GPU's for Autodesk Products
polycounter lvl 18
I know these threads are dull. I've searched and read whats already on the forum but there's no real conclusion to find. Since I'm putting together a new build and typically the issue of GPU rears it's ugly head as usual.
Read countless topics on various CG forums, opinions are mixed. Some swear by Quadro ONLY, calling Geforce garbage for serious work. Others claiming the reverse. A lot of people showing benchmarks and citing numbers rather than real-world experiences though.
So do people have experience of using a 680 or 780 with Maya or Mudbox ? If going Geforce it's a toss up between a 4GB 680 or 3GB 780 but I'm concerned about viewport performance really. Currently a 500k mesh runs like crap on my 560Ti and I'd really like to be able to tumble and rotate around a couple of million polys without issue.
Read countless topics on various CG forums, opinions are mixed. Some swear by Quadro ONLY, calling Geforce garbage for serious work. Others claiming the reverse. A lot of people showing benchmarks and citing numbers rather than real-world experiences though.
So do people have experience of using a 680 or 780 with Maya or Mudbox ? If going Geforce it's a toss up between a 4GB 680 or 3GB 780 but I'm concerned about viewport performance really. Currently a 500k mesh runs like crap on my 560Ti and I'd really like to be able to tumble and rotate around a couple of million polys without issue.
Replies
If you want to work in games, than you need the same hardware the games are meant to run on, so geforce all the way quadro cards will struggle with the shaders used for real-time game art, or just not work with them at all, so for this a gameing card is needed.
As for Maya, I have seen people get those dreaded Maya crashes even with highend end Quadors. so no escaping Maya crashes no matter what GPU you get.
Highest Quadro I could afford would be a K4000 which comes in around £600. The 780 is around £400. I'm just concerned about it *working*, specifically within those programs. I'll play no games at all so that doesn't bother me. I recall hearing 7xx series were *really* buggy in 3D apps but I can't recall where now. Don't fancy wasting £400 on a broken card with Xmas around the corner.
AMD doesn't seem to have that control.
I too dabble in mudbox most of the time, and it is the app in which my bottleneck-gpu really stands out...
i can not say having a quadro is better than gForce. i have two workstation one with a gtx770 and one with quadro 4000. both run well and pretty stable. the 770 is newer and therefor i think framerates in maya and also the performance in mari is slightly better. for the openCL thing i can be wrong but i understood that nVidia supports openCL but ati no cuda so you are more save with nVidia!
I believe they have gotten alot better, but AMD/ATI cards have had quite a few driver issues that would cause issues with certain programs, which is why I tend to stick with Nvidia stuff on any work machines.
i think ive made up my mind for a gtx780, even tho the sweet spot on the price/performance curve should be the 770.. laziness&thefuture
No only the Titan Z is a dual-GPU, the regular Titan and Titan Black are single GPUs.
From anandTech:
"GTX 780 can offer 90% of GTX Titans gaming performance, but it can only offer a fraction of GTX Titans FP64 compute performance, topping out at 1/24th FP32 performance rather than 1/3rd like Titan. Titan essentially remains as NVIDIAs entry-level compute product, leaving GTX 780 to be a high-end gaming product."
for our type of work, even the 480 will give you better performance then the 600 or 700 series since NVidia has gimped them so hard for everything past gaming.
I thought mudbox is dependent on your graphics card VRAM and the amount of RAM you have on your computer? If it's CPU then it must be Zbrush then.
there's a geforce 770 with 4GB out for relatively little which looks ideal for the job, specifically texturing in mudbox. anybody have one and experience to share?
also of interest: what are the experiences with nvidia drivers, those 7-series cards and 3ds max these days (OS would be windows 7)?
I still need an explanation behind this I was about to get a 270x but im holding off if that is a bad option
Like I said before, when students of mine have AMD cards the drivers do not seem to offer an option to force apps to use the card. Instead many apps would default to the shitty motherboard GPU, usually an Intel one. Nvidia's control panel let us override this, forcing apps to use the better GPU.
Maybe AMD has fixed this in recent drivers, like within the last couple months? I have steered clear of AMD/ATI cards due to longstanding performance problems with 3ds Max in DirectX mode.
i'm in the same boat as eric here - for as long as i have been in 3D, ATI has always been known for drivers that don't play nice with max or CG apps for that matter. that might have changed in the meantime, it might not be true for certain professional series cards but i don't fancy spending time finding out.
oh and - being a long time marmoset user and following the corresponding topics here on polycount it's hard to overlook that lots of glitches seem to be related to users running it with ATI cards.
all i want is more texture RAM at this stage, if i could just bolt it onto the existing card, that would be the best outcome actually.
If you'd like me to run a few tests for you, to help you decide.. shoot a message to my inbox.
I used 15 4k UDIMS with multiple layers for texturing and never had a problem so far. I had the same amount (or even more) textures in Maya viewport with layered shaders etc and never had a crash. Then when I took my scene to the 650Ti's and 460GTX's in my uni lab I had to disable textures and smooth at render time.
But then again I'm just a student and there are people way more qualified than me:)
[ame="http://www.amazon.co.uk/Gigabyte-GeForce-Graphics-DisplayPort-Windforce/dp/B00FQ8CNNI/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1400315694&sr=8-2&keywords=gtx+760+gigabyte"]This is the card I have[/ame]
i just found out that the 770's are too large to fit into my computer without causing some shuffling of parts so it'll be a GTX 760 with 4GB instead. seems to consume less power too which is always a bonus.
i don't have specific scenarios to test but if you happen to use 3ds max / mudbox / toolbag2 with your cards and don't happen to run into display issues or stability problems, that would be reassuring to hear.
and Gnutmi, that definitely sounds good so far. you're on windows 7?