REDCINE and GPU = co-work? [Archive]

View Full Version : REDCINE and GPU = co-work?

Martin Jäger

03-17-2007, 10:49 AM

hej!

is redcine taking advantage of the GPU? if yes - what graphics-card makes
most sense? personally i'm interested in a mac-compatible model...

Bruce Allen

03-17-2007, 10:57 AM

Hrvoje Simic

03-17-2007, 11:02 AM

Bruce, do you think it's reasonable to expect 8800 GTX in new 8 core Mac Pro ?
I would really like to see that option.

Jeff Kilgroe

03-17-2007, 12:38 PM

Bruce, do you think it's reasonable to expect 8800 GTX in new 8 core Mac Pro ?
I would really like to see that option.

Apple would be slitting their own throat to not offer the 8800GTX and upcoming 89x0 models in the (hopefully soon to be updated) Mac Pro line.

I prefer OSX over Windows and it's my platform of choice for doing most things, but when it comes to performance graphics -- be it games or 3D visualization, the Mac is a generation (or even two) behind most of the time as Bruce said.

I plan to buy a new 8-core Mac Pro later this year. Hopefully they will offer SLI style multi-video-card configurations and I'll take mine with dual nVidia 8950GTX cards, thank you very much.

Gunleik Groven

03-17-2007, 12:53 PM

Yes

Especially if FCP, and Shake('s followup) would start engaging all that horsepower.

I actually just ordered a mini to take care of some renderingtasks, because I want to hold off on a tower untill the octocore is out.

What a laugh!

Gunleik

Zach Hilton

03-17-2007, 01:05 PM

hej!

is redcine taking advantage of the GPU? if yes - what graphics-card makes
most sense? personally i'm interested in a mac-compatible model...

I asked a similar question recently. http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1010 Mr. Rob said that we'll find that out at or after NAB.

Sanjin Jukic

03-17-2007, 01:32 PM

Smartin, what I think would make sense is to wait until RedCine is released, then buy the card. Graphics cards double in speed every year.

Macs are a whole generation behind at present - they don't have the nvidia 8000 series yet. Also, if they decided to make the code heavily GPU-oriented, you'd want SLI. Which Macs also don't offer yet. Buying a GPU for a Mac is like shooting yourself in the foot right now. Actually, it has historically been this way (they are often a generation behind), however the people who swallow the rest of the Reality Distortion Field believe they are "faster for graphics"...

I say this as a guy who uses Macs on a daily basis. I like them very much in fact. I even look forward to buying one once for myself one day - preferably when they catch up to what a year-old PC can do, GPU-wise!

Bruce

Bruce, it looks you are pretty outdated with yours Mac state opinion. Mac is on Intel more than year and Macintosh is really looking to get the best from that CPU-GPU hardware platform. I think you are still believe in all that "foggy" high-end PC propaganda. There are really many options but not any works well as advertised. To conclude is to say everybody want to make money with a fog on Windows platform as we all know well. And they are all rich and fat, Ballmer, Gates, etc... With the Mac is a bit opposite. It works as advertised. And also they want to make money. So keep in mind that before you talk Mac, Bruce!

Jeff Kilgroe

03-17-2007, 04:36 PM

Bruce, it looks you are pretty outdated with yours Mac state opinion. Mac is on Intel more than year and Macintosh is really looking to get the best from that CPU-GPU hardware platform. I think you are still believe in all that "foggy" high-end PC propaganda. There are really many options but not any works well as advertised. To conclude is to say everybody want to make money with a fog on Windows platform as we all know well. And they are all rich and fat, Ballmer, Gates, etc... With the Mac is a bit opposite. It works as advertised. And also they want to make money. So keep in mind that before you talk Mac, Bruce!

You're drinking too much Apple kool-aid. Sorry. Currently the two best graphics options available to the Mac platform are the ancient, nVidia FX4500 and the ATI X1900XT. The X1900XT in PC land is an upper-mid range card.

On the Mac there is no SLI or CrossFire graphics configurations, let alone even single card options in line with the upper end of PC options. This has nothing to do with "foggy high-end PC propaganda". There are several solutions in the PC world that are nowhere close to the top end of the spectrum that will outperform the offerings from Apple. And let's not bring Microsoft, Gates, Balmer, etc.. into the equation. This has little to do with the overall hardware picture in terms of graphics cards. All of which, especially on the nVidia side of the fence are fully supported under Linux.

Don't get me wrong, I love my Apple systems. But a properly configured and cared for PC is every bit as stable and productive and also "works as advertised". But this isn't a discussion about platform reliability or productivity in general. This is about graphics card options and what GPU is available on which platform... Right now the Mac is way behind and it has been this way for a few years. Apple has the power to change this on a whim, anytime they wish, but they don't.

SLI/Crossfire configurations not considered, where are current upper mid range offerings we see in the PC world? No nVidia 8xxx cards, no ATI X1950XT, ...Not even the X1900XTXi, only the 'XT. And Apple also has their model underclocked by 150MHz vs. the same card from other PC vendors... Why?

Gunleik Groven

03-17-2007, 05:28 PM

Have to agree here, even with 7 macs and 1 PC in house.

Gunleik

Martin Jäger

03-18-2007, 05:43 AM

i assume one reason could be that apple want's to keep their reputation of "it just works" - so might be that they are just carefull with choosing their components.. well i changed to apple 12 years ago and i'm far away from changing back to wintel - that's why i really hope for either a new compositing software from apple or a mac version of fusion.. unless after-effects 8.0 will change alot.. and i'm willing to take a step back in GPU performance just because i know the hassle you can have with wintel machies (or let's say no-name macs ;) )

Anders Holck

03-18-2007, 06:44 AM

Bruce Allen

03-18-2007, 10:28 AM

Yeah, when Apple switched to intel I was sure hoping that there was going to be a revival of the third party GFX card market.
Now that big-endian, open firmware, ADC etc. are long gone, it's hard to see why Nvidia and ATI couldn't release mac drivers for their PC cards and get SLI going as well...

True! I will ask my friend who writes drivers for nVidia to see if he can give us any hints as to why this is.

Similarly, I thought they would have 2x4 core Macs at the same time as PCs.

Bruce, it looks you are pretty outdated with yours Mac state opinion. Mac is on Intel more than year and Macintosh is really looking to get the best from that CPU-GPU hardware platform. I think you are still believe in all that "foggy" high-end PC propaganda. There are really many options but not any works well as advertised. To conclude is to say everybody want to make money with a fog on Windows platform as we all know well. And they are all rich and fat, Ballmer, Gates, etc... With the Mac is a bit opposite. It works as advertised. And also they want to make money. So keep in mind that before you talk Mac, Bruce!

I usually agree with everything you post, but not this one.

1. A Geforce 8 series is much faster than the Geforce 7 series.
2. I can put two Geforce 8's in most PCs and run them in parallel (SLI)

So, we have:

PC - two Geforce 8's
versus
MAC - one GeForce 7 or old-gen ATI.

Not fuzzy. You can put more GPUs in the Mac, but they won't run in parallel to render the same frame.

This should change at NAB (I assume either GeForce 8 or the new ATI to go with the new Macs).

Oh, and if the above setup for PC wasn't fancy enough, you could get two Quadro Plexes :)

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

Jeff Kilgroe

03-18-2007, 10:46 AM

Anders,

There are two problems with using / creating graphics hardware for Macs. First of all, Apple is not using the same type of BIOS structure that most PCs use... Their systems are EFI, which some PCs are also, but even EFI PCs have PC BIOS fallback and compatibility. Windows supports both BIOS and EFI, the latter to a lesser degree. So this requires peripheral cards on the Mac to have different firmware than they do for the PC in most cases. Not a big deal, but there is the issue of getting hardware vendors to actually create and implement the necessary firmware. AMD/ATI is starting to do this. They have released the X1900GT card for G5 PCI-E Macs, which was nice and made sense. But I'm unsure why they're not pushing any other Mac options at the moment except for the OEM X1900XT for the Mac Pro which is only sold through Apple.

The other problem with video devices on the Apple platform is Apple's driver distribution model. Graphics drivers are tied directly to the kernel under OSX and hardware vendors have to submit their code and driver software to Apple for testing, approval and incorporation into OS updates.

These are inconveniences to hardware vendors and they have little desire to produce Mac graphics hardware when they can't even keep up with demand on the PC side of things.

Bruce, if you know someone at nVidia, I've got a question for them! Ask them why their Mac drivers don't support display rotation... It's standard fare on their PC drivers and ATI rotates the display with their Mac drivers. I prefer nVidia over ATI in most cases because they have a better OpenGL implementation and more polished dirvers in PC land, but this is one nagging thing about their Mac support that drives me nuts.

For NAB I bet we see the latest Quadro cards for Mac and most likely a couple GeForce 8 series options. I will be very surprised if we don't see an announcement of 8-core Macs too.

Most likely the big reason Apple held off on the 2x4-core Macs thus far is the quad-core Intel release didn't co-incide with their typical ~6month product cycle. Combined with waiting for the upcoming Stoakley/Seaburg chipset, which provides far better support for the quad-core CPUs as well as support for the upcoming unified quad-core and 45nm offerings from Intel we may see late this year or early next.

Apple likes to pace themselves. And while their sales have never been higher, I also think that they're cutting themselves short. A lot of people still purchase systems regardless of OS and just by studying CPU and hardware options. They no longer have the mystique of the different CPU platform and all the marketing voodoo associated with it. No matter how you slice it, they're just an Intel PC these days. A very well built one too, especially for the price, but they need to step up a bit on peripheral options and update cycles. Their slower pace keeps a lot of potential "switchers" from coming over.

Sanjin Jukic

03-18-2007, 11:05 AM

Bruce,

when thinking Apple my logic is very simple and it goes like this:

1. RED is according to computer hardware primary Apple on Intel Mac OS X oriented.
2. REDCINE is developed on Apple computers.
3. Jim and Graeme like "GODS" of REDCINE are also extremely Apple oriented.
4. As all above is Apple based together with REDCINE why should I think or care about "How PC is more GPU powerful than Apple!!??"?

And NAB 2007 will show us power of REDCINE+APPLE hardware for sure. We don't have to worry about it. Everything is already set up earlier and now driving in that direction safely.

Rob Lohman

03-18-2007, 11:42 AM

2. REDCINE is developed on both Windows & Apple systems!

Although RED is Apple oriented there are enough Windows work stations around. I'm already running several here...

Gunleik Groven

03-18-2007, 11:52 AM

2. REDCINE is developed on both Windows & Apple systems!

Although RED is Apple oriented there are enough Windows work stations around. I'm already running several here...

And that is crucial for the migration of Red.

Gunleik

Anders Holck

03-18-2007, 11:54 AM

Yeah it's true about the BIOS, but I guess will see winpc going all EFI at some point.

Apples driver model only applies to the OEM cards they ship with their computers.

Ati's third party cards have their own driver update cycle, and you need to download the driver updates from Ati.

BTV. have you seen ATI's new campaign: http://ati.amd.com/online/red/red.html

Bruce Allen

03-18-2007, 12:43 PM

Bruce, if you know someone at nVidia, I've got a question for them! Ask them why their Mac drivers don't support display rotation... It's standard fare on their PC drivers and ATI rotates the display with their Mac drivers. I prefer nVidia over ATI in most cases because they have a better OpenGL implementation and more polished dirvers in PC land, but this is one nagging thing about their Mac support that drives me nuts.

AFAIK, there are different teams writing drivers for Mac, XP, Vista, Linux, etc. Inside that, there are teams of people working on DirectX only, OpenGL only, etc.

The reason the Mac drivers don't support the same things the Windows drivers do is because the Mac team hasn't done it yet ;) I will ask my friend if he knows why and ask him to send them a gentle nudge...

By the way, my friend says that despite what rumors you might have heard about prioritizing DirectX for Vista, OpenGL is still a very high priority in Windows driver development - all of the great coders who wrote the early OpenGL drivers for nVidia are still there, still 100% working on OpenGL. That was reassuring.

Also reassuring is that, having gone through Comp Sci undergrad with my friend, I can tell you that he is by far the most talented programmer I know. He used to write 3D engines in assembly. He does the most beautifully fast and understandable C++ you have ever read. He is the one coder I know who I'd rank at genius level.

The fact that nVidia somehow found him in South Africa (where he was working on PS2 games...) and brought him over to the USA really says a lot for them scouring the globe for the best graphics programmers out there. I have no doubt that their Vista drivers will very shortly become awesome. I'm sure ATI is similar... but still, they didn't find and hire my friend, so they can't be quite as good ;)

By the way, if anyone on the Red team has problems / questions with RedCine on Vista on a Geforce 8, or if you just want to optimize it a bit, let me know - I will get you in touch with my friend.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

Zach Hilton

03-18-2007, 01:00 PM

4. As all above is Apple based together with REDCINE why should I think or care about "How PC is more GPU powerful than Apple!!??"?

Just offering my opinion here. If encoding your redcode footage through redcine is at all helped by the GPU, then that is why you would care about having more GPU processing power (2 geforce 8800's in SLI for example). There is A LOT of processing power in the GPU and when you can accurately program it and take advantage of that power, you can CHEAPLY have a reasonable super computer in your home. I would assume that eventually the Red Team will incorporate GPU acceleration of the Redcine process and when and if they add CUDA programming as well...all the more better. Check this article...http://www.tgdaily.com/2007/02/16/nvidia_cuda/.
It just makes me really excited to be able to have a computer for under 3k that would be capable of processing teraflops. Very impressive in my opinion.

Jeff Kilgroe

03-18-2007, 02:38 PM

AFAIK, there are different teams writing drivers for Mac, XP, Vista, Linux, etc. Inside that, there are teams of people working on DirectX only, OpenGL only, etc.

The reason the Mac drivers don't support the same things the Windows drivers do is because the Mac team hasn't done it yet ;) I will ask my friend if he knows why and ask him to send them a gentle nudge...

I pretty well figured that... It's just curious that display rotation continues to be ignored on the Mac. It's a feature that tons of people are screaming for and most desktop publishing and page layout pros who know their Mac hardware will not buy a Mac with an nVidia chip because of this reason.

By the way, my friend says that despite what rumors you might have heard about prioritizing DirectX for Vista, OpenGL is still a very high priority in Windows driver development - all of the great coders who wrote the early OpenGL drivers for nVidia are still there, still 100% working on OpenGL. That was reassuring.

Reassuring yes, but I would have never doubted that... Regardless of Microsoft's DirectX / Vista propaganda. Too many professional apps and cross-platform games use OpenGL. Actually, the way I understand it anyway, Vista actually lets OpenGL move closer in to the kernel and core OS components vs. Win2K/XP so it's better for us all.

Also reassuring is that, having gone through Comp Sci undergrad with my friend, I can tell you that he is by far the most talented programmer I know. He used to write 3D engines in assembly. He does the most beautifully fast and understandable C++ you have ever read. He is the one coder I know who I'd rank at genius level.

I have a friend that's on that level as well. He's mostly been in game programming since college. We didn't go to college together, but were old high school buddies. It was funny, he used to ask me programming questions and I originally taught him C++. Anymore, he's a programming god and it's me asking the questions. His last job was as some kind of programming or code director at Activision, but he's since moved on. I don't know where he works now, he told me but it slips my mind. He's essentially their lead programmer now and working on some kind of revolutionary new 3D game engine.

Sanjin Jukic

03-18-2007, 03:39 PM

2. REDCINE is developed on both Windows & Apple systems!

Although RED is Apple oriented there are enough Windows work stations around. I'm already running several here...

Sorry Rob, I forgot to mention you as one of REDCINE GODS together with Jim and Graeme.

Again PC vs. Apple is just a boring story.

What I am interested in is to work on the next MacBook Pro with REDCINE til end of year or beginning the next when I hope all that 8 CPU and nVidia vs. AMD GPU situation will be clear.

Bruce Allen

03-18-2007, 04:00 PM

Again PC vs. Apple is just a boring story.

What I am interested in is to work on the next MacBook Pro with REDCINE til end of year or beginning the next when I hope all that 8 CPU and nVidia vs. AMD GPU situation will be much clear.

I totally agree! It's just the original poster wanted a recommendation of Mac-compatible GPUs and my recommendation was "Wait - RedCine isn't released and Apple GPU options suck at the moment. They don't have GF 8 series yet".

By the end of next year, the Intel roadmap is quad-core 45nm laptops. I think that there you will have something pretty nice. Hopefully by that time they'll have a higher-res laptop display (like PCs currently have) but with an elegant resolution-independent solution (like what will come with next Mac OS). Until then, I think speeds will be a little frustrating for us impatient creative sorts.

How does that relate to the original post? Well, I say if you absolutely have to buy something now, go for a cost-effective card. Do not blow cash on the latest and greatest because everything will be so much much faster and cheaper next year. Eg I don't recommend the super-expensive GeForce 7-based Quadro that is the current top of the line on the Mac.

As for me, I have simply decided not try to shoot any 4K features until this is sorted out and super-cheap ;) My $500 home PC is fine for running Final Draft... although I was at a coffee shop in LA today and there were 4 "scriptwriters" there using shiny new MacBooks so maybe I am missing out.

Now, if only I can stop checking this addictive reduser.net forum... I was at a talk with the director of the (oscar-winning film) Lives of Others and he said the only way he got his script done was by moving into a monk's cell for a while...

Good luck with the GPUs, people!

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

Hrvoje Simic

03-18-2007, 04:23 PM

By the end of next year, the Intel roadmap is quad-core 45nm laptops. I think that there you will have something pretty nice. Hopefully by that time they'll have a higher-res laptop display (like PCs currently have) but with an elegant resolution-independent solution (like what will come with next Mac OS). Until then, I think speeds will be a little frustrating for us impatient creative sorts.

I'm imagining all that with high speed SSD + OLED screen :love:

I was talking the similar thing to my friend and his reply was "Yeah, but soon after that that won't be enough for you also".
I had no comment.

But...somehow I think that next gen will be pretty enough for the mobile usage (with reasonable needs in mind). The most complex graphics, color correction and special effects should be done in a studio anyway.

And yeah - chasing creativity is really a problem when you're chained to a "est. time left"...

- I don't want to be impatient, it's just that creativity doesn't like to wait...:umm:

Evan Owen

03-18-2007, 04:26 PM

I pretty well figured that... It's just curious that display rotation continues to be ignored on the Mac. It's a feature that tons of people are screaming for and most desktop publishing and page layout pros who know their Mac hardware will not buy a Mac with an nVidia chip because of this reason.

I'm not sure when it came in, but display rotation is built into Mac OS X as of the current version. The option won't appear if the display doesn't specifically support rotation however... I have a Dell 2005FPW on a GeForce2MX card (yes, ancient Mac) and it works great in either landscape or portrait (or upside-down, etc.).

Rob Lohman

03-18-2007, 04:42 PM

Sanjin: thanks ;)

Jeff Kilgroe

03-18-2007, 08:24 PM

I'm not sure when it came in, but display rotation is built into Mac OS X as of the current version. The option won't appear if the display doesn't specifically support rotation however... I have a Dell 2005FPW on a GeForce2MX card (yes, ancient Mac) and it works great in either landscape or portrait (or upside-down, etc.).

Display rotation has absolutely NOTHING to do with the display supporting it or not. Unless you're implying that support is the display mounted on a stand which allows the monitor to pivot. ;) Rotation is part of the GUI function of the OS, but the video drivers themselves still must support it. nVidia does not support it on their current Mac offerings -- ATI does. But if I'm going to point fingers, I should also note that I can list several OpenGL functions that nVidia supports via their drivers and hardware that ATI does not.

Current nVidia video offerings for the G5 Power Mac as well as the Mac Pro systems DO NOT support display rotation. The ATI cards do. Commonly known issue. Same with the iMac 24" -- no display rotation for the 24" built in display, nor the secondary display if connected. However, display rotation is fully supported on the 20" iMac with the ATI X1600 GPU as well as the Macbook Pro (ATI X1600) for both the primary display and a secondary if connected.

Seriously, go browse through any of the Mac forums like the ones at Macrumors.com or Macnn, etc.. there are tons of pissed off G5 PM owners with 7800GT and FX4500 cards that can't rotate their displays. And many have had to run secondary displays or even a third display off of another installed video card like an ATI 9600 in order to get rotation.

Older nVidia GeForce and GFII [MX and GS] support rotation though... Like yours. Rather frustrating, really. My Dell 3007's and 2405's all work beautifully in portrait mode on a PC, but not on my FX4500 equipped G5 quad. I can connect them as a second display to a Macbook Pro and run them in portrait mode. Just lame really.

Sanjin Jukic

03-19-2007, 12:04 AM

As for me, I have simply decided not try to shoot any 4K features until this is sorted out and super-cheap ;) My $500 home PC is fine for running Final Draft... although I was at a coffee shop in LA today and there were 4 "scriptwriters" there using shiny new MacBooks so maybe I am missing out.

Now, if only I can stop checking this addictive reduser.net forum... I was at a talk with the director of the (oscar-winning film) Lives of Others and he said the only way he got his script done was by moving into a monk's cell for a while...

Good luck with the GPUs, people!

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

Bruce,

Also I totally agree! I will order the most needed accessories from RED and one Arri standard to PL adapter, maybe one affordable Arri Zeiss 35mm zoom and disappear in a sort of Zen-Buddhist monk's environment to write my feature. And when I am back hopefully all that CPU-GPU price/performance options with Apple hardware/software is clear.

Bruce Allen

03-19-2007, 12:57 AM

Haha, reduser.net - one of the few places on the net where people are passionate about digital film tech, but know when to put aside mac/pc differences and go and make films... this common goal unites us and makes the forum a lot of fun.

Sanjin, I bet you guys have really nice Zen monk-style environments in Austria! Such beautiful architecture. And better coffee houses for writing in, too ;)

Bruce

Sanjin Jukic

03-19-2007, 03:24 AM

Bruce,

Wien schon schön. Have a look from your writter's LA cafe
http://www.vrvienna.com/

I live around the corner from Schloss Belvedere-Belvedere Palace.

http://www.vrvienna.com/vienna-daily-image/belvederepalace1.jpg

Zen feeling with a natural calmness in Alpine environment you could get in Tyrol/Vorarlberg.

Try out this

http://www.stuibenfall.at/freizeit.htm

or

"life, living and the industries of the Neolithic Age"
http://www.oetzidorf.at/eng/seite2.htm

Gregory Karydis

03-19-2007, 09:22 AM

Jeff Kilgroe

03-19-2007, 11:00 AM

A little info on the new (G80) nVidia GPUs
The 8800GTX and the Quadro FX4600 (announced about 2 weeks ago) have the exact same hardware.
Inly difference is the DeviceID stamp which is 0190 for the GeForce and 019E for the Quadro.
Apple is unlikely to put a GeForce in their systems but I can expect a Quadro in there.

There are a few other subtle hardware differences. For example the Quadro version of the card supports up to 8 stencil or masking buffers in hardware as well as 4 overlay planes. The GeForce only supports 1 on each. The Quadro also supports more hardware accelerated "GL Lights". Quadro card has a multi-function genlock port for stereo shutter glasses or other peripheral devices.

But for the most part, the hardware is identical and unless you run one of the very rare and obscure applications that can even use the extra features, you're wasting your money on the Quadro. Just like the FX4500 in a G5 Quad power Mac. I own one, it's a complete waste compared the 7800GT option that was also available. ...Unless you actually needed to drive dual 30" displays or needed the genlock port or... Which I did, so I coughed up the $$$. Don't go thinking they're identical except for the minor ID tags and firmware... Not the case. You can actually read the list of functional differences between the two GPUs in nVidia's developer docs. You'll have to register to take a look. But really, I just about covered, it's very minor and even though I run 3D software like Modo, Lightwave, Maya and XSI. I can honestly say, a Quadro offers no benefit over a GeForce and I will buy and run the GeForce card when I can.

After a helluva lot of tinkering I have managed to turn a GeForce8800GTX into a Quadro without altering any of the hardware (just firmware and software) It operates like the real thing and none is the wiser.

Quadro hacks (like SoftQuadro) have been available for years in PC land. In the early days, the hardware was truly identical. But Starting with the QuadroII, nVidia did start putting additional hardware functions into the Quadro line of GPUs... But many of the Quadro hacks became more sophisticated and utilized some pretty good software routines to cover for the missing line and point functions. And in a great many cases, it never mattered because outside of a few obscure applications, none of the unique quadro features were ever used. The benefits to running the Quadro driver set on the GeForce hardware was typically a different optimization level -- driver functions tuned more for CADD style applications. With the latest drivers these days from nVidia, the internal optimizations are the same between GeForce and Quadro and you tune your selected optimization and function set with their application templates. On the Mac we're still lacking that functionality.

But I really hope Apple offers the GeForce 8800GTX and upcoming 8900 iterations. I have a bad feeling they will do their usual brain dead product offerings and let us choose from a budget 8600GT/8800GT or pay through the nose for the Quadro. :sad: For a PC, my choice would be a dual 8800GTX SLI config. If people are truly seeing a benefit from running the Quadro driver set on that config, I'd do that too as long as stability isn't compromised.

Gregory Karydis

03-19-2007, 01:01 PM

You'll have to register to take a look. But really, I just about covered, it's very minor and even though I run 3D software like Modo, Lightwave, Maya and XSI. I can honestly say, a Quadro offers no benefit over a GeForce and I will buy and run the GeForce card when I can.

Been a registered developer for more than a year now.
Actually I run Houdini, Lightwave and Maya and to be honest I completely regret investing on a couple of Quadro FX5500s since I can render with nVidia's Gelato with a couple of 8800GTXs.

BTW, Rivatuner won't work for the G80 series (I was involved in the making of the most recent release and alas there is nothing that can be done...)