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

 

The Quadro 500 FX I love and is cheaper than those 2 cards,

Regards,
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

 

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

 

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

 

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 )

http://www.3dchips.net/content/review.php?id=63

Cheers!
Dan

 

Dan:
Try the Soft Quaddro patch for Gforce 4 cards.

It's free and really does make a difference.
no more window limitations.

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