Greetings!

Welcome to Scifi-Meshes.com! Click one of these buttons to join in on the fun.

Question on graphics Cards (Maya 2012)

I.G.88I.G.880 Posts: 0Member
edited January 2013 in General Discussion #1
So what im currently running is
The Asus CM1730
Procssor AMD Phenom II X6 1065 2.90GHZ
Ram - 8 GB DDR3
OS- WIN7 64bit
Power supply - 750w (upgraded it),
Main CG App : Maya 2012

well my last graphics card crapped out on me pretty hard it was about 5 years old so i got a good run out of the old girl shopping for a new one as the stock one can barley handle Maya.

So was wondering if anyone has experience with the AMD fire-pro series i was looking around and seems that it is a very affordable and should get the trick done but want feedback from other modelers to see what they think.

Thanks in advance!
Post edited by I.G.88 on
Tagged:

Posts

  • I.G.88I.G.880 Posts: 0Member
    Currently looking @ this graphics card good price and everything i see says as long as you aint a idiot should be just fine...

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814195109
  • CoolhandCoolhand283 Mountain LairPosts: 1,294Member
    hmm, not much ram on that card. If you're into building insanely detailed spacecraft or environments you may want more.
  • I.G.88I.G.880 Posts: 0Member
    wat i read says it can handle a million polys easy but im still looking trying to keep price down thou

    Sent from my LGL45C using Tapatalk 2
  • Knight26Knight26191 Posts: 837Member
    I have a similar question, I will be upgrading my old laptop here this year, but cannot afford one with a quadro card, since I use AutoCAD, and have never had luck with ATIs. I was thinking a consumer card like a GeForce 6xx series, any thoughts on that?
  • CoolhandCoolhand283 Mountain LairPosts: 1,294Member
    keeping with the nvidia is probably a smart move for most people, I think those cards tend to work better with 3d apps, esp autodesk, I think its basically a driver thing. ATI are less helpful in my experience.

    Again it all depends on what you want to do, looking at our android bounty hunter friends models, a 1gb card might be fine for the stuff he intends to do. Most here won't need need to bother with anything fancy as even todays budget gaming cards are ludicrously powerful and more than enough for basically all the spaceship models you see around here... if you're on a budget and want to make impressive models, get a card with as much ram as you can afford IMHO.
  • DeksDeks200 Posts: 259Member
    Uhm... I don't share the above's perception that Nvidia cards are better for 3d software.
    Reason being:
    Nvidia decided to gimp their Kepler gpu's in terms of compute performance.
    So... even if the program is able to offload rendering to the gpu, it will be even slower than last generation Fermi cards.
    AMD on the other hand, INCREASED their compute performance rather dramatically, and beats anything from Nvidia.

    Desktop drivers for AMD are mature enough to my knowledge.
    At this point I think it depends whether the program is capable offloading rendering to the GPU, and if so, will it use OpenCL in the process?
    AMD is based on open source OpenCL, whereas Nvidia on Cuda. While it would be accurate to say that most software is transitioning to OpenCL, I think Autodesk might as well - especially Maya might be a FAR friendlier environment for AMD in general and especially OpenCL.
    3dsMax has an in-build gpu render which is based on DirectX if I'm not mistaken... Its capable of using AMD cards for GPU accelerated rendering to my knowledge, so there shouldn't be any issues.
  • CoolhandCoolhand283 Mountain LairPosts: 1,294Member
    I think these guys are talking about view-port /real-time modelling performance more than high end rendering on the GPU. Do you have links to back that up, do you know which cards are crippled?
  • DeksDeks200 Posts: 259Member
    I was mainly referring to consumer grade GPU's... not professional ones.
    But from the consumer/gaming gpu's, ALL Nvidia Kepler cards have been radically reduced in Compute performance.
    http://vr-zone.com/articles/nvidia-kepler-gpus--back-to-games-away-from-compute-/15332.html

    We know that gaming gpu's are essentially reworked (and overpriced) 'professional' gpu's. There's no reason why a consumer card cannot support both gaming and have same performance view-port wise (along with offloading rendering to the gpu).
    The only reason 'professional' gpu's perform better in pro software, is because the businesses will pay big bucks for it.

    In regards to sole viewport performance and not offloading rendering to the GPU (which btw would be only beneficial), Maya might be a lot friendlier towards AMD than Nvidia in that regard.
    Its pretty late here and I'm tired so I don't feel like searching for the info right now (perhaps tomorrow). I'll have to meditate before going to bed though.
    Night.
  • I.G.88I.G.880 Posts: 0Member
    Well feedback has been super helfpul now just making my search for graphics hard quite difficult lol was hoping for suggestions without going in to much in to technical aspect but better educated i suppose i will have to go do my homework and look some more and im deffiently going with AMD because NVIDIA seem to charge way more for the same basic product and never had a issue with AMD
  • CoolhandCoolhand283 Mountain LairPosts: 1,294Member
    Deks wrote: »
    I was mainly referring to consumer grade GPU's... not professional ones.
    But from the consumer/gaming gpu's, ALL Nvidia Kepler cards have been radically reduced in Compute performance.
    http://vr-zone.com/articles/nvidia-kepler-gpus--back-to-games-away-from-compute-/15332.html

    We know that gaming gpu's are essentially reworked (and overpriced) 'professional' gpu's. There's no reason why a consumer card cannot support both gaming and have same performance view-port wise (along with offloading rendering to the gpu).
    The only reason 'professional' gpu's perform better in pro software, is because the businesses will pay big bucks for it.

    In regards to sole viewport performance and not offloading rendering to the GPU (which btw would be only beneficial), Maya might be a lot friendlier towards AMD than Nvidia in that regard.
    Its pretty late here and I'm tired so I don't feel like searching for the info right now (perhaps tomorrow). I'll have to meditate before going to bed though.
    Night.

    There's downsides to all brands and you get what you pay for but whatever your preference you've gotta be building pretty big models these days (a million triangles is nothing) to even fully use a pretty low spec 'consumer' card... I doubt that many here will be worried about using the GPU for high end rendering
  • CoolhandCoolhand283 Mountain LairPosts: 1,294Member
    I.G.88 wrote: »
    Well feedback has been super helfpul now just making my search for graphics hard quite difficult lol was hoping for suggestions without going in to much in to technical aspect but better educated i suppose i will have to go do my homework and look some more and im deffiently going with AMD because NVIDIA seem to charge way more for the same basic product and never had a issue with AMD

    I'd still say get one with more ram, whatever brand you choose, then you have more headroom if your models get more ambitous, if you're not doing tons of rendering, or have the rendering engines that use it you probably don't need the GPU rendering features at all. I've always gone for memory over raw performance and its served me well - i'm more into modelling than rendering and the Nvidias have always been great for that while i've seen problems with other makes. Anyway, your mileage may vary. good luck.
Sign In or Register to comment.