Nvidia quadro FX 1000 or 2000 experience?

Not that money is burning a hole in my pocket... but I am thinking of
upgrading my graphics card from an Nvidia Ti4600 to one of the FX series. I
am thinking of the FX1000 or FX2000. I have not managed to find many useful
reviews to help answer this question. Most show that the FX2000 is very
good, but the question is, does it really have a significant advantage that
I will see and feel over the FX1000 when using SW2004?
My main reason for thinking about this upgrade is that I do suffer from the
multiple window slowdown that the ti4600 has (but not the XGL or FX series).
It really has been a good card, but I am sure that the FX will make the
think that is isn't....
So anyone out there using these cards care to give a little feedback and
experience?
Also, I do not know enough about PC hardware and the AGP slots to know if
there is any issue, or drastic performance hit, if I put an AGP 8x card in a
4x slot?
Thanks!
Dan
Reply to
daniel
Loading thread data ...
The Quadro 500 FX I love and is cheaper than those 2 cards,
Regards, Scott
Reply to
Scott
But why? (not the cheaper part, I understand that...LOL) Where do you see the performance or what makes you happy about it? Are you using realview on 2004? Is that actually useful or do you feel a performance hit?
What I also wonder is if the higher end cards (FX1000 + 20000) will only show a benefit if one is doing animations in maya, xsi or other animation modeling packages?
??? dan
Scott wrote on 11.9.2003 6:10
Reply to
daniel
Dan,
I think it will depend on the work you do. If you have large assemblies, or even smaller but complex assemblies, get the most you can afford. On the other hand, if you do a lot of parts but not much with large assemblies, save your $$ and go with the cheaper one.
I have the FX2000 and think it is great but havent tried the other cards so I dont have a direct comparison.
Todd
Reply to
Todd
IM WITH SCOTT
the fx 500 will do you fine right up to the 980xgl
the fx 2000 and 1000 are great cards we use em here and to be honest you wont see much of an improvement in solidworks unless youre hammering the real view
we use maya here also and this is where you will see a major performance difference the card supports cg and polygons like no other which is what maya is all about, as they havent included facilities for writing cg shaders and the likes in solidworks this is realview(though you can do it)you can in maya and this is where it comes into its own high end rendering and animation you wont need an fx2 or fx1 buy the cheaper card its money well spent
Reply to
mikemcdermid
Thanks everyone!
I do use StudioTools and Maya a little bit, so that is interesting to me...
I was sent a link to a great review that I will pass along since I do not recall seeing this link before. It reviews 14 (if I remember right...) high end cards and a couple gaming cards. Very useful read, and very interesting results. What is really great is that it includes benchmarks for Maya 4.5, 5, 3DS max, Inventor and SolidWorks. You can really see the difference (or lack of) between the different application types (CAD vs DCC). Also interesting is the difference with some cards with the Athlon vs Xeon chips. Anyway, have a look!
Of course... These are benchmarks... Not real world sweat and tears :-))
formatting link
Cheers! Dan
Reply to
daniel
Dan: Try the Soft Quaddro patch for Gforce 4 cards.
It's free and really does make a difference. no more window limitations.
Colazi
Reply to
Colazi
I did try this once, and did manage to get it to see the Ti4600 as a Quadro, but it would crash SW soon as I tried to do anything like rotate the model. So I reverted. I did see some slightly different instructions that I will try again sometime, but it can kill a day doing these things....
Thanks!
Colazi wrote on 12.9.2003 5:06
Reply to
daniel

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.