Although those are very good cards, especially for gaming,.. I'm pretty
sure they use the same quadro GPU's but they are not setup for use for
professional OpenGL. BTW, also consider a FX5950 Ultra (if you're going
So, if you're into hardware/software hacking, you could tweak the
FX5200, FX5600 and FX5950 Ultra to act like other Quadro cards.
Do a search for FX5200 FX5600 quadro hack or tweak using RivaTuner.
Or, http://www.guru3d.com /
Roger BERNERD wrote:
BTW, note, that those cards will work without the hacks but you'll most
likely run into problems with them.
Or, you can set (force) Pro/e to run in Win_GDI mode. (although pro/e
should recognize that it is not a opengl card upon installation and set
it for win_gdi?)
Paul Salvador wrote:
i don't understand why you say these cards are only for game.
to day i work on proe2001 on 2 PC with a GEFORCE 3MX and GEFORCE 2MX
Sure i have some problems with te geForce 2mx only 4 windows supported but
no problems with te geForce 3mx and in proe i can sea that opengl is active.
But i think fore proe/wildfire i nead more memory.
We are a smal office and we can't buy very expensive material.
If you know where i can find a benchmark for proe/wildfire and these cards
i'll thanks you.
We use several FX500 at work mostly because the price is fair.
IMHO performance in ProE2001 sucks - rotating is not especially smooth
and is somewhat annoying (on a 3,2P4)
Running the same models on my FX5600 gives almost the same result
Using the same card in SW2004 on similar models works brilliantly -
extremely smooth and no problems.
The guy at PTC that interfaced to the FX500 must have been weeeeery
tired or maybe PTC ran out of pepsi at the time
Try loading the ProENGINEER application specific settings under Control
I've not seen this behavior. Typically the main difference (to me at
least) between a gaming card and the same chip on a professional board
is that the professional board allows for a unified back buffer and you
can have more than a couple of windows open and doing OpenGL.
I'm in search of some graphics card info as well.
I'm looking to build a new high-end system and would not want to make a
mistake in something as important as the graphics accelerator card. PTC
offers a list of certified cards, but they are only certified in certified
systems (my new system will likely be custom-built).
I prefer ATI over Nvidia (from past compatibility experiences) so I'm
looking for info more specific to the ATI cards.
I understand that the card must OpenGL. I had been considering an ATI X800
or X800XT (even the previous 9800XT or PRO), but have since been told that
while gaming cards rock for gaming, they are mediocre, at best, for high-end
MCAD applications. I've also been told that the OpenGL cards rock for MCAD
apps, but will still perform flawlessly for gaming. Is this true? I'm not
ready to give up on my gaming time yet!!!
More specifically, I'm looking at the newer X2-256T and the to-be-released
X3-256T cards and would like user opinions. These run in the $600 range,
but I was already looking to spend $499 (older price on the 9800XT) so
that's within my budget. I'm not prepared to go much over that anyway.
AutoCAD, Solidworks and Pro/E Wildfire 2.0 (and the upcoming 3.0) are my CAD
programs. I also do web design and photo-editing/enhancement (very large
files) and I'm looking to get into Video editing (lotsa HDD space!!).
As you can see, Pro/E is the package most determining my choice in graphics
card, but I'm still looking forward to trying Doom3 on a new cutting-edge
system as well! One more thing to consider is that I'm intending to build
this system around the AMD Athlon64 chip, so if anyone has experience
running Pro/e on that mfg. system, let me know how it works.
Thanks in advance, guys,
ATI has had more compatibility problems than any other card vendor..period.
Especially in the last five years or so. ATI has always written crappy
drivers, and they've been slow to fix them. The Radeon based cards are
nothing but problems for professional OpenGL apps.. I've heard some die hard
ATI fans say they work fine, but upon asking them detailed questions, I find
out that they have all the typical problems (sketches disappearing, random
artifacts). They've just learned to live with it. The FireGL series seems to
have improved though. You don't hear as many stories about BSOD crashes as
you used to. At least not with the newer stuff.
Nvidia had problems early on, (5 or 6 years ago). Everything from Quadro 2
and up has been rock solid. The trick is using the right driver. Newer isn't
always (almost never) better.
3D labs, (which I "used" to use exclusively) dropped the technology ball and
couldn't compete with Nvidia. They went broke trying and got bought by
Creative labs. Their new line of VP based cards have been very dissapointing
both from the performance, and stability sides. The "big" Wildcat's are a
completely different animal, and priced out of range for most.
Now, I use nothing but Nvidia, PNY 980XGL's, FX1000's and 1100's. The real
world performance (not published specs.. that's manipulated B.S.) is better
than the competition.
I spend "ZERO" time troubleshooting graphics related problems.
PTC reccomends driver version 56.56 (Win2000/XP) for that card. It can be
Programming for OpenGL is complicated. Each CAD vendor appraches it a little
differently. The same card for Solidworks uses 53.03. I've never had a card
(from any manufacturer) work right with the supplied drivers.
Also, make sure you go to the display settings "advanced" and set the OpenGL
custom application to Pro Engineer.
So you would advise against a Wildcat card? I can get a Wildcat VP880
which has 256MB with a 256-bit interface for about $325. If I try to
get an NVidia Quadro FX 1100, that will cost me twice as much, and it
only has 128MB with a 128-bit interface.
How is NVida so much better? How do you compare cards properly? I look
at memory, bandwidth, AGP, etc.
What's you advice for someone who can't spend more than $325?
The only Wildcat I'd reccommend are the big ones, not the VP's
The 3D Labs VP based cards are priced so attractivley because they can't
sell em. They have all kinds of performance and stability issues that make
them a pain in the ass.
I look at reliability, and performance based on the real world. Not a bunch
of marketing hype. I've tried these cards.
That's a tough question, all I can say is you'll get what you pay for. How
much is your time worth? If you crash to a BSOD four or five times a day, or
have to reboot every hour, how much is that costing your employer ??
Good reliable graphics are an important part of using tools like Pro-E. Back
in the early 90's it would cost you a minimum of $20,000 for a decent UNIX
box to run it. Having to spend five or six hundred for a decent graphics
card is nothing.
Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.