NVIDIA's New Pro Graphics Quadro FX 3000 Reviewed

SpinnerBait writes "NVIDIA recently took the wraps off their next generation Workstation Graphics card, the Quadro FX 3000. This card is based on the same general GPU architecture as the NV35 but optimized for CAD and DCC applications. This article over at HotHardware shows what the new Quadro FX 3000 is capable of and it makes a strong showing. However, you've got to pay to play (or work) on this card, that's for sure."

Comments

Most high end graphics cards STILL suck.

[Hayzeus]

But once I see FOUR-dimensional acceleration, /then/ I might upgrade.

I don't need it.. yet at least

[qmrq]

I've yet to find anything that gives my Quadro4 a real workout.. I'll stick with what I have for now.

Optimized

[mopslik]

...but optimized for CAD and DCC applications.

That's funny, I thought nVidia was "optimzed" for 3DMark2003.

Re:Optimized

[Dark Lord Seth]

I only go for video cards that are optimized for my wallet.

Games!

[Ikeya]

Yeah, yeah... So it's good at doing work. That's boring.
What we really wanna know is how many FPS can we get in Quake?!

crazy

[Boromir son of Faram]

I can't believe how powerful video cards are getting. Is it just me, or has the computer industry gone a little too far with the whole "bigger is better/more-more-more" consumerist mantrae? I mean, currenty video cards render full color frames faster than the human eye can perceive. A cheap PC has enough RAM to store the entire contents of the Library of Congress many times over. Most commodity hard drives are in the 100+ GB range. And yet the hardware producers continue churning out bigger, faster machines, as if anyone will ever need a 10GHz CPU. When will enough be, finally, enough?

Re:crazy

[pheared]

And yet the hardware producers continue churning out bigger, faster machines, as if anyone will ever need a 10GHz CPU. When will enough be, finally, enough?

It's because people keep using more and more things like perl and Java.

OK sorry, cheap shot. :-)

Re:crazy

[Verteiron]

You may not need a 10GHz CPU. I know I don't, at least, not yet. But as interfaces improve, as software becomes more complicated, hardware like this may well a requirement. After all, monitor images are still nothing like as detailed as a printed page, and even a very high-end monitor has only a fraction of the resolution that can be produced by a $100 printer. It's going to take serious hardware to acheive that kind of image clarity in real time. 10GHz CPUs may be just the beginning.

Re:crazy

[2nd Post!]

When someone designs something that uses all of it.

I own a Mac, so the situation is slightly different, but as a user of iMovie, iDVD, and Final Cut Express, I can use *all* the ram, CPU, and HD space I can get. Two hours of footage take 30gb of raw storage. Rendering 5 minutes of video takes 30 minutes. iPhoto takes 1.2gb of ram.

So for me, it's not enough. I need more.

Re:crazy

[Anonymous Crowhead]

According to this, 20 terabytes. Now please direct me to the store that sells cheap pcs with 20 terabytes of ram.

Re:crazy

[niko9]

Is it just me, or has the computer industry gone a little too far with the whole "bigger is better/more-more-more"

I mean, currenty video cards render full color frames faster than the human eye can perceive

Currently, I am addicted to Desert Combat, which is a mod for Battlfiled 1942. I consructed a top of the line gaming system just for this game. 3.0Ghz Pentium and Tyan 9700 Pro, 1 Gig 'o ram.

The game is buttery smooth most of the time, even with AA and AF on and at a resolution of 1600x1200.

But, the producers of the mod have a habit of updating the in game textures with every release, which makes the game look even more gorgeous, but will eventually start to tax my system. Not only that, Battlefiled supports upto 64 players, and with the advent of broadband in almost every home, don't be surprised to see games with a max of 128 players. So asking your card to render moving players, tanks shooting shells, blood and gore, lets not forget the choppers and amphibious assault vehicles, your "I mean, currenty video cards render full color frames faster than the human eye can perceive" seems irrelevant.

When you see so called "gaming benchmarks", please remember they are on avergae. They rarely point out the times when there are so many things being rendered, that you will see a bit of a slowdown, even with top of the line cards.

What is a DCC Application?

[Eros]

Okay, I know what a CAD program is but what is a DCC application?

Re:What is a DCC Application?

[Verteiron]

You know, for 3D accelerated direct client-to-client file transfers on IRC. Yeah. I can't wait for this card to be supported under Linux so I can view BitchX in all its full, 3D text glory (as seen in Hackers).

Oh wait.. Google says it stands for "digital content creation". Poo.

Re:What is a DCC Application?

[mopslik]

According to this article, DCC stands for Digital Content Creation.

Workstation Class Cards

[Serapth]

I have never understood how this breed of cards exists to this day. Really... the difference between a "stock" GeForce and a workstation class Quadro GeForce... just doesnt justify the cost difference anymore.

When you go back about 3 or 4 years ago... when you contrasted a Oxygen video card, or a FireGL vs a TNT or 3DFX card, you could see where the extra money went. But now, todays commerical grade video cards are more then capable. In fact, alot of people I know that work as graphic artists, use traditional Radeon or GeForce 4's in their workstation machines. Outside of say... Pixar, I just dont understand people buying the workstation class cards.

Now, to go back to this arguement... its nice to see that nVidia managed to get rid of the vacumn cleaner sized fan!

Re:Workstation Class Cards

[GauteL]

Did you read the article? Some of the benchmarks show that the workstation cards do the job at a magnitude of 3 times faster in some test than the fastest gaming card from NVIDIA.

If you need this speed, then you pay for it. Paying say $2k for a video card is not much if it makes your employees more productive.

Re:Workstation Class Cards

[Homology]

I have never understood how this breed of cards exists to this day. Really... the difference between a "stock" GeForce and a workstation class Quadro GeForce... just doesnt justify the cost difference anymore.

Just take a model of some hundred thousand triangles, and render them as wireframe. The gaming card ("stock" as you call it) will just slow down to a crawl. Add a few clipping planes, and the frame rate gets even worse. But the Quadro cards does indeed cater this common usage in CAD, and charge accordingly.

Now, you may say it's pretty much the same hardware, and you might not be that far wrong. A couple of years ago you could "upgrade" a GeForce card to a Quadro card just by hacking some software. Don't think that is possible anymore.

$3k? When $500 is almost as good?

[FileNotFound]

Having RTFA I am surprised that they liked the card.

I mean how can you say that the Quadro is a good card when it costs 6 times more than the competition and is less than 10% faster?

6 times for for 10% faster? No thanks.

Re:$3k? When $500 is almost as good?

[JungleBoy]

There IS a reason, but its a high cost setup. The Quadro FX 3000 can do Dual DVI at 1600x1200 on each screen. Very few cards can do dual DVI at this resolution. In fact the only other one I know of is the Quadro4 XGL 900 (which I use to drive my viewsonic vp201mb LCDs). Many high end game cards can now do insane dual monitor resolutions, but only dual analog is supported; or if they do support dual dvi, they only support it at 1280x1024. I think the Matrox Parahelia can do Dual DVI @ 1600x1200, but I bet UT2k3 doesn't run as well as on my Quadro. And with 3200 pixels of width, you can set a nice high field of view.

The Police Quest test

[lateralus_1024]

One has to wonder how well it can run Police Quest. Time will tell. I'm sure NVidia is dodging this test.

Re:Dual Out

[niko9]

Dual DVI output: Drives two independent digital displays at 1600 x1200, or one at 3840x24005.

Nice.

Sounds like the perfect card for the perfect monitor

9.2 million pixels at 0.1245mm stripe pitch, 3840x2400 native resolution.

Now, that my friends, is nice.

What about Half-life 2?

[az]

The review is good and well, but what framerate do I get when i run Half-Life 2?

Re:Dual Out

[FileNotFound]

Actually that'd be tall screen or something.

The first value is the horizontal.

Re:Impressive.

[hawkbug]

You spent 3 grand on a CAD card so your brother could play Dark Age of Camelot? I think not.

Re:Dual Out

[shish]

Damn it, I *am* showing my ignorance. This is not my day. Wait a minute... /me checks flies

DAMN!

Re:damnit.

[DeathPenguin]

>>Any hardcore gamers like to give their opinions? I'm very curious why people would drop SO MUCH money for cards like this...

RTFA, this is not a gaming card, it's a workstation card and the drivers are tweaked for such apps as 3DSMax and Photoshop rather than Quake and UT. It's NOT for the average gamer and it's NOT for the average desktop user. It's for a very niche market, nothing more. That question is sort of like asking why people drop $10k+ into an SGI workstation that is clocked lower and performs worse in everyday apps than white box x86 computers.

Now, why nVidia jacked up the cost of the Quadro when they've historically been known for solid-performing value cards in this segment (As opposed to exotic multi-GPU solutions from 3DLabs, for example), I don't know.

Impressive? No, especially the review.

[LxDengar]

Max 4.2 as a benchmark? Please, move up to 5.1 at least, and get XSI and Maya in there (Although admittedly Maya can be a troublesome beast for new graphic cards). Its a workstation card, run it against workstation apps.

I appreciate the effort with the SPECopc benchmarks, but review sites need to put more effort into testing a card like this. I cannot see what the reviewers were thinking by not putting this card up against what it's price point is aimed at - specifically Wildcat cards.

Ever use a mid to high range 3D CAD program?

[bombom]

I work as a CAD developer and you won't belive how much Quadro cards can outperform regular Geforce cards (don't get me strarted about ATI and thier crappy drivers for the FireGLs).

The single biggest limitation of the GEForce cards is they are optimized for 1 window. A Quadro card OTH can have open multiple windows in a 3D cad program . (e.g. Geforce 4's choke after having 3-4 moderatly complex parts open and a good Quadro 4 can handel 12-15 windows no sweat). AutoCAD is pretty light on the GFX card so a older quadro might suffice but something like Inventor or Solidworks or Catia can really benefit from these cards. If one of your engineers sees a 20% speed up in generating drawings of a complex assembly, or a 10% speed up rotating a gear assemlby, 3K is money very very well spent.

Re:Dual Out

[afidel]

21-24"
The Sony Trinitron CPD-G500 21" monitors can do 2048*1536 @ 75Hz. Their 24" widescreen does 2304 x 1440 @ 80Hz. Someone else may have a better monitor but I haven't seen em =)

Couldn't agree with you more...

[cpopin]

Yah, I looked at the high-end cards and looked at what software I would be using that would push it, mostly popular first-person-shooter games, and decided on the NVidia GeForce4 Ti 4200 128MB. It's the most bang for the buck. Hell, running on a P4 2.0 GHz with 1GB RAM, any game would be happy.

Re:What's the license?

[be-fan]

In random configurations, yes, there are issues with NVIDIA's stability. In closed configurations, there is not. I've never had a problem on any of my systems with NVIDIA's drivers, so its quite possible to build a system that runs rock solid with NVIDIA's drivers. Companies that are using NVIDIA on Linux can use these configurations, so that's not a problem.

As for Linux's importance to NVIDIA, remember three things:

1) Being the only option for high-end 3D on Linux is a big boon to them. A lot of computer graphics companies are moving to Linux (ILM, as I mentioned, runs Linux on almost all of their graphics workstations). These users are a very profitable market segment for NVIDIA's high end hardware (like the Quadro this article is about).
2) Being the only option on Linux is great for publicity. Gaming geeks are at least aware of Linux, and many have fooled around with it. Running on Linux is nice PR towards this segment.
3) Maintaining these drivers doesn't cost NVIDIA much. Their driver architecture is highly modular, so being cross platform is relatively inexpensive.