation and update, hardware, operating systems, setup, etc.

Desktop Graphic Cards vs. Workstation Graphics Cards

Anonymous
Not applicable
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?
19 REPLIES 19
Ben Odonnell
Contributor
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.
Ben O'Donnell
Architect and CTO at BIMobject®
Get your BIM objects from bimobject.com
MarinRacic
Graphisoft Partner
Graphisoft Partner
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...
MBPro Retina 2.7i7/16GB/SSD
AC ...20/21
www.3Dart.hr
Anonymous
Not applicable
<nod> Save the cash, get a gaming card, and spend the extra money on CPU, RAM, and a new HD with 8MB cache!!!
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
Win 10 Home Premium - AMD Phenom IIX6 1090T Processor 3.20 GHZ 8.00 GB RAM 64-bit Opp. Sys NVIDIA Quadro 4000 AC 22, MEP
Jefferson
Participant
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 ..............................
jeff white
w3d design


AC 23 Solo US / current build & library
Windoze 10 Pro 64
HP ZBook 17 G4
Intel Zeon 3.0
Twin 2GB SSD
32 GB memory

http://w3d-design.com
Anonymous
Not applicable
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
Not applicable
There is a great review of opengl cards.
Its in 3 parts here
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,9717,00.asp
Anonymous
Not applicable
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
Not applicable
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
Newcomer
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.
tim hanagan
aaha! design studio durango, co
27" retina 5k iMac 4ghz i7 os 10.13.6 m395x 4 mb, 32gb ram, 512 gb ssd ac 22 current
15" retina mbp 2.6ghz 1mb 16gb ac 22 current[/size]