-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Jeff Mowry Mar 29, 2011 5:30 PM (in response to Charles Culp)Charles, from my recent experience (last three years) I'd also confirm what your numbers show--that you can find better value with ATI. Their latest offerings of the FirePro line is a great value (and this is coming from somone who always used Quadro cards previously).
The FirePro v4800 I've got (that I'm trying to sell) seemed to even handle RealView just fine, and that was in an assembly with complex, swoopy parts (though only ~50 or so parts). I haven't tested it with larger assemblies. But it certainly rivaled my older FireGL V5600, considered "mid-range", and may have even bettered it. Quite a cost difference between the two, and, according to your stats, quite a difference in value between nVidia and ATI. I wonder if this has anything to do with AMD's purchase of ATI from a couple years ago? Seems to be working for them.
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Devon Sowell Mar 29, 2011 6:33 PM (in response to Jeff Mowry)Very informative, thanks Charles.
Devon
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Greg Hynd Mar 30, 2011 3:34 AM (in response to Devon Sowell)Thanks Charles.
-
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Jeff Mowry Apr 1, 2011 5:05 PM (in response to Jeff Mowry)SOLD! Whatever it's worth the FirePro is now gone. Thanks!
-
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Richard Bremmer Jan 24, 2012 8:39 AM (in response to Charles Culp)There is a comparison of videocards made by HP as well. FirePro, Quadro FX and Quadro cards are mentioned. As I am not sure if I am allowed to post the pdf please read below how to find that comparison. I believe a HP machine is neccesary to be able to install the "HP Performance Advisor".
Download and install the HP Performance Advisor from HP http://h20331.www2.hp.com/Hpsub/cache/285686-0-0-225-121.html. It has a button on the top right hand side, just below the "close this window" button. This button will bring you to the "White Paper Index" section, this section contains a pdf named "Tips For Performance SolidWorks 2010". The document has been updated 20th january 2011.
They seem to use the punchholder to test.
Edit1 24-01-12:
The document has been updated 27th of October 2011 to include the new 9 series from ATI. nVidia used to be better when compared to the 8 series ATI, but with the "new" 9 series, ATI takes the lead again. The V4900 is equal to the Quadro 4000 for SW performance according to the HP tests.
This is not true for notebooks however.
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Alin Vargatu Jun 24, 2011 9:18 AM (in response to Charles Culp)Thanks Charles!
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Josh Mings Jun 24, 2011 9:47 AM (in response to Charles Culp)Thank Charles,I've been using Passmark's software on some tests. The ATI 4800 and Quadro 2000, 3800 and 5000m. My opinion is that NVIDIA's mid-range has gone down in performance. The Quadro 2000 is alright for most work, at least not getting black screens, like on the 1800 and previous, but on our last upgrade, we went with the QuadroFX 3800 and have had great results.
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Sammy Redshaw Jun 27, 2011 5:12 AM (in response to Josh Mings)my experence is that the ati fire gl cards are, although they are good at bench marks is that the catalyst driver is rubbish and open gl handling is nowhere near as good as the nVidia range.
I suspect this because the ati cards are modified game cards where as, nVidia game cards are de rated quadro cards.
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Kevin De Smet Jan 12, 2012 11:31 AM (in response to Sammy Redshaw)Where did you get that last statement? I mean I ain't saying it's false, I'm just curious if you have any further references to back that up.
-
-
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Adam Harte-Maxwell Jun 28, 2011 11:08 AM (in response to Charles Culp)Thanks for the very informative post.
I've always leaned more towards NVidia products as their drivers have always seemed to be less problematic than ATI's, however in light of NVidia's most recent offerings and problems, this no longer seems to be the case. However, I just recently upgraded from a DELL M65 to a M4600 with the Quadro 1000M, and it's performing very well with no issues running SW2011 SP4 using the latest driver supplied by Dell. Installing SW2012 Beta 1 today...
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Mark Tafelski Jun 28, 2011 11:20 AM (in response to Adam Harte-Maxwell)I recently switched (temporarily) from a nVidia Quadro FX1800 to an ATI FirePro V5800. I did not find the increase in performance that I was hoping to see. I also experienced graphics issues (areas of the screen not refreshing and artifacts around my cursor). I'm running SW 2011 SP4.0 and believe that I was running the closest driver that I could find to the SW approved/recommended driver.
I have since switched back to the Quadro FX1800 and the FirePro V5800 has been put into the conference room computer instead of my workstation.
Mark
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Charles Culp Jun 28, 2011 11:27 AM (in response to Mark Tafelski)Mark,
What kind of models do you work with? How was your FX1800 performing poorly, so you wanted to upgrade? What was your v5800 not doing, that you thought it would?
The issues you were having with the ATI sound like what I had with my v4800 prior to using the approved drivers. I wonder if there is a solution out there for you...
Thanks for the response.
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Mark Tafelski Jun 29, 2011 6:07 AM (in response to Charles Culp)Running SW 2011 SP4 on Windows 7 64 bit. I'm using two flat panels (primary 1920 x 1200, secondary 1920 x 1080). Usually run SW on primary and other misc. applications on the secondary. Occassionaly I run a second window of SW on the second display to pull up a project for reference. We do machine design and a typical assembly would be 150 to 200 parts. For the most part I am happy with the FX1800, but was configuring some new workstations for "non-SW" use and we ordered the ATI V5800's instead of the FX1800 or FX2000 based on the better price/performance comparison.
As far as driversfor the ATI V5800 I was running version 8.723 - listed as "recommended" on the SW web site.
I wasn't having an issues with the FX1800, I was just thinking I would get better performance from the V5800 due to the additional memory and better benchmark scores.
Other system specs in case the matter: HP Z600 - 12 Gig of Ram - Xeon X5670 processor
I guess that we will have to re-evaluate again before we purchase more workstations or graphics cards.
Mark
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Charles Culp Jun 28, 2011 12:03 PM (in response to Mark Tafelski)Thanks for the information, Mark.
I asked about what you expected for performace because often people have an expectation for the video cards that doesn't match their function. What I mean, is that a faster video card will:
- Allow for smoother rotations, expecially when components are transparent, edges on, etc.
- Allow for higher quality models (Tools>Options>Document Properties>Image Quality>Shaded and draft quality resolution)
- Allow for quicker switching (CTRL-TAB) between SolidWorks and other windows
- Allow for more visual effects like shadows, Real View, Ambient Occlusion, Advanced Appearances, etc.
It will not effect rebuild times, part loading times, drawing view regeneration, which are all controlled by the CPU.
It sounds like you are using the correct video driver, so I can't actually suggest anything to help you out, but I do appreciate you posting your experience.
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Sammy Redshaw Jun 28, 2011 12:17 PM (in response to Mark Tafelski)Never ever go with benchmark scores!!!! You would be suprised what chip manufactures can do to make the benchmark look good, but in the real world they perform awful. Best thing to do is to speak to heavy cad users they will tell you what is good and bad. I know from experiance (I had an fx v5700 512mb for a year) that the ati cards the drivers are not reknowned for stablity and they do not handle opengl as well as quadros. Also the best thing about the quadro drivers is you select what cad application you are using and it will configure the card to the optimal settings.
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Charles Culp Jun 28, 2011 12:26 PM (in response to Sammy Redshaw)Sammy,
Yeah, I very much understand your point. The benchmark above only tells part of a much larger story. Stability is probably more important that a little bit faster frame rate.
Unfortunatly, my last video card was an nVidia, and it was horrid. I had problems from the day I got it, and then more problems later. The whole thing was a nightmare. You can just browse the forums from postings today showing how many people are having problems with their nVidia Quadro 2000 and 4000. (Both posted today: https://forum.solidworks.com/thread/44100?tstart=0 https://forum.solidworks.com/thread/25984?tstart=0)
So, is nVidia better than ATI? Who knows. They both, apparently, don't have a handle on good drivers for all systems. So thats what this discussion board is about. I think most people who read this thread count as "heavy cad users," so we are the people you are talking about.
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Sammy Redshaw Jun 29, 2011 4:29 AM (in response to Charles Culp)Charles
Not to argue with you but the whole microsoft graphic API has been restructured for windows vista/win7, This why there are alot of driver issues to be resolved. Effectivly the whole knowleged base of workarounds for the driver programing has to be relearnt.
Similar thing happened with X windows , which macosX BSD linux and unix use, it look a while to sort out for both the hardware and software developers.
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Nick Cruz Aug 1, 2011 3:50 PM (in response to Charles Culp)So, where are we at today with this? Im about to pull the trigger on a video card to go with my Alienware setup. The only piece of the puzzle that Alienware didnt make in regards to have a workstation vs a gaming rig is the video card. So, I have about 300 to play with and Im looking at either the FX1800 or the V5800. I currently work with large machines (1000+ parts), and I have been getting more involved with renderings, which is why I upgraded from the T5500 to the Alienware.
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Charles Culp Aug 1, 2011 3:54 PM (in response to Nick Cruz)Neither company has updated anything for their desktop lineup since I originally posted this; so my opinion still stands. Check actual street prices for the nVidia options, I have seen some serious rebates and tie-ins recently.
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Nick Cruz Aug 1, 2011 6:23 PM (in response to Charles Culp)At 160 bucks the V4800 is hard to pass up. I think, if Im going to spend some money Id get the Quadro 2000 because its newer and will have a longer support life vs FX1800 (close in price). Ive always been a Quadro buyer since 99. Man, tough call!
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Charles Culp Jan 6, 2012 4:49 PM (in response to Charles Culp)Time for an update. Here is new data from January 2012.
* Note that the v4900 Passmark score is estimated. Since it is the clear winner, keep in mind that this is not very accurate.
The AMD FirePro v4900,
for whatever reason, does not have a Passmark benchmark score. That is too bad, because based on what I have read, it will be a clear winner in the price/performance ratio for SolidWorks graphics cards. Sometime between inital release, and when I checked today, AMD reduced the price on the vx900 series cards. They are now a pretty good deal, and probably the best value you can find.
So it appears that the $165 v4900 is probably the relative same speed as the $780 Quadro 4000. Ouch.
So, how did I calculate the performance of the v4900? Want to criticize my calculation? Sure, I got it from here: http://jonpeddie.com/reviews/comments/benchmarking-the-firepro-v7900-v5900-and-v4900-the-v4900-shined-on-specapc-/
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Sammy Redshaw Jan 9, 2012 4:42 AM (in response to Charles Culp)How stable are the drivers? I would rather pay for for stable drivers and good reliablity than all out performance.
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Charles Culp Jan 9, 2012 9:34 AM (in response to Sammy Redshaw)That's a tough call. I see more postings to the forums about nVidia cards than I do AMD cards. Then again, they do still have a larger market share.
For anecdotal evidence, I have an ATI FirePro v4800 and have no issues.
-
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Thyagarajan C M Jan 12, 2012 6:05 AM (in response to Charles Culp)Thanks for the statistics data..
-
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
John Samson Jan 12, 2012 6:12 AM (in response to Charles Culp)Passmark is totally irrelevant for evaluating a CAD card since they lump CAD and gaming together and is geared towards testing gaming performance. Besides, they only test DirectX and not OpenGL which is what Solidworks uses. Benchmarks related to Solidworks performance should be Specviewperf and Solidworks Performance Test.
The Firepro v4900 looks interesting, and I'm considering buying that one over Quadro 2000. However, by looking at the benchmarks we see:
Quadro 2000
Passmark: 1109
Specviewperf 11 (sw02): 32-43 fps (several sources)
Solidworks Performance Test (graphics) (http://www.solidworks.com/sw/support/shareyourscore.htm)
2011: 35-40 (average)
2012: 65-75 (average)
Firepro v4900
Passmark: 1208 (v4800, no v4900)
Specviewperf 11 (sw02): 42 fps (http://jonpeddie.com/reviews/comments/benchmarking-the-firepro-v7900-v5900-and-v4900-the-v4900-shined-on-specapc-/)
Solidworks Performance Test (graphics) (http://www.solidworks.com/sw/support/shareyourscore.htm)
2011: 45 (average for v4800, no data for v4900)
2012: 110 (average for 3 samples of v4900)
2012: 100 (average for v4800)
For reference, my current Geforce 8800GT gaming card gets these figures
Passmark: 997
Specviewperf 11 (sw02): 10.43 fps
Solidworks Performance Test (graphics)
2012:
138.3 (@3.0Ghz)
112.3 (@3.7Ghz overclocked. Why does overclocing the CPU give better graphics performance?)
In conclusion, the v4900 is substantially worse than the Quadro 2000 for Solidworks 2012 when looking at the Solidworks Performance Test. In fact, the v4900 gives no performance improvement over my 8800GT gaming card which is 4 years old!
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Charles Culp Jan 12, 2012 10:04 AM (in response to John Samson)I'll agree with the Specviewperf test, although the fact that they use SolidWorks 2003 for that really bothers me. The changes in SolidWorks '08+ are significant for how it handles graphics.
I have little faith in the SolidWorks benchmark. It has produced too many results that are known to be false. I will have to see a review of it against known performances before it will mean anything to me.
-
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Samuel Barnum May 29, 2012 9:52 AM (in response to Charles Culp)I'm going to suggest that what one really needs to do is take a look at the realtime performance of a graphics card while using SW. Use a utility like GPUZ to see what your GPU and Memory usage are while working in SW.
I work with both small parts and very very large assemblies. Usually I have Realview off and most performance related parameters set to lower detail (faster). Small simple parts will not push the GPU past 30ish % usage, Larger more complicated parts can push it up to 90% GPU usage. Then something interesting happens, as the parts get more complex, and assemblies get just moderately complex, the GPU usage decreases as the complexity increases. Finally when I have a multi-thousand part assembly, with multi gigabyte memory usage, the GPU usage doesn't even clear 5%. This suggests that the CPU is really the limiting factor since the CPU is running at 100% Max clock rate/CPU usage (for the SW thread) in all of these cases, except maybe for the small simple part.
Also if you are interested, you can measure your Realtime FPS in the SW View-Port with a utility like FRAPS.
GPUZ
http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/
Fraps
http://www.fraps.com/download.php
My system Specs:
ASUS P6TS WS
Xeon W3680 (6 core) OC to 4.14 Ghz
24 GB Ram
OCZ Vertex 3
Quadro 1800
Win7 X64 Sp1
SW 2012 Sp1
SpaceExplorer
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Anna Wood Jan 12, 2012 2:06 PM (in response to Samuel Barnum)To add to what Samuel says I have seen no real difference in performance when doing a Spin500Mouse test on my models with the Quadro 600, 2000, 4000 or 5000. The Spin500Mouse test is on Josh Mings blog, bottom of the page from the following link.
http://solidsmack.com/cad-design-news/the-hp-elitebook-8740w-nvidia-quadro-3d-graphics-slam-hp_pc/
I have tested this on small models and models that took 20 gigs of RAM and a half hour to load off of SSD drives. (5 gigs of data).
It is interesting to watch the GPUZ numbers as it is running. I need to try out the Fraps program on my models.
I have come to the conclusion that video card performance with SolidWorks is very fuzzy to determine. The CPU is much more a driving factor. I think the vast majority of users will do fine with just a lower range video card. Even at the lower end the video card these days are very powerful.
FWIW,
Anna
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Charles Culp Jan 12, 2012 2:13 PM (in response to Anna Wood)What about "simple" parts with all the toys turned on, including transparency for all components...
I will consider all that.
And still, from your (Samuel's) results above, it still sounds like all the most expensive cards are a waste. Anyway, I have some engineering to do!
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Anna Wood Jan 12, 2012 2:31 PM (in response to Charles Culp)I have tested it every which way from simple to complex, RealView, No ReaView, Transparency, No Transparency, Shadows, No Shadows. Lots of combinations trying to see a difference between the cards. Not seeing it.
Cheers,
Anna
-
-
-
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
John Sanchez Feb 6, 2012 7:32 AM (in response to Charles Culp)Hey Charles and Anna,
I am working with 100-200 part assemblies, nothing real large. When I go to edit a part in the assembly, it is BRUTALLY slow and as far as I'm concerned not usuable. Which is frustrating because I enjoy using this feature in SolidWorks. What do you recommend for me. I'm using a NVIDIA FX 580 and thought it was possibly the card so i put in a RADEON 6970 which is a nice card but apparently not for SolidWorks because I couldn't find a certified driver... Anyway, some input would be apprecaited. Thank-you
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Anna Wood Feb 6, 2012 10:26 AM (in response to John Sanchez)John,
Your system is brutally slow doing what?
Anna
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
John Sanchez Feb 6, 2012 10:27 AM (in response to Anna Wood)When editing a part inside of an assembly. The assembly is in the 150 part range.
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Charles Culp Feb 6, 2012 10:29 AM (in response to John Sanchez)Yes, but what is slow when you do this? Rotating the model is slow? Is bringing up the FeatureManager slow? Does it take a long time for it to generate new features? Does it take a long time to save? Does it take a long time to rebuild after changes to the model?
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
John Sanchez Feb 6, 2012 10:35 AM (in response to Charles Culp)When editing a part in an assembly, rotating the model seems like a 1/2 a frame a second ( if that is possible, its bad). Also, when editing a part in an assembly line selection becomes very clunky. Feature Manager seems to respond okay.
Rebuilds aren't lightening fast, but their acceptable. I was hoping to get better results on rebuilds with the AMD FX but overall not impressed. Saving to a network drive, therefore speed there suffers slightly
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Anna Wood Feb 6, 2012 10:40 AM (in response to John Sanchez)The slow graphics are from the gaming card. Also your CPU plays a big part in the graphics performance of SolidWorks.
So you are doubly cursed with the AMD CPU in your system. It has a lot of cores but is not as fast as a Core i7.
Cheers,
Anna
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
John Sanchez Feb 6, 2012 10:45 AM (in response to Anna Wood)I was hoping you wouldn't say that.
I swapped the NVIDIA FX 580 back in, i figured the gaming card (considering it's mainly a Direct X GPU) wasn't ideal..
The AMD FX was a result of our IT guy getting excited from all the AMD hype on the Bulldozer chips. I was lobbying for the I7 but he submits the REQs. Bummer.... thanks Anna
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Charles Culp Feb 6, 2012 10:42 AM (in response to John Sanchez)With only 100-200 parts, I would think an FX580 should be sufficient, but apparently not. It sounds like you need more video memory. I'm still going to just suggest the AMD v4900, because I really think that 1GB should be enough ($160). The v5900 has 2 GB of video memory, and will be a guaranteed winner for you, they seem to be selling for $380.
Are any of your parts really complex? Does turning of edges help (so go to shaded view without edges)? That can be a quick-fix for now (or forever). That and I would stick with the FX580, that Radeon card is just going to be difficult.
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
John Sanchez Feb 6, 2012 10:52 AM (in response to Charles Culp)Thanks Charles, all good advice.
I'll try hiding edges and see if that helps. The assembly is made up of some 8020 extrusion which is kind of a line nightmare.
What is the story with gaming cards performing so poorly in SolidWorks. I even soft modded the driver so that SolidWorks would think that the Radeon was a FirePro (to unlock real view) and it still acted kind of clunky. Where else will performance suffer with the Radeon card in SW? curiosity mainly.....
and thank-you again for the recommendations. I'll note the cards you suggested.
P.S. What's your input on the FX chip? Like Anna was mentioning..
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Charles Culp Feb 6, 2012 11:07 AM (in response to John Sanchez)Even in rendering, it is not very good:
and for regular modeling, the closest chart will probably be this:
So, not so good. Is it a good value? Well, no, because the Core i7-2600K is pretty reasonable already, and the i5-2500K is cheaper than the AMD.
AMD needs a pretty serious contender before they can really compete with Intel on CAD and premium systems, and this isn't it.
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
John White Feb 10, 2012 10:53 AM (in response to Charles Culp)I have a question. I am running sw 2012, win 7 64 bit with an ATI firepro V7800. I also am using an old monitor, a SOYO Topaz s, which I don't even think they make anymore. Is it true that I could be crashing because my monitor can' t "keep up" with what my computer is doing?
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Charles Culp Feb 10, 2012 11:40 AM (in response to John White)Nope. Your monitor should have no effect on the performance and stability of your system.
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
John White Feb 10, 2012 12:08 PM (in response to Charles Culp)So you could have a real crappy monitor and a great computer and a large assembly model would show up fine, just drag a little. Ok. Bummer, I was hoping this was the problem with me getting errors.
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Charles Culp Feb 10, 2012 12:39 PM (in response to John White)You might notice slight ghosting because of a cheap monitor, but stuttering and slow movements are completely due to the video card performance.
Ghosting:
Slow movement from a "gamer" card (the one on the left):
Stuttering video (starting at 1:18):
-
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Abhinandan Singh May 29, 2012 5:22 AM (in response to Charles Culp)Hi
i am having the same problem with my solid works, i am currently working on very large assemblies 600 or 700 assemblies at a time then i have to merge some assemblies together and some time when i tried to put some more parts in my assemblies then every thing turn into white and after that i can't work on that assembly any more. its very slow and when i rotate the image its graphics is very bad.
i am using windows 7x64, intel core i5 750@ 2.67, 4 G ram, AMD Radeon HD6700 series. do i need to upgrade my drivers??
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Ajay Dhiman May 29, 2012 5:56 AM (in response to Abhinandan Singh)Hi Abhinandan ,
Which Workstation you are using Right Now?
As you have written that your assembly structure is more than 700 assemblies than i think 4GB RAM would be not enough for your Working.
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Abhinandan Singh May 29, 2012 8:45 AM (in response to Ajay Dhiman)i am using 2012 solid works.
-
-
Re: ATI FirePro vs nVidia Quadro
Kelvin Lamport May 29, 2012 10:55 AM (in response to Abhinandan Singh)Abhinandan Singh wrote:
Hi
i am having the same problem with my solid works, i am currently working on very large assemblies 600 or 700 assemblies at a time then i have to merge some assemblies together and some time when i tried to put some more parts in my assemblies then every thing turn into white and after that i can't work on that assembly any more. its very slow and when i rotate the image its graphics is very bad.
i am using windows 7x64, intel core i5 750@ 2.67, 4 G ram, AMD Radeon HD6700 series. do i need to upgrade my drivers??
No, you need to get a workstation grade video card. The Radeons are gaming cards, and are not suitable for SolidWorks.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-



