Workstation Graphics: AGP Cross Section 2004
by Derek Wilson on December 23, 2004 4:14 PM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
SPECapc Maya 5.01 Performance
The NVIDIA Quadro FX 4000 comes out on top once again in the Maya SPECapc test. The Realizm 200 is able to best the Quadro in the hand1.ma test, but all other tests go in favor of NVIDIA's parts.Looking deeper into the Maya tests (which we have not listed here), we were able to see that the Quadro and Realizm perform just about dead evenly in smooth shaded operation under the Maya 5.0 SPECapc. Wireframe operation with both GPUs is also evenly matched in everything, but the Insect.ma test (which NVIDIA led).
The performance factor that pushed everything over the top seems to be the way that NVIDIA is able to handle the selected and hilted modes in Maya. The Quadro FX 4000 was able to beat its competitors every time in these tests.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
25 Comments
View All Comments
DerekWilson - Thursday, December 23, 2004 - link
johnsonx,thanks for the suggestion. we're definitly exploring options for other workstation articles.
since this is the first of the graphics workstation articles we've tackled in quite a while, we wanted to start with current technology (R4xx, NV4x, and WC Realizm based parts). There aren't curently lower end parts (with the exception of the Wildcat Realizm 100) based on the technology we tested for this article.
thanks again. let us know if there's anything else we can look into doing for future reviews.
Derek Wilson
johnsonx - Thursday, December 23, 2004 - link
How about benchmarking some of the lower Quadro and FireGL cards? ATI has the FireGL 9600 (aka FireGL T2-128), FireGL 9700 (aka FireGL X1), and FireGL 9800 (aka FireGL X2-256t) at $250, $500 and $600 price points repectively. Comparable Quadros are available as well.For many professional uses, a workstation class card (with attendant workstation class, certified drives) is desired, but ultra-high performance isn't important. It'd be nice to see the comparitive performance of the lower end cards.
DerekWilson - Thursday, December 23, 2004 - link
ksherman,You may have some luck with the 6600gt under AutoCAD, espeically if you don't intend to push the graphics subsystem as much as we did (no AA lines, less tess, etc...), but depending on the Pro/E workload, you may have trouble.
The SPECviewperf veiwset tests a much larger workload than the OCUS benchmark. If you're working with smaller data, you should be fine, but if we're talking millions of verts, you're going to have increasing ammounts of trouble with a 128MB card.
Derek Wilson
ksherman - Thursday, December 23, 2004 - link
You guys should throw in a few mainstream graphics cards for comparison. I am trying to build a systems whos primary use will be with Pro/Engineer and AutoCAD and i certainly do not have the money for a $1000+ video card. Im just wondering how the other cards match up (like the 6600gt AGP)Speedo - Thursday, December 23, 2004 - link
Nice review!