Experiences with Quadro 2000?

[Hirazi Blue]

As I mentioned in another thread I am about to embark on a new "let's buy a new computer" adventure and I have more or less decided to buy one with a nVidia Quadro 2000 graphics card. Unless someone comes up with compelling reasons not to. So I am asking you all, if someone has any experience with using the Quadro 2000 with Softimage and if it is useable for that primary task.

Please note: This is not meant as a Quadro versus Geforce thread (this is), this is only to ascertain if the Quadro 2000 is any good for working with Softimage (my current card is an old Quadro FX 3700 BTW).

[origin]

Would be cool to see some real life benchmarks (not specview crap) in maya/softimage (opengl...) with quadro vs gtx 2xx (last iteration of nvidia cards that didn't have opengl raped)

[Hirazi Blue]

Please note: This is not meant as a Quadro versus Geforce thread (this is), this is only to ascertain if the Quadro 2000 is any good for working with Softimage (my current card is an old Quadro FX 3700 BTW).

@origin - while I agree that would be valuable info in general, I think such a wish belongs more in the other thread. I am not even really looking for benchmark kind of info, more for "yes it works/no it doesn't" & "these are the pitfalls" kind of information...
;)

[Nizar]

I find it a bit expensive. Why do you want it?
I don't find any review debate or opinion about it (refered to XSI)

[Hirazi Blue]

Well my reasons are feeble/debatable, but I wanted a Quadro I could afford, that apparently - from the one or two reviews I read - easily outshines the ancient Quadro FX 3700 I have "on board" ATM and even seems to do better that the slightly less ancient Quadro FX 3800. The other new Quadro 4000 already is too expensive for me. And from what I hear some gamer cards aren't usable for this kind of work anymore, due to opengl driver issues (but I could be mistaken!). So that would leave the Quadro 2000. Unless someone tells me: no, it explodes whenever you open a Render Tree View (or something similar)...
In which case I probably will be looking for a new hobby!

[Nizar]

The other new Quadro 4000 already is too expensive for me.

It is expensive for everyone (Nvidia CEO has installed a Radeon 6800 in his workstation

I think it work well, no doubt about, but why don't consider an ATI firegl? It seems have more raw power then quadro series

[Hirazi Blue]

I always was under the (probably mistaken/perhaps outdated) impression, Softimage and the ATI cards never really played well together. If this is wrong (as I am not a hardware wizard, this might very well be so), I must obviously review my options anew...

[Nizar]

I don't want convince you to take a different decision, but don't seems real, ATI and XSI has a great story together:
http://www.amd.com/uk/products/workstat ... image.aspx

And here you can read a discussion about:

http://forums.cgarchitect.com/62486-quadro-4000-vs-firepro-v7800.html

V7800 can be compared to quadro 4000 and perform (in 3dsm) better then quadro (v7800 cost about 550 € some quadro 2000 price)
If you need cuda ok, there is no story and buy a Quadro. In any case, GPU rendering like Machstudio seems performing better on ATI side.

[Hirazi Blue]

Thanks for the suggestion. In the past (but over a long period of time, I must add) I have read a lot of posts on the different forums about problems with ATI drivers. This made me conclude (wrongly, obviously) that this would always be the case... Now I will to have a slight rethink... Thanks for confusing me even more...

The only real reason for CUDA ATM, as we all know what didn't happen in that respect with Softimage, would be 3DCoat. Hmmm, I must think about it...

Meanwhile: Quadro 2000 experiences are obviously still welcome...

[Nizar]

I think standard in a near future is not cuda.
In any case, I ever had a Nvidia card and this cards doing the work without issue.

And agree with you, old ATI driver was a nightmare (especially if you use Linux), now driver work better, and I think they are usually good like nvidia one.
Now ATI/AMD has a certfied driver for every application:
http://support.amd.com/us/gpudownload/f ... ro%20V7800

If in a future the trend will be the some, I think I will buy an ATI (difference in price is too enormous and ATI GPU power is really better (on paper). The only cons, for me, is Mental Image now Nvidia property.

About Quadro 2000 test on XSI I find nothing, I think you will be the first one who test it and share result

[Chris_TC]

The only real reason for CUDA ATM

I know you didn't want any comparisons in this thread. But it should be stressed how large the discrepancy is: a GTX 580 (cheaper than Quadro 2000) has 512 CUDA cores, a Quadro 2000 has 192. The Quadro has less RAM, and in terms of raw power (frame rates in viewport) they're probably not even in the same ballpark. The Quadro is way outmatched.

[Hirazi Blue]

Yes, but weren't the drivers for the Geforce 400 and 500 series crippled where opengl applications like Softimage are concerned? (See, for instance, this thread in the Mailing List.)

And the CUDA stuff isn't extremely important. Even in 3DCoat CUDA is mostly used for Voxel sculpting AFAIK and I have already given up on Voxel sculpting, using 3D Coat only for the original task I bought it for, painting/texturing models... I must still test how well the non-CUDA 3DCoat version works when doing these tasks only...

And I should probably wait for the mythical "CUDA acceleration of PhysX RBD"...

[Biped Guide]

Wow, what a scary thread. I can't afford to buy a Quadro for each of my machines.
I'm glad I bought a GTX 460. Unless I'm reading it wrong, the alleged "crippling" only applies to the 480's and up.
My 460 does fine with Softimage and Maya and Mudbox, btw, just as good as my GTX 285 did, except the the 460 has twice as much vram.

I know I sort of went off topic here, but I just wanted to reply to the above about the 400 and 500 series being crippled.
If it's true though, I doubt Nvidia will be able to get away with it for long. Many studios (mine included) simply cannot afford to slap a $3000.00+ video card in every computer, especially with the economy the way it is at this time. They could seriously be screwing themselves if they are in fact doing this intentionally. I (and many others) WILL switch my allegiance if need be.