SLI config w/ 2 X1.5GB PCIe x16 nVidia Quadro FX5600 cards, Dell

We just got out new dells and they are configured with ""SLI config w/
2 X1.5GB PCIe x16 nVidia Quadro FX5600 cards in graphic riser "" Does
anyone know if this benefits SW08? I use two monitors and not even
sure how to manage the cards, can I just plug 4 monitors in and they
will work? (I currently only have two plugged into one card) Plugging
one monitor in one card and another into the other card doesn't work.
Anyone have some more info on using dual/two fx5600 cards together?
Thanks, btw, the properties on the graphics only show a 5600 card is
installed, so I am not sure how you manage both cards installed. I
can't wait to test it out though with some rather large assemblies. I
have my single card quadro 3400 computer sitting next to this new one.

 

If SLI is enabled, both cards are linked together by a special direct
link and their power is combined to generate each screen frame. Think
of it as 1 card drawing the top half of the screen, and the other one
the bottom half. As a result, your system looks to have only one card,
and you can connect only 2 monitors.

If you disable SLI, you'll have 2 cards in your system, and you'll be
able to connect 4 monitors, but the frame rate won't be doubled.

Check GPUCapsViewer at http://www.ozone3d.net/gpu_caps_viewer/index.php?lang=2
It's a freeware that display a lot of information about graphic cards
and drivers, and it handles SLI : it will tell you if your SLI is
properly enabled. But I'm not sure it works 100% for Quadros.

 

Short answer, not really. Last I saw, SLI increased performance in
SolidWorks by maybe 1-2%, at most. If you don't want to run 3 or 4
monitors, you may as well have gone with one card and just taped $3000
to the side of the case.

 

I will check that out for sure, I don't know why my company didn't
check into this better, a small increase in performance would not be
worth the added cost since they bought a few of these workstations
with this config. Is there still a SolidWorks benchmark program out
there for 2008, I would be will to test it out with both cards on and
one card on to post the difference. Thanks.

 

Short answer, not really.  Last I saw, SLI increased performance in

i am the one that tested this in SWx 2007 and actually got a slower
time, 1-2%, running with SLI than i did with SLI disabled. you should
be able to do the same test. do a time benchmark on an assembly that
takes 3-5 minutes to load. do this at least 3 time with a reboot
between each benchmark. then disable (or enable) the SLI or pull (or
install) the second video card. do benchmarks again 3 times with
reboot between each one. average the benchmarks times and provide
results. you can also benchmark a cosmos, this gives great benchmark
results. another item to try is to disconnect network, sometimes this
affects results. iQ

 

i am the one that tested this in SWx 2007 and actually got a slower
time, 1-2%, running with SLI than i did with SLI disabled. you should
be able to do the same test. do a time benchmark on an assembly that
takes 3-5 minutes to load.

??????

It seems to me that video cards are for better frame rates, not shorter
loading time. I am very much surprised that you even find any time
difference between the 2 configs, with and without SLI. Maybe there is some
processor cycles that goes into SLI processing.


I imagine that there could be a difference (SLI better) rotating a large
assy, with some semi-transparent parts...



Now, if you plan on fragging some opponent parts...

 

I don't understand this either. Loading (hard disk and file system
dependent) and Cosmos (CPU dependent) should really not be effected by
the video card.

I think the best thing to do might be to download SPECviewperf
http://www.spec.org/gwpg/downloadindex.html and run the SolidWorks
test. I believe it's based on SW2007, but it should work fine as a
comparison tool.

 

Even a single FX5600 is not a great performer for SolidWorks. It's
optimized for games development and high frame rates, not for CAD. A
$2000 T3400 w/FX1700 graphics would be faster.

 

It would help to actually read the post. He's talking about the
Quadro FX5600 with 1.5GB of memory, not the old GeForce FX5600. It's
the highest performing workstation video card nVidia makes.

 

I'm talking about the Quadro FX5600. It's targetted to Digital
Content Creation (games development, special effects, etc.) where
high frame rates and Genlock features are more important than
accellerating CAD geometry. It performs well on synthetic benchmarks,
like Viewperf, and DCC applications, like 3D Studio and Maya, but NOT
on CAD application benchmarks, like SPECapc for SolidWorks.

The FX4600 is the top-end card for CAD, but the FX1700 and FX3700 are
based on newer technology and are slightly faster.

 

One thing to note is what type of ram is being used on the card. I
found that ram type can make the card faster or slower and it may be
that an new ram type on a older card design may make the graphics card
faster. when i was looking at this with SLI i found that the newest
card (Quadro 5500) had DDR2 memory and the step down card (Quadro
4500) had DDR3 memory, this was about a year ago now. it is just
something to keep in mind when looking at graphics cards. it is no
good to have the newest card available if it uses slower memory.
check through put and benchmarks, they should identify speed and card
specs should identify memory type. iQ

 

I am downloading the SPEC program now. I checked for SLI in the Nvidia
Control Panel and don't even have that option anywhere, I updated the
drivers, installed a bridge cable between the cards and checked in GPU
Caps program for SLI, it just says disabled, I don't know how to
enable it. I will try the test with two cards in and then one card in.
Also, one monitor on one card, one on another. I will post soon.
Nobody from dell knows what I am talking about when I called tech
support, I think when the computers were ordered, they were configured
for QUAD view, not SLI mode. You have both options when buying two
graphics cards. Don't know if I can fix that now without sending the
whole computer back. I will run these benchmarks now anyway to see
what diff. two are making.

 

Oops, guess I was the one guilty of not fully reading your post. My
apologies.

 

I am downloading the SPEC program now. I checked for SLI in the Nvidia

You might not be able to enable SLI because they don't have an SLI
bridge installed. It's a small connector that runs between the two
cards at the edges.

 

The results of the test are below, restart in between test, one card
in, test run 5 times, both card in test run 5 times.

Manufacturer : Dell Inc.
Model : Precision WorkStation T7400
OS : Microsoft Windows XP Professional
OS SP : Service Pack 2
CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5482 @ 3.20GHz
# of CPU : 8
Memory : 2813

WITH just ONE Quadro FX5600 with one monitor plugged in, average was:

Test Total = 213.61
Graphics = 87.39
CPU = 59.35
I/O = 66.87

WITH just ONE Quadro FX5600 with TWO monitorS plugged in, average was:

Test Total = 220.41
Graphics = 93.4
CPU = 58.47
I/O = 68.54


WITH TWO Quadro FX5600 with TWO monitorS plugged in ONE card, average
was (no SLI, second card enabled/plugged in):

Test Total = 213.86
Graphics = 91.94
CPU = 56.53
I/O = 65.39

WITH TWO Quadro FX5600, one monitor on one card, one monitor on
another, dual monitors, average was (no SLI, second card enabled/
plugged in):

Test Total = 247
Graphics = 125.29
CPU = 56.95
I/O = 64.76

FROM what I gather, one card with two monitors is my best for now,
having the other card makes no diff. and even slows performance when
using one monitor on each card verse both monitors on one card. WOW, I
didn't expect these results.

I would run a test with two cards bridged in SLI mode with one monitor
BUT when I bridge them together with the bridge cable, I never get any
SLI messages or options in the control panel. I have ran two Graphics
spcec programs and both say SLI Disabled, but compatible. I have no
idea how to turn it on. I have searched forums and google and gather
it maybe a motherboard swith for SLI or in fact the bridge may not be
needed because its done through the PCI-e bus, but that still doesn't
help me in enabling it. I have tried Dell drivers, Nvidia Drivers, but
no luck. I contacted about 5 different people from dell, no one knows
how to enable SLI or even what SLI is... Well, we might sell these
extra cards since Dell isn't in agreement on just sending the cards
back without sending the whole computer (3 of them). Time to talk to
the boss.

 

You have two FX5600 graphics cards and only 3GB of memory? That's
your problem. Windows has to map video memory even if it is onboard
the graphics card. Your two graphics cards are stealing all the
memory - and using up to 340W of power. SPECapc is a relatively
small dataset, so performance isn't impacted too much, but performance
with real world assemblies would be dismal.

Replace the two FX5600's with ONE FX1700 or FX3700 and your
performance should improve dramatically. A system like yours should
also be configured with 8GB or more RAM and 64-bit OS.

For reference, a single Core2 Duo e6850 (no longer top of the line)
with an FX1700 graphics card completes the SPECapc benchmark in 167
secs. A single Core2 Duo e8500 with an FX3700 does it 125 secs.
(You can't really compare these two scores and they are done under
diffrent testing conditions. You CAN compare scores of various
machines tested by Desktop Engineering and scores of different
machines submitted to www.spec.org.)

http://www.deskeng.com/articles/aaahdf.htm
http://www.spec.org/gwpg/apc.data/fujitsu-siemens/CELSIUS_M460/sw2007/result.html#scores

 

I have an older computer with a fx3450 QUADRO in it, i took it out and
put it in this new computer taking out the quadro 5600's. I updated
the driver, rebooted and ran the spec test again, here are the
results:

Manufacturer : Dell Inc.
Model : Precision WorkStation T7400
OS : Microsoft Windows XP Professional
OS SP : Service Pack 2
CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5482 @ 3.20GHz
# of CPU : 8
Memory : 3325
uadro FX 3450/4000 SDI/PCI/SSE2

Test Total = 208.17
Graphics = 94.84
CPU = 51.43
I/O = 61.9

Help me out here, are you saying I should update to 64 bit? How come I
am not seeing the speeds in those results from the links? Thanks for
the advice.

 

If you could spec me out the perfect SolidWorks Computer, what would
be in it and where from, this may help if we send this back under the
30 day warrenty.

 

You just improved your time quite a bit - with a mid-range graphics
card that is a couple of years old and NOT a top-rank card for
SolidWorks 2008. (The FX3450 gets a "gold ball" from SolidWorks
because it will support all 08 RealView features, but it runs an older
shader model and doesn't fully accellerate all the new features.) A
current generation FX1700 or FX3700 would be even faster. I bet you'd
see some improvement with just one FX5600 instead of two.

I can't say if I'd recommend 64-bit for you or not. 64-bit is
recommended ONLY for those working with large datasets. (Which
doesn't necessarily mean large assemblies. You can have a 10,000
piece assembly that puts little strain on SolidWorks and a single part
that will bring it to it's knees. It's the number and type of
features that matter.)

Same for optimal computer - it depends on what you do. If you just
run SolidWorks with limited rendering and/or analysis, then a single
Core2 Duo system is best (64-bit with 4GB+ RAM if your datasets are
large.) If you do a moderate-heavy amount of rendering and/or
analysis, then a single quad core CPU with 64-bit Windows and 4-8 GB
of RAM is worth the extra money.

Only users doing *extensive* rendering and FEA are going to benefit
from more than 4 cores and/or more than 8GB of RAM. IMO, those are
the only ones who should be spending the money on a Xeon-based
system. I really can't see the point in having an 8 core system that
is constrained by a 32-bit operating system.

 

Thanks, i have learned a lot. Just after the fact though, live and
learn.