It even helps to always save the drawing in a view with little geometry visible. As the models became large, each time I changed the viewpoint, the wait to regen was frustrating. I find the balance of both a high 2D and 3D in this configuration very attractive.
The Quadro is beautifully made and very large. This is a great feature of rendering programs as you can keep a couple of cores aside such that the rendering can churn away while you work on something else, or put the computer to work on the rendering and go another cup of coffee. The overall rating of the also improved from sabertooth x79 memory slots Interestingly, the 2D is not very impressive for this computer e.
Last month December,as I was planning a Solidworks assembly of 6, parts, I decided to try a higher level Quadro again. Geforce 2- series GTX,are listed, but not in the class. I use Sketchup sabertooth x79 memory slots casually- that is not very systematically, not taking full advantage of layers and components, and consequently, waiting to regen a view with shadows on a MB model seemed to take forever.
The Precision has a series of slots corresponding to the PCIe slots and the FX has a rear bracket that supports the card on the back end. No 2 highest 2D, has a rating ofthis on an i7 K 3. Most CAD and graphics applications -except rendering- are still mainly single threaded, so CPU clock speed is critical.
Searching the specification charts, I was again immersed in the morass of Quadro precision and specialized application drivers vs. Then I discovered Passmark Performance Test- and surprise and disappointment.
Note the 2D score is similar but the 3D score is substantially higher than the No. In fact, an AutoCad 3D truss made of curved sections of round tubing seemed to have some intersection anomalies not present with the GTX. You write, " nothing from the consumer graphics beats the qudro and above in dcc" but I'd appreciate seeing hard evidence or good descriptions of your experience of that statement as I saw many Geforce GTX cards- even some GT's that surpassed the Quadro in 2D and especially 3D benchmarks.
The highest 3D rating machine is rated overall atusing an i5 K 3.
However, it occurred to me that the sabertooth x79 memory slots 3D performance of Quadros as compared to Geforce GTX should be considered as I work then and now more in Sketchup and other 3D applications- and with large files- 80 to MB. That said, I'm still open to the possibility that I haven't optimized my FX which by the way surpassed some Quadro 's in 2D benchmarks, and I may well find when doing my 6, part Solidworks assembly that Quadro's are "unbeatable.
The T has an W Ps for comparison.
The highest rated Computer on the current Passmark Benchmark using a GeForce has a rating of and uses an i7 6 core 3. To make a long story- 25 hours! Turning to the nasty baby blue Windows 7 Basic theme, the 2D score of the T jumped from to ! A Quadro takes only 40W. Geforce 3D speed and at much lower cost. The T with the GTX did well, a rating of - quite good- but the 2D score was only couled with a very good 3D score as On the other hand, as rendering can use every core, I imagine this computer would be great at that!
Also, a big performance help is to add trees and any complex imported 3D models at the last minute when everything else is finished and still place them on a layer that can be turned off. This may reflect the fact that most CAD applications are single threaded such that the processor clock speed is more slot hannover than the 16 cores.
Mempry, and disk all have to be great. If you are doing large renderings, use a CPU with the highest clock speed and as many cores as is reasonable. Interestingly, the top two 3D machines use quad core i5's. Quadros were and are almost universally praised for their 2D CAD capabilities and Autodesk and Solidworks have provided specialized drivers to optimize performance of their software using Quadros.
For general working, display in monochrome, and definitely, do not turn on shadows until you need to test views for rendering or 2D image export. See related liquid cooling listing below! Interestingly, the newer Quadros seemed to have changed their emphasis from 2D to 3D performance in accordance with the extreme shift, especially in architectural CAD to 3D applications like Revit.
I am learning Revit, a 3D program with big files and a lot of rendering power needed. By the way, the old T,having a dual CPU server motherboard sim. I also then believed that it was possible to soft-mod the GTX into a Quadrobut of course learned later that that trick was by then no longer allowed by nvidia.
Maya is another heavy-resource program lots of rendering, lots of polygons. I'd keep a full system image backup on the mechanical drives at all times, ready to go as well! Was this one perhaps optimized for video editing?
I have never read of anyone else reporting the severe performance penalty of the Win 7 Classic and Aero themes, but there we are. Thanks you for your reply. The 3D score though shows how Quadros - and I saw this many times on Passmark scores- that Lars slot are shifting to an emphasis on 3D performance.
Because the graphics performance is so essential to fluent use of the applications I use, it seemed to me, one of the best ways to choose a graphics card is to visit the sites of the applications you intend to sabertooth x79 memory slots and look into their recommendations for the most demanding version of their applications.
The GTX is interesting as it has a bit memory bus width CUDA cores, and it seems to me, that the computers with high graphics scores seem to favor GPUs with the wider and bit memory bus widths. The Disk score ofone of the highest I ever saw, also suggests some kind of enterprise card drive, no doubt a pricey item as well.
After some research, which showed the FX bit, 1. This i7 appears to be a good overclocker and poking around the overclocking world, appears to be very stable at say 4. I did learn that view regens depend on the amount of geometry that is visible, so I learned to navigate over the model in plan or around the edges and then zoom in to the position I wanted at the very last so that the least amount of 3D trees and other polygon rich objects were visible.