professional gfx card:ati or nvidia which is the best solution ? [Archive]

Gfxman

03-05-2008, 09:38 AM

Since every bench program i've found does't take in any consideration Xsi as they always refer to max, or maya, or rino, or sintetic calculation, it is very hard to understand which profesional grafic card one should choose.

Reading this article: http://www.hothardware.com/Articles/MidRange%5FWorkstation%5FGPU%5FShootout/

in the end they can say: maya? go ati, max ? go nvidia ( as you can read here:
http://www.hothardware.com/articles/MidRange_Workstation_GPU_Shootout/?page=6
)
in the Overall performances the firegl 5600 outperforms quadro 1700 that is a little more expansive.

What should a poor xsi user choose? Maybe someone "inside" softimage, can help us to understand these bech result...and choose the best card.

thx and sorry for the very poor english..

franky

03-05-2008, 10:33 AM

Gfxman

03-05-2008, 10:56 AM

first using one of these:
http://www.softimage.com/support/xsi/graphics_cards/default.aspx

is a must. do you have certified hardware running xsi.

i personally will stay with quadro. speed is fine. no crashes, no glitches, no lags. unified driver! i am happy :)

Yeah. I know, they're both certificated so... i'm asking which one of these two cards is the best solution in xsi.

Or simply, if anyone knows, is quadro is better then firegl in xsi, like it seems to be, for example in Maya.

But i would like answers based on actual fact ore real life comparision.

luceric

03-05-2008, 04:19 PM

We test both but, you know, we always seem to have a few more glitches on ATI.. I've personally always been on nVidia.

Adrian Lazar

03-05-2008, 04:27 PM

Same here, nvidia has stronger drivers than ati.
I have a 8800 GT and works perfectly under vista 64.

giant551

03-05-2008, 06:55 PM

Well i'm no hardware expert but i'd stick with Nvidia also. If your a bit strapped for cash it would be worth looking at the Nvidia high end gaming cards as thay can be a lot cheaper that the quadro's and if your not pushing really big scenes around they run XSI fine.

Ive got a quadro 4500 in my work machine and a 8800gts in my other PC and they both run XSI really well, very stable. The quadro is a dream but to be honest with you the 8800 is not a million miles away in veiwport performance.

cheers

Paul

Adrian Lazar

03-06-2008, 03:31 AM

I always wondered how far ahead is a quadro compared with a top of the line gamers card and if this difference can justify the quadro price.

Heinerich

03-06-2008, 04:12 AM

Dual-monitor 3d acceleration goes a long way and that is quadro-only :devil2:

Firebird

03-06-2008, 04:16 AM

Ive heard u will see the power of a quadro compared to an gamer card quite fast when u plug in a second monitor

edit:Heinrich was faster

Gfxman

03-06-2008, 04:51 AM

Ive got a quadro 4500 in my work machine and a 8800gts in my other PC and they both run XSI really well, very stable. The quadro is a dream but to be honest with you the 8800 is not a million miles away in veiwport performance.

cheers

Paul

I had a geforce 8800 gtx: the worst gfx card under xsi i've ever had ( windows xp pro sp2 slow, buggy and unpredictable results).
My old 7800 ( installed on the same pc )
outperforms it by 1,5 times....i can't really use it, tried all the drivers people suggest worked for them, nothing.
In the end i've sold it. Now i'm with my old good 7800, but i have the old pc without a gfx card: i'm looking for a fx 570, someone told me ( on an hardware forum ) that is just a 15% slower than a fx 1700, any idea about this?

Can't really understand the difference in price tag, when you look at benchmarks, they seems all quite the same, looking at the various bench around a 250$ card ( quadro fx570 ) is just 50% less powerfull in the most bench then a 3000$ card (Top nvidia Quadro ) ad you can read here:
( http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=3994&page=3 )

Really confused:
ati seems better then nvidia

bench says that all the quadro card are quite the same in power

some people say that 8800 gtx worked well for them under Xsi, some have my same experience and it's the worst you can imagine...

Adrian Lazar

03-06-2008, 05:24 AM

i have 2 displays, one is 24" wide hp and other 19" samsung, what difference would i notice if i would use a quadro card?

Mr_Nitro

03-06-2008, 05:58 AM

Hi,
just my 2cents , been using 8800gtx on xp64 and no glitches or weird things at all... it's very fast card, just have to be careful about what drivers/settings u use. (all the nvidia v1** drivers are a bit weird imho). One options is to try out omega drivers (for nvidia/ati) sometimes they really solve most problems, like on my laptop with ATI x1600, it was pretty bad at xsi, but then using omega I never experienced any problems or crashes.
btw if nowadays a video card gives you serious crashes it's more a matter of bad cooling/PSU or such rather than sw issues me thinks...

cheers
val

giant551

03-06-2008, 07:28 PM

i have 2 displays, one is 24" wide hp and other 19" samsung, what difference would i notice if i would use a quadro card?

I run 2 21" dell DVi monitors on both my machines with no problems and again i'm no hardware expert i don't tend to go much on benchmarks and all that stuff. As i said before i don't think there's million miles difference in viewport performance.

Well, would you see a couple of hundred quid worth of difference between a quadro and a geforce thats the question ?? Its all about budget in the end. again unless your planning on pushing lots of millions of poly's around the screen its open to debate in my opinion.

Don't get me wrong i love my quadro its a dream, but it cost a lot of money for that nice little toy LOL.

Where the quardro's really excel is with cad applications where your pushing big complicated CAD models around the screen. As applications like Inventor and Solidworks
tend to display the materials real time not after rendering.

cheers

Paul

Adrian Lazar

03-07-2008, 12:40 AM

thanks paul, i was looking to get a quadro from some time, as you said is quite an investment, i'm still not decided.

jgoldfin

03-07-2008, 10:32 AM

Hi there -

I have posted this on the xsilist before, this question comes up often.

To start - Commnercial Cards vs Workstation Cards - why are WS cards the only ones certified?
From our side, we work closely with the NVIDIA and ATI WS development teams, and they are the engineering group that helps us re-pro bugs and issues should something be flagged to tech support or escalation. During development cycles on our side and theirs, there is a lot of support - from cards to sw fixes, etc.

As for ATI and NVIDIA - we can't choose sides and say one is better than the other - we work equally with both companies, and they both deliver great products.

What I can say is that in the past, ATI has been known for having less than stellar driver support, which has caused a few issues for some clients running XSI. In the last few months, with the release of their latest Fire GL line, ATI has been extraordinarily diligent helping us ensure that XSI performs on the 5600/7600 cards - we have had a direct link to the development team at AMD that is responsible for driver support, and have seen quick turnarounds and a tremendous willingness to fix any issues.

We ran the latest Dell dual quad workstations equipped with the Fire GL 7600s at GDC and they were amazing systems.

When we say a card is certified - it is tried, tested and true. We'll be working more in the upcoming months to provide documentation and evidence on how, why and what we certify - from the lower end WS cards to the top of the line.

Hope that is somewhat helpful!

jen

Paul Wood

03-07-2008, 04:13 PM

I run 2 21" dell DVi monitors on both my machines with no problems and again i'm no hardware expert i don't tend to go much on benchmarks and all that stuff. As i said before i don't think there's million miles difference in viewport performance.

I know this is off subject but I also run duel monitors and was wondering if it is possible to move one of the veiwports to the second monitor.

Thanks,

Paul Wood

Adrian Lazar

03-07-2008, 04:18 PM

i think that you can open a floating point object view (alt+8 i think) that can mimics a camera/perspective view and move that window to the second display.

mde

03-08-2008, 05:19 AM

Just stay away from gaming cards, they may or may not work for you and seems to me that every generation Nvidia makes them worse for professional 3D.

Personally I use ATI FireGL7600 and despite there are no certified drivers for XSI yet, it performs great.

DAVID:-D

03-08-2008, 09:37 AM

We had problems with dual monitors running with game card. QuadroFX even with lower performance in papers fix that. Well, perhaps in these days 8800 GT-S nVidia cards can offer you more power, but still QuadroFX is best choice to run without any problems. I have QuadroFX1500, which is not that expensive and Im pretty happy with performance. 6.000.000 scene run without problem.

jgoldfin

03-10-2008, 11:28 AM

MDE -

I'll doublecheck with Mark Schoennagel today, but I believe that the latest AMD graphics drivers are being certified - 8.44 I believe. We ran the Fire GL 7600s in our Dell GDC workstations, and we worked closely with AMD to make sure everything was flawless. There even could be another driver in beta, I am not 100 per sure.

Keep an eye here, and we'll update it as soon as we have the info:

http://www.softimage.com/support/xsi/graphics_cards/v5_v6_xp_pro.aspx

jen

mattmos

03-11-2008, 02:15 PM

mde

03-11-2008, 03:16 PM

Hi Matt where have you been? :)
Well, I have this card for a little more than a week now, but so far so good. Drivers are a bit young (it's just 2nd version of drivers I think), there is one glitch so far, if you select a heavy mesh (100k +) there is slight delay (no delay if you select from explorer, just in viewport), but I know they are fixing it as we speak (that bug is in maya as well).
Other than that, the card performs great, a couple of million polys is not a problem at all, works very well with 2 monitor setup as well.

Considering it's like 1/3rd of the price of equivalent Quadro FX4600, I think this card is a winner (and it plays Crisis great as well), especially when drivers mature a bit - (edit: didn't see Jennifer post :) )

marksch

03-12-2008, 04:20 PM

Hi Everyone,

There is a known issue with the FireGL driver 8.44 that is definitely being fixed. The issue is as mentioned above, when selecting dense objects in the viewport there is a lag. The lag will increase as the polygon count increases of the object. I found this bug just before GDC and the good news is just a couple days after I reported it to AMD they had me a beta driver to test. The new driver cut the lag by 2/3rds. They are still committed to getting this lag down to nothing and will have a new driver out as soon as possible when all the optimizations and testing have been completed.

This is really why buying a certified card makes sense for the professional. There are dedicated teams at both Nvidia and ATI along with all the workstation vendors who really do test and make sure our products are running at the highest levels of stability and performance.

On the workstation side, if you see a workstation on the certified page it means it has also undergone extensive testing. I let them render for days on end along with a series of real world production tests. After that the machines go to Montreal where the are further used by Q&A or the dev team. The benefit here is If a customer reports a problem on a certified workstation we can easily try to repro the problem since we have the hardware on-site.

Wow no lie, I was just writing this reply when AMD called. The beta driver I was using went through their Q&A and is ready to be released. They were wondering if getting a driver out now that cuts the selection time by 2/3's was better than waiting an additional month or so until an instant selection fix was completed. I thought it would be best to get something to everyone sooner than later as I found the fix made things MUCH better even though they are not perfect. So, expect a new driver very soon, and a complete fix in a few weeks.

Cheers,

mark

astrodog

07-21-2008, 07:05 PM

The FireGL team just released FireGL driver v8.502.

The new FireGL drivers not only fixes the reported lag in selecting objects in large models, but actually adds full hardware acceleration.

The new Catalyst driver for FireGL is at http://ati.amd.com/support/driver.html

There is a known issue with the FireGL driver 8.44 that is definitely being fixed. The issue is as mentioned above, when selecting dense objects in the viewport there is a lag. The lag will increase as the polygon count increases of the object. I found this bug just before GDC and the good news is just a couple days after I reported it to AMD they had me a beta driver to test. The new driver cut the lag by 2/3rds. They are still committed to getting this lag down to nothing and will have a new driver out as soon as possible when all the optimizations and testing have been completed.

mde

07-21-2008, 07:45 PM

The FireGL team just released FireGL driver v8.502.

The new FireGL drivers not only fixes the reported lag in selecting objects in large models, but actually adds full hardware acceleration.

The new Catalyst driver for FireGL is at http://ati.amd.com/support/driver.html

This is indeed fixed (or at least much better) but I had 1.5 seconds delay while tagging points on big meshes (around 100k and more -> this is really bad, doing the same operation via scripting produces no delay), and if I try to resize viewport (by dragging the frames) I get redraw problems (this is more cosmetic than anything else, the viewports get erased, but they come back right after I release mouse key).

Other than that everything works fine and is very fast, I am running xsi using unsupported OS (vista64), so hopefully next release of driver (and possibly XSI) will make all remaining issues go away.

I must say that driver support is really good so far.

giant551

07-22-2008, 03:58 PM

Well just to say its worth shopping around. I recently got a brand new ATI firegl 5600 from ebay for just over £100. Even though its only a mid range workstation card it works really well with XSI with really good viewport performance. I would go as far to say i was shocked to see how good it was. :D

mde

09-24-2008, 03:18 PM

Well after having FireGL 7600 for about six months, I think I am ready to give up and get rid of it.

AMD just can't get drivers sorted. FireGL7600 is listed as certified on softimage website, but, even the latest Vista driver (523.1.1, released today) is ridden with show stopping bugs, the biggest one (for me) is huge delay when tagging points - about second or two in 6.5, 5-6 seconds on 7.0 in certain scenes (howards_room, it's freeware scene floating around which I use to test drivers) - and in some cases it can even freeze the program for 10-15 seconds. The mesh isn't even that dense.

In my other scene which contains a bunch of spheres (around 6 million polys in 700k chunks), delay when tagging points is up to 20 seconds.
In real life situation, it means when you model and have moderate poly count mesh (10-50k) moving points feels really sluggish and "sticky", because point selection always has some sort of delay.

I run q6600 with 4 GB ram and Vista64 ultimate with all latest drivers.

The above doesn't happen when selecting components from scripting or using equivalent Quadro card.

I am afraid that this card isn't a good card to run XSI on, personally I'll recommend staying away from it, which is a shame, because raw power of this card is great.
I think I gave AMD enough time to sort the drivers out and tried to stay really positive about them (NVidia needs a competitor).
P.S. I'll try to wipe the drivers again when I have time and reinstall from fresh, but I don't think it will fix anything.

giant551

09-24-2008, 03:26 PM

mde

09-24-2008, 03:31 PM

Thats a real shame, I wonder if its because you are running Vista? I got to say i have no problems at all with V7 and XP 64. The viewports are very qiuck with no lag at all for selection. Its really sad to see that even after all this time Vista drivers still are not 100%

Well, I might try it on XP32 when I have time, but I am not going to install XP64 bit. AMD had enough time to sort Vista drivers.

Thanks for the tip anyway :)

p.s. Did you try to tag points on 100k+ mesh?

sven

09-29-2008, 05:22 PM

AMD just can't get drivers sorted. FireGL7600 is listed as certified on softimage website, but, even the latest Vista driver (523.1.1, released today) is ridden with show stopping bugs, the biggest one (for me) is huge delay when tagging points - about second or two in 6.5, 5-6 seconds on 7.0 in certain scenes (howards_room, it's freeware scene floating around which I use to test drivers) - and in some cases it can even freeze the program for 10-15 seconds. The mesh isn't even that dense.

In my other scene which contains a bunch of spheres (around 6 million polys in 700k chunks), delay when tagging points is up to 20 seconds.
In real life situation, it means when you model and have moderate poly count mesh (10-50k) moving points feels really sluggish and "sticky", because point selection always has some sort of delay.

Can't confirm that with a FireGL8600, runs just fine. We're also running a 7700 in another machine, also no complains here. ICE Tree feels a bit laggy, when zooming in and out, but thats it.

mde

09-30-2008, 06:09 PM

Can't confirm that with a FireGL8600, runs just fine. We're also running a 7700 in another machine, also no complains here. ICE Tree feels a bit laggy, when zooming in and out, but thats it.
What system are you using?
I'll gladly take everything what I said back if this is some error on my side, although I completely wiped out the drivers and re installed them - still long delays when tagging point.

ICE tree works perfectly.

sven

09-30-2008, 07:28 PM

Vista 64.. Although the ICE tree is only slow compared to a Nvidia-system, i think you wouldnt notice if youre not used to a Nvidiasystem

mde

10-01-2008, 05:08 AM

Vista 64.. Although the ICE tree is only slow compared to a Nvidia-system, i think you wouldnt notice if youre not used to a Nvidiasystem

Hmm that's really weird.. only 7600 would be affected?

I assume you ran "tag point on 100k+ poly mesh" test?
Well, I am going to wipe the drivers again....
I use ICE on nvidia system as well and ICE tree speed is the same. I really start to lose my plot :)

sven

10-01-2008, 08:46 AM

Hmm that's really weird.. only 7600 would be affected?

I assume you ran "tag point on 100k+ poly mesh" test?
Well, I am going to wipe the drivers again....
I use ICE on nvidia system as well and ICE tree speed is the same. I really start to lose my plot :)

Ok, you're right, i have the same delay. I was sure, i worked on dense meshes with the ATI, but seems I was wrong.

bwtr

10-02-2008, 12:15 AM

http://news.nvidia.com:8080/read/archive?id=1341&e=john%40jbr%2ecom%2eau&x=61f8b5a5

Has this been mentioned?

Brian

wurp

10-03-2008, 06:14 AM

mde

10-03-2008, 11:32 AM

Im using an ATI hd 4850 at home and although it has some small glitches it's really fast compared to my brand new quadro I have at work. I had to try some different drivers to get it to work properly but now that I found the right one (v 8.8 seems to work best) I'm really happy with it. I can't really recomend ATIs cards for professional work though, having as few glitches as possible is more important than raw speed, so overall Id still say nvidias cards is the best option for CG companies. Most highend 3d programs test against quadro cards and although there are some certified ATI cards for xsi I don't think they work quite as well still, it's mostly a driver issue so the problems might be ironed out in time though.

If they fix tag points delay (on FireGLs), there will be no more show stopping issues left (a couple of minor ones) - and card is indeed blazing fast comparing to equvalent quadro. With exception of that (tag point) bug the latest driver is very stable and fast.

IMO AMD have to speed up driver development a bit and possibly give more attention to XSI/Maya/Max and not only engineering programs.

Personally I don't really want pro gfx card market to be dominated by one company.
I am sure AMD will get there soon, but competition isn't asleep and atm I'd recommend waiting for new driver before buying FireGL

Faizol

10-15-2008, 04:57 AM

Hi all,
Has anyone test the latest ATI driver (which i think was released last week or so)?

wurp

10-15-2008, 06:57 AM

Are you talking about the fireGL drivers, because the radeon drivers hasn't been updated since september.

Anyway, I ended up sending my ATI card back, I've just had it with their crappy drivers, it took me like 5 tries just to get a new different version of the driver installed and in xsi that one fixed one thing but broke something else, ATI has lost another customer for at least a few years.

Did I mention that the new mudbox 2009 doesn't work well at all with ATI cards?

Go with nvidia if you want to do 3d is all I can say, ATI just aren't there yet.

Hi all,
Has anyone test the latest ATI driver (which i think was released last week or so)?

mde

10-15-2008, 07:03 AM

Hi all,
Has anyone test the latest ATI driver (which i think was released last week or so)?
Last FireGL driver was released on Sept 24th. This is the driver I talked about in my previous posts, ie. not very good. I don't know about radeon.

giant551

10-15-2008, 08:03 PM

Right the plot thickens!! I just got a new Vista 64 machine at home and put my Fire gl in it and the performance is dreadfull with the new drivers and version 7. The lag on selection is huge and you get the exploding mesh syndrome just to name a few.

I run the same card with XP 64 using driver 8.502.0.0 with vertually no problems and its blisteringly fast in the viewports.

I will try the 8.502.0.0 driver in Vista and see what happens. I will keep you posted.

giant551

10-16-2008, 04:02 AM

trollett

10-16-2008, 05:52 AM

Just on a side note i was wondering if ant one has tried RivaTuner. Apparently you can softmod your geforce cards to run to quadro specs using quadro drivers.

http://www.guru3d.com/category/rivatuner/

A fello developer friend of mine has got his 7950gtx running to the same specs as a fx3500 and he's using quadro drivers apparently.

Anyne else tried??

cheers

Paul

Yes I tried that before with my GeForce 8600, I can't remember I noticed any difference though, but I know it works atleast. :)

Have anyone with ATI tried the latest 8.10 driver? I really want a HD4870x2 cause I love the picture quality, and it would be great to actually be able to play what you make in Cryengine 2. :) But my friend who has it is barely able to work in XSI using that gfxcard.

I really hope they fix all the problems with it, it's a really nice card besides from the XSI problems!

wurp

10-16-2008, 06:06 AM

Yeah, dont buy that ATI card if you want to run XSI on it, believe me I've tried.

if you look at the benchmarks you'll find that nvidias cards are just as fast as the ATI ones, just slightly more expensive. For example the new 260 gtx core 216 is on par with the ATI 4870 in most tests, sometimes even faster, and that't not even nvidias top of the range card..

As for moding your geforce into a quadro, I wouldn't bother, it won't perform any faster in xsi at all, and games are less likely to work, so unless you have a specific problem that you know a quadro card would solve, it's really not worth the trouble.
I have a top of the range quadro card at work, and I don't notice anything different working on here compared to working on a normal geforce.

Yes I tried that before with my GeForce 8600, I can't remember I noticed any difference though, but I know it works atleast. :)

Have anyone with ATI tried the latest 8.10 driver? I really want a HD4870x2 cause I love the picture quality, and it would be great to actually be able to play what you make in Cryengine 2. :) But my friend who has it is barely able to work in XSI using that gfxcard.

I really hope they fix all the problems with it, it's a really nice card besides from the XSI problems!

trollett

10-16-2008, 04:28 PM

According to a friend of mine, the new Catalyst 8.10 do fix alot of bugs in XSI.
If you got a new ATI card, check out the new drivers here http://game.amd.com/us-en/drivers_catalyst.aspx

sven

10-16-2008, 05:13 PM

The Selection Delay Bug is still there (8.10)

wurp

10-16-2008, 06:15 PM

This is what Mr T has to contribute to this thread:

http://www.ericknelson.com/wurp/sucks.jpg

I tend to agree....

The Selection Delay Bug is still there (8.10)

giant551

10-17-2008, 09:38 AM

After a little play with Vista and the latest Fire gl driver ive found that if you disable the aerotheme display in vista i have had a much better performance. Ive not had an exploding mesh yet and the viewports are very qiuck.

Ive still got the selection delay but it seams to be a lot better.

I'm pretty conviced this is a vista issue as ive encountered very few glitches with XP 64.

sven

10-17-2008, 10:25 AM

That sounds very promising, I will give XP64 try..

mde

11-12-2008, 07:10 PM

FireGL7600, Vista 64 Ultimate, Aero on, latest driver 8.543.0.0 (released today I think), XSI 7. (bug also confirmed in Maya 2008)

Still over 2 seconds delay (sometimes total freeze) when tagging points using default rectangle tool on large meshes (around 80k polys) (lasso is instant, as it should be). One of 4 cores usage goes up to 100% when tagging.

Card is going on ebay soon, or to trash if no one buys.

I am done with ATI, I think.
I just wonder how this hardware gets certified for various 3D applications, because obviously it isn't working properly.

wurp

11-12-2008, 07:30 PM

yes, my ATI card (4850) will also go on ebay soon, already replaced it with an nvidia 260 gtx, couldn't be happier with that one.

I am also done with ATI, they have lost yet another customer due to their shitty drivers, possibly forever.

FireGL7600, Vista 64 Ultimate, Aero on, latest driver 8.543.0.0 (released today I think), XSI 7. (bug also confirmed in Maya 2008)

Still over 2 seconds delay (sometimes total freeze) when tagging points on large meshes (around 80k polys). One of 4 cores usage goes up to 100% when tagging.

Card is going on ebay soon, or to trash if no one buys.

I am done with ATI, I think.
I just wonder how this hardware gets certified for various 3D applications, because obviously it isn't working properly.

Faizol

11-14-2008, 08:22 AM

apparently, ATI will release a pro card pretty soon, FireStream 9270, basically a HD4870 with 2GB of DDR5 and a very special driver set.

I wonder how will the driver perform to XSI users.

mde

11-14-2008, 01:52 PM

apparently, ATI will release a pro card pretty soon, FireStream 9270, basically a HD4870 with 2GB of DDR5 and a very special driver set.

I wonder how will the driver perform to XSI users.
FireGL is pro card with very special set of drivers. It performs just like I wrote above.

streaker

11-14-2008, 04:02 PM

The Selection Delay Bug is still there (8.10)
On my system it's less than 0,5 sec delay - didn't even realise this bug, before read this thread - XP64 and hd4850 with 8.10 drivers. And finally I'm good with this version - before it was real pain in the neck... when you want to model - install 8.6 for mesh to non explode, want to use ICE - install something never (or don't try to zoom in compounds ;) ).
One of 4 cores usage goes up to 100% when tagging.
On my system this doesn't occur

Despite this, I'm still satisfied from my hd4850 - don't have feeling of overpaid from product (you can have that especially when you buyed gt2xxx before hd4xxx comes out ;) ) and when decide to move over cs4 - will have graphic acceleration without investing in quadro

wurp

11-14-2008, 05:01 PM

you will have other problems with that card too, the new mudbox doesn't run well at all on ATI hardware, and no, having a quadro doesn't mean cs4 will run well, you need one that supports CUDA etc, the new nvidia 2xx series does that fine..

On my system it's less than 0,5 sec delay - didn't even realise this bug, before read this thread - XP64 and hd4850 with 8.10 drivers. And finally I'm good with this version - before it was real pain in the neck... when you want to model - install 8.6 for mesh to non explode, want to use ICE - install something never (or don't try to zoom in compounds ;) ).

On my system this doesn't occur

Despite this, I'm still satisfied from my hd4850 - don't have feeling of overpaid from product (you can have that especially when you buyed gt2xxx before hd4xxx comes out ;) ) and when decide to move over cs4 - will have graphic acceleration without investing in quadro

streaker

11-14-2008, 05:33 PM

the new mudbox doesn't run well at all on ATI hardware
Well... for now don't use any sculpting software, but if I do - go to zbrush anyway (it's cheaper and more powerfull). But to be honest - put that on "ATI negatives" shelf (and I'm pretty sure this will change in couple months)
having a quadro doesn't mean cs4 will run well, you need one that supports CUDA etc, the new nvidia 2xx series does that fine..
My bad - before cs4 go out where were a rumours, that gpu acceleration will works only on specyfic quadro cards and all hd3xxx and never. Now check on adobe.com and looks that all gf6+, hd1xxx+, quadro 3xx+, firegl 5xxx+ are tested and supported (acceleration goes throught ogl interface, not cuda).
And about cuda: http://blogs.adobe.com/kevin.goldsmith/2008/09/ and the end there is that sentence: One thing I wanted to correct about Photoshop CS4: it is not using CUDA. Not sure how this rumour got out there, but it isn't true. Not that we aren't fans of CUDA, we just aren't shipping anything that uses it in CS4.