paneli Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 Help! Yesterday I bought the Quadro 4000 and my life turned into hell. I installed it on a Intel i7 860 system running MSI P55 mobo. 4GB of ram, 650W PSU under Windows 7 64bit. I don't see any diffrence between the new Quadro 4000 and my old FX580. Performance increased (maybe) by 5%. How come? 1200$ card vs a 300$ card and no improvement? I installed everything properly (as far as I know) using the CD driver. Also, I tried the latest version on nvidia's website (267.05). 3Ds Max 2011 Performance Driver (MAXTreme as it used to be called, now D3D somthing..) installed properly. Tried it on Windows 7 64bit, Vista64 and XP 64bit. Tried Max 2009 and max 2011. Everything installed properly but performs BAD. Is there any solution or it is just a ripoff? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJLynn Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 Ilya, I thought I'd replied to your previous post but I guess I failed to press the Post button - which is just as well because I'd confused your FX580 with a GTX580. Okay, let's see here. Can you use Device Manager to confirm the driver actually in use is the new one, and check in Max to make sure Performance Driver is turned on. (Might have been messed up in the software installing process.) Not that I would ever try to argue the point that $1200 for a Quadro 4000 is not a ripoff for most people, mind you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superkames Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 -With programs which use direct3d , the Quadros or Firepros show a little advantages . But with Vray RT GPU , the amount of video ram is great . -Just for 3dsmax's moddelling , you should buy a AMD's HD4800 , that's ok , I said in a previous thread already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJLynn Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 I'd never recommend a Quadro 4000 for its Vray RT GPU capabilities. As a CUDA card it's just an underclocked Geforce 470 with 2GB. A Geforce 560 with 2GB is better and a lot cheaper, but for Quadro 4000 money the card to buy is going to be the 3GB version of the Geforce 580. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superkames Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Yes , the Geforces with 2gbs ram or more are good choices for GPU renderring , but he bought the Quadro 4000 already . Can you tell him that he should sell the card , and don't talk any thing about it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paneli Posted February 19, 2011 Author Share Posted February 19, 2011 By the way, I'm a 3Ds Max Design 2009/2011 and AutoCAD 2009/2011 user. How can it be a 1200$ quadro 4000 performs the same as a 250$ quadro fx580? I just don't get it. I'm telling you, it a rippoff. Otherwise, I am an idiot and I can't install drivers. I formatted my pc about 3 times, tried different os as i mentioned. XP64 showed a TINY improvment over win7 or vista64 but... There is no solution? What about all these tests on the web confirming he quadro 4000 outperforms previous generetions? I've seen the graphs, i've seen tests, i red reccomendations. Is it just nvidia's marketing? all of this? I'm still lookiong for a solution. It was claimed that DirectX 11 caused issues on Windows 7, so I down graded to Vista with DirectX 10.1. The problem remains. I downgraded than to XP64 SP2 and felt no difference. I instelled different drivers, certifed, uncertified, cd drivers, latest drivers for nvidia website. NOTHING. The Quadro 4000 = FX580. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superkames Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 (edited) @Ilya : Most of the softs that they (Nvidia or AMD )tested are very old version (which included in SPECViewperf 11.0 or SPECViewperf 10)-->you must look for new realworld tests for accuracy results: http://www.cgarchitect.com/news/Reviews/Review076_1.asp http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/nvidia-quadro-5000_7.html#sect0 ............... SPECViewperf 11.0 Realworld tests (or up to date software version): ----> Tiny improvement compare to the SPECViewperf 11.0 (The one they usually advertising) Ps/The performance driver will improve a little (about 20% with new scenes+softwares,and more with older scenes+softwares) , but also buggies drivers. Edited February 20, 2011 by Superkames Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paneli Posted February 19, 2011 Author Share Posted February 19, 2011 In other words, I got owned? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJLynn Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 No, you didn't, what's going on here is that you're not doing the sorts of work that require very high end video cards. Max is more CPU dependent than, say, Solidworks or Maya. But it also depends on how you're testing. Some scenes and display types will show more benefit than others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paneli Posted February 19, 2011 Author Share Posted February 19, 2011 I have a lot of kinds of scenes. In all of them both quadros performed the same Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elliot Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 (edited) Hello Guys Here we are again. I remember we spent great part of Dec and Jan talking about these cards. Ilya.... I am afraid you are right, no matter how nice is Andrew about explaining the advantages of the Quadro so you don't feel like me, hi hi hi hi. Vu (Superkannes) was pounding on the three of us not to buy the Quadro 4000, we both did.... Hi hi hi Andrew and Vu were correct....! I am on one of my extended business trip. I have on this end an I-7 985 with the 4870 X2. There is no difference between this 250.00 card and the 780.00 card. In fact I think this card is slightly faster. Even the regular 4870 is about the same as the Quadro. I am a heavy user of Soldiworks, other than the Realview there is not much difference. With SW and the Realview there is a difference. However on my laptop I have a Quadro 1600 and it is basically the same as the Quadro 4000. Yes, we were taken.... Hi hi hi hi Me twice..... on the Quadro FX5800 and now the Quadro 4000. I while ago I was at the store and they have the new gamer card, I think it is the 6970 or 6950 they seem to be OK. If buy another card I will definitely buy a gamer card. Ilya.... you are not alone....! I was taken too...... hi hi hi The card works OK, just like the gamer card at almost 2.5 the amount of money. Just keep on going like I did and don't think too much about it. The card is OK. Regards to the 3 of you Elliot PD I am in the Caribbean..... Edited February 20, 2011 by Elliot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aref3dsmax Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Friends. Our biggest problem today's world is a lie. why I say it? Large companies such Nvidia only lies and propaganda pieces to sell. AMD actually much higher than the hardware is set. Now we see my good friend says that the difference between 4000 and the FX580 does not exist. I'm living in Iran. 4000 prices here 2 times world prices. I really thought that this is a miracle QUADRO 4000. but with good information that you knew was wrong. If I buy a 600 Quadro all my needs autodesk 3dsmax 2012 and AutoCAD 2012 is the Undertaker. I'm working vray. The scenes that are seen, please, have a light source is 127. I am looking for a piece that I could viewport correctly establish the relationship with my lights. What card you buy me that I could do better than this I needed answers. I'm Have ATI 4870 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now