tlehnhaeuser Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 We have a client looking to upgrade their graphics cards. The below is the list. Can anyone provide feedback on any of these cards or a card feel is the "best" for IronCAD. thanks Tom 256MB nVidia Geforce 7300LE TurboCache [included in Price] 256MB ATI Radeon X1300 Pro [add $49.00] ATI Radeon X1300 128MB, DVI w/VGA adapter and TV-out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronKevin Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 They would better off with any of the Nvidia Quadro FX or ATI FireGL cards since they are designed for CAD. The cards listed above are designed mainly for gaming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janttila Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 They would better off with any of the Nvidia Quadro FX or ATI FireGL cards since they are designed for CAD. The cards listed above are designed mainly for gaming. 16668[/snapback] Can anyone tell me the difference, for 3dcad use. One machine has 1 Quadro fx card (4500) $2,458.99 and lets say we put 2 GeForce 8800GTX $569.99(x2) in one machine to compare with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Twining Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 Classically, "Gamer" cards (such as the nVidia 7xxx,8xxx series) are tuned to fill colors at very high rates, where CAD cards (such as the nVidia Quadro series) are tuned more to do 3D calculations (i.e. they can rotate complex 3d objects with "simple" coloring at a far superior rate). These features won't begin to show themselves until you reach "large model" classifications in IronCAD. Additionally, (and the latest that I have heard), IronCAD currently only uses the first 128M of video memory...further clouding the comparison. In reality, both the above options (the dual gamer card vs. the single super CAD card) will likely result in similar performance in IronCAD while working with anything other than a "large" file. So, to me at least, the rule of thumb is: Work on relatively simple parts (small machines, <1000 parts), get a relatively inexpensive video card (especially now when IronCAD can't use the full potential anyway). Work on complex & large assemblies (aircraft, automobiles, anything with a very large number of features & edges), fork out the $ for a "CAD" card. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Andersson Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 (edited) -with the addition that even if IC dont support more then 128MB MB, I dont know if that is for the framebuffer or/ and texture memory, IC can make use of the GPU´s power. Its not the MB that "turns" the geometry on the screen, its the GPU using Open GL. If you select a fast GPU card, then you will have 256, or 512MB or more shipped with it, you would still benefit fom the faster GPU. Edited January 10, 2007 by Robert Andersson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tlehnhaeuser Posted January 11, 2007 Author Share Posted January 11, 2007 Thanks for all the help tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cary OConnor Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 If you are following press releases, you may have noticed that IronCAD is looking to integrate a new real-time rendering engine. This will improve IronCADs performance significantly and the previous rules of thumb are no longer valid. http://developer.hoops3d.com/graphicscards...phicscards.html shows a link of tested cards on the Hoops platform (it doesn't show speed comparisons since it will differ slightly when integrated in IC). Anyway, the card does really depend on the models in the scene. Typically, large amounts of faceted date will need larger cards to support the rotation performance. This may not be as much of an issue with hoops if we enable features like the level of detail reduction and others. Cary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Per-Arne Almeflo Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 (edited) They would better off with any of the Nvidia Quadro FX or ATI FireGL cards since they are designed for CAD. The cards listed above are designed mainly for gaming. 16668[/snapback] Now, does IC 9.0 take advantage of any extended OpenGL functions in pro cards like the Nvidia Quadro series? We learned from Steven Velez, that IC up to 7.0 did not, and you Kevin confirmed that IC8 had the same graphics system as 7.0. Edit: Well Cary beat me while writing this, thanks. Will this mean that Pro CAD cards will be more useful, or does it mean that gaming cards will be all we need in the future? Edited January 11, 2007 by Per-Arne Almeflo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronKevin Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 We are planning a completely new OpenGL system in IronCAD 10.0, I don't have any details yet but it will have many advantages over the current system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janttila Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 Any updates regarding cores, ram and multiple processors? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronKevin Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 I don't have any more specific information at this time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkern Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 I am the customer Tom was speaking of in the original post. I just wanted to run a few more video cards by you guys that seem to be more along the correct requirements then the ones originally listed. 512 MB PCIex16 nVidia Quadro FX4500 256 MB PCIex16 nVidia Quadro FX3500 256 MB PCIex16 nVidia Quadro FX3450 256 MB PCIex16 ATI FireGL V7200 128 MB PCIex16 nVidia Quadro FX550 128 MB PCIex16 ATI FireGL V3400 128 MB PCIex16 nVidia Quadro NVS285 Of course the higher the more expensive, and only have a certain amount of $ to spend being in a school district. Just wanted to get some recommendations, top 3 or so. All this help is very appreciated. Thanks again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Twining Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 128 MB PCIex16 nVidia Quadro FX550 I currently run this card, and it works just fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjones Posted January 24, 2007 Share Posted January 24, 2007 I'm using a 256Mb NVidia FX3000 and it has very good resolution and works very well with rotating assemblies etc. I have just ordered a new workstation with a 512Mb Nvidia FX4500 so I will let you know if there is any appreciable difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tlehnhaeuser Posted January 24, 2007 Author Share Posted January 24, 2007 I would like to add that Brians School is using IronCAD for Architectual design and more complex product design as well. Their files have the potential to become very large assemblies. So any input relating to that is well, would be greatly appreciated. thanks forum gurus! Tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.