anyone running GTX 670`s?
polycounter lvl 11
Just a simple question, anyone running something like the
Asus Nvidia GeForce 2GB GTX 670 DirectCU II TOP and if so, how does it run the usual apps : Maya, Max, Zbrush etc etc..
I need to replace my always bad performing GTX 460.. and soon :poly122:
Just wondered if the 670 series will perform a LOT better...
Cheers,
Asus Nvidia GeForce 2GB GTX 670 DirectCU II TOP and if so, how does it run the usual apps : Maya, Max, Zbrush etc etc..
I need to replace my always bad performing GTX 460.. and soon :poly122:
Just wondered if the 670 series will perform a LOT better...
Cheers,
Replies
I need to replace this card as I broke a fan blade, but I also want to upgrade too, just to have something solid, so just capable of running all the major apps without issues. I saw the 670`s are not 'supported' by Autodesk, which is not a surprised, but just want to know it should run 'well'
I will check your link, cheers!
A model of 2 million of triangles (smoothed sub-division) is running slowly on my best machine (gtx 470 + quad-core) but on my shitty laptop (dual core + ATI HD4670) it's running fine and smoothly. I can't understand why...
I'm thinking about a specific option in maya which could drive the performances, but i never changed anything on both of my computerS. That's weird.
http://www.polycount.com/forum/showthread.php?t=92072
pretty much all 400 500 and 600 series nvidia cards seem crippled in these softwares.
minus zbrush as thats more cpu dependant? and not sure on max as i havnt used that nor am i familiar with the viewport options.
mayas viewport 2.0 runs 10x faster than standard viewport on my gtx580
so the older nvidia cards out perform the new ones in these applications and also the new amd cards are better from what ive read
I just dont want to waste what money I have for not much improvement over the 460. It sounds unlikely, as a 670 should be quicker no doubt, but the lack of knowing is frustrating.
I recently purchased a gtx 670 and then returned it. i bought it to replace my current card which also happens to be a gtx 460.
my gtx 460:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814500182
the 670 i tried:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121637
maya regular viewport performance was 1/2 or less compared to my 460 so i returned it. tried different drivers as well. mudbox performance was better though but i work a lot inside maya regular viewport and poly model a lot so that is a priority.
also to note, i tried an AMD firepro V8800 few months ago which had lightning fast speed in mudbox. it also had very fast viewport 2.0 in maya 2012+ BUT regular maya viewport was slower than GTX 460 so i returned that as well.
i am currently still running gtx 460. its working well compared to other so called "highend" cards out there. mudbox also works fine with my gtx 460 and since i now have 32gb ram i have little problems in mudbox.
500k tri model seems pretty low to be a big problem for maya viewport.
i can navigate regular viewport with 8 million tri model @ 2-3 fps.
500k model works at 10-20 fps
So, that's a driver problem. Meh.
I just dont like Autodesk saying "Important note: Nvidia Kepler graphics cards (Geforce GTX 670-680-690) are not supported by Maya."
I know game cards have never really been supported in the past, or certified, but why do they mention just the Kepler range?
i was thinking of trying out a quadro next but i also want to be able to play latest pc games at high res. i also dont think there is much physical difference between a quadro and a geforce.
it is mostly a nvidia/autodesk marketing scheme to force professionals to spend good money on same technology. they just lock/disable certain opengl features that maya viewport uses in the gaming cards and lock some of the direct3d and directx features in quadros.
also on my next to test list is one of the AMD gaming cards HD7970 pci3.0. Amd's seem to have more raw compute power compared to nvidia but may be at the expense of possible driver incompatibility.
I heard that one of the primary reasons to get a Quadro was nullified (frame clipping)
when Maya 2011's interface was redesigned using nokia QT. Performance didn't increase using Mari either (I think Mari is more dependent on ram and hdd speed).
The 1st quadro that uses Kepler architecture (K5000) was just announced recently, so there has been no certification on Kepler hardware whatsoever. It is expected to be available by itself in October and in workstations In December.
Remember when they say not supported, it doesn't mean that it won't work... it just means that if there are issues, they don't want to hear about it. There is also no support for Maya bonus tools, but I'm using them everyday.
It's definitely the better bang for buck card compared to the 670 and 680. It also runs cooler, quieter and draws alot less power than the others.
Keep in mind that if you use anything that is CUDA enabled you will probably want to go with a 500 series card.
I think the 660 is a good choice of a card, but with that being said I don't know if you would be disappointed with it a few months down the line.
They're not going to disappoint in a media related field, but as to if production pipeline, it's honestly up in the air, with all gimping left and right from nVidia and Autodesk, as Cow said, you it might not live up to the legend.
So if you're a Max user you'll probably be ok, but if you're a Maya user its probably best to go with a different series of cards.
Hopefully using DX will help.
http://area.autodesk.com/forum/autodesk-3ds-max/installation---hardware---os/geforce-vs-quadro-benchmarks-40actual-tests41/post-0/#p0
I'm frankly amazed if you got that many polygons into a single batch without hitting big problems.
Also, not many people use Mari as one might think, for example, the Predator from the latest Predator movie a few years ago was actually all done in ZB, even the texturing, so again, ask yourself if it's really necessary to learn Mari, especially for the game industry, where 4K maps are still a holy grail on PC's from time to time, and last I checked, Mudbox allowed you to do that in a much traditional way vs. shader painting.
@ace: You're right. I don't think I would actually use MARI in a production setting, Mudbox does the job just great. But I just wanted to dick around with it and see what all the hooplah is about. But your post did encourage me to stick with the 285 until the Nvidia kepler cards are supported by autodesk. Maybe I was looking for a justifiable reason to upgrade.
Hmmm......might have to rethink about upgrading again. I'll just wait a little bit longer and see if there are anymore success stories with these cards. No rush, you know? And thanks for the response; the quoted part is what kind of answer I was looking for.
Hi,
I'd just thought I'd chip in to say that Mari is in heavy use at every major US, London and Australian VFX / CG facility. It is also the texturing system that LucasArts are using on Level1313. LucasArts have a really nice workflow in which they use their in-game shaders in Mari so they have 100% WYSIWYG between Mari and in-game.
Regarding the Predators movie. I assume you're talking about this film. If so, it would be a little difficult for Mari to be used on it as it was released in the cinema 10 days before Mari 1.0 came out. At least one of the lead companies that did the work on this film now use Mari. I can't remember about the other one off the top of my head.
In general though,Mari runs best on Fermi class and above hardware. A $180 GTX480 will run Mari very well. The 600 class hardware runs Mari perfectly. a 680 actually seems to be better than a $3k Quadro 6000
Although it is Film CG related, this video might be of interest. It shows some hard surface painting in Mari for Battleship by Justin Holt of ImageEngine.
Jack Greasley
Mari Product Manager.
It'd be good to hear what you did as a workflow to assure everything was set optimally from start to finish in BIOS/windows/3d drivers/Max to assure good performance.
I'm not sure what/why but video performance in Max seems to have gone a bit crappy over the last five years since they moved to D3D from OGL/GLide stuff.
Quadro stuff doesn't seem any better than game cards in my experience either... I got all the latest proper drivers with Max support for my exact workstation and all manner of stuff and my older home 8800GTX was faster than my £750 workstation Quadro in Max 2010 hehe.
Dave
I have bought a new pc (please find the spec in my signature), but I still have problems in 3dmax 2012 rendering. I might chose wrong graphic card or there are some specific max drivers as you have mentioned and I have not installed them.
Thank you guys if you help me to find if there is anything special about installing the graphic card or I have to change my graphic card as I want to work specially with 3Dmax.
Here is my graphic card link http://my.asus.com/Graphics_Cards/NVIDIA_Series/GTX660DC2O2GD5/#overview
I Just got a new pc with gtx 660 (not the ti version), but the result in max2012 is not acceptable, rendering is too slow!
Do you know if there is any kind of special setting or driver for Max2012 for this kind of card?
Thank you
edit: lolnecro post by accident.
Now I have heard stories that the GTX 680 will dip in performance when pushed to the limits because of its low power consumption, compared to the GTX 580 which consumes a lot of power for performance. I've also read a story where one guy overclocked his CPU that made Max and Maya crash a lot. Many people think (from what I read on online forums) is that it's not worth upgrading to the GTX 680 since it won't give you the best performance out of your graphics card and sometimes will give issues in terms of stability. I think oglu mentioned to someone that you wait for the GTX 685 but I wasn't sure or totally forgot what the reason for waiting.
What do you guys think? Is it worth upgrading to the GTX 680 or should I wait for the GTX 685? The Quadro card (it only has 1 gig of virtual memory) that I have right now is over 3 years old now and I want to upgrade to a card where I can get good performance out of Autodesk Maya, 3DS Max, and Mudbox.
I looked up Geforce Titan online and found that it just came out and has 6 gigs of virtual memory. I also found out that it's price is close to $1000!!! That's almost as expensive as a Quadro but you're probably getting the performance that you could ever need in a machine and then some. I don't think I can drop that much cash on just the video card alone.
just using power as performance indicator is not a good idea for hardware, since architecture is changed and typically every couple years the process how chips are made is changed so things become smaller. Essentially using the same chip design but fabricated smaller, gives you less power at same performance. Now combine shrinking with architecture improvements, and you can see how typically the new chips easily beat the old chips. GeForce 6xx generation is called Kepler and really well tuned for graphics work, much much more texture fillrate compared to Fermi (GeForce 4xx/5xx). In Quadro land the Quadros with "K" in their name are Kepler based.
What kind of card makes sense for your daily use, totally depends on the kind of workloads.
(disclaimer: I work for NVIDIA but speak for myself)
comparing to my current gtx460
pro:
maya viewport 2.0 is significantly faster with lot of highpoly objects in viewport
mudbox viewport was also quite fast. on average a boost of 20-30 fps in maya viewport 2.
cons:
viewport 2.0 became buggy with component selection so the speed boost is useless. regular viewport was slower compared to gtx460. there is a bug with geforce 6xx and maya viewport with if you have UV borders highlighted they will create lot of viewport artifacts with random edge lines showing between UV borders. this is visible when wireframe is enabled.
mudbox realtime shadows doesnt work with gtx 6xx cards and is a known bug as far as i know.
oh and i am selling a gtx660 if anyone is interested. 50% discount, used for a week or less, almost new and all packaging items included.
Yeah thanks for correcting me CrazyButcher. By "virtual memory" I mean the amount of RAM in the video card :poly121:.
So it safe to say that having a GTX 680 performance will increase and hopefully some of the cons that you mentioned based off of the cards you tested will not appear? Also what do you mean by "mudbox realtime shadows doesnt work with gtx 6xx cards and is a known bug as far as i know"?
no it is not safe to say that. lot of people have posted exact same issues with 6xx cards.
as for mudbox, not sure how else i can clarify it but basically with a 6xx card you wont see any realtime shadows when you enable shadows of a light in mudbox.
Thanks for your input. How is it that the older cards work fine but the newer 600 series cards have issues? Is Nvidia just gimping the 600 series so professionals will buy the more expensive Quadro cards. Is there no hack to fix these cons?
note sure, may be Nvidia has an inside deal with autodesk to force professional users to buy more expensive cards because they can afford it, who knows...
http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=16820654
basically all Kepler cards are not recommended for Maya.
lower end quadros are also quite slow in terms of raw compute power, but more stable and bug free.
so the best solution out there is a top of the line $4000 pro card or a cheaper older gaming card.
Try Nvidia driver release 301.42
http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/syscert/card?siteID=123112&catID=18254205&id=18844534&product=74&os=8192&hw=272
http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/syscert/card?siteID=123112&catID=18254205&id=18844534&product=72&os=8192&hw=272
Is geforce kepler still slower than gts 250 with default maya viewport?
I need to upgrade to either radeon R270 or geforce 760, need advice.
My previous radeon 5750 have selection lag with maya, but I'm wondering whether the newer gcn radeons have improvement.
With ps4/xb1 using amd gpus, surely gcn radeons should be developer/artist's primary choice right?