Is this the fasted GFX card for mac pro?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by JamesGorman, Jun 21, 2009.

  1. Tallest Skil macrumors P6

    Tallest Skil

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #2
    For a scant few professional apps.

    If you needed it, you'd know what it was. Trust us.
     
  2. trainguy77 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2003
    #3
    Its a card for those doing special scientific work. Thats about it. Not worth your money unless you know what its good for.
     
  3. Tesselator macrumors 601

    Tesselator

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #4
    It used to be (a few years ago and prior) that the Quadros were the full enchilada without feature masking or crippling of any kind and in some cases the chips themselves were actually a different die. The results of this was that quadro cards could be counted on for smooth steady and consistent frame rates in a wide variety of load conditions. The desktop models might have been a little faster but the smooth consistency wasn't (as) guaranteed.

    People are saying of the latest cards that it's all driver and that the hardware is identical. If this is true then there's a very good chance they won't be worth any extra money at all - for anything. I've not looked into it myself.
     
  4. JamesGorman thread starter macrumors 65816

    JamesGorman

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2008
    Location:
    Winnipeg
    #5
    So what would be the best card for gaming and watching hd and what not? Is the gtx 285 the best card for the mac for that stuff then?
     
  5. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #6
    Yes.
     
  6. JamesGorman thread starter macrumors 65816

    JamesGorman

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2008
    Location:
    Winnipeg
  7. netkas macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    #8
    for gaming, this card will loose to gtx260_192sp.
     
  8. Dr.Pants macrumors 65816

    Dr.Pants

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    #9
    Identical in most areas except one; VRAM. There's enough VRAM in there to make CUDA applications weep! :D Personally... If I had a choice of a BIY computer for science applications, a couple or three would get swung into it for sure :D Sure its not Mac, but its... For Science!

    But yeah. When it comes to the sheer processing power, the Quadro offered at the Apple store is identical to the GTX 285; same processors, etc. However, the Quadro can load more "stuff" onto its VRAM and attempt to eliminate distasteful latency between the systems RAM and the card.

    And once again... Quadros are used for either bleeding-edge applications or CUDA, and on the Windows side (with a few models)hardware acceleration on the card can be enabled.
     
  9. 10THzMac macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    #10
    I use pair of Mac 285 and 2G PC 285 (Palit model) for CUDA - latter injected post boot. Both have 240 cores. Runs multi GPU examples. Do you really think Quadro is better for Cuda apps?

    Dr Pants - if you have Quadro and Cuda up can you run MonteCarlomultiGPU - Mac/PC 285 (when run separately) will do > 100,000 options per sec, 80,000 each when together, when both cards run at 1.48 GHz. What does Quadro do?
     
  10. Gnorkie macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    #11
    I use Cinema 4D and heavy photoshop cs3 extended files. And I've just a refurbished Mac 2008 3.2 Ghz with the ATI HD 2600.

    Do you think that the Quadro 4800 would be a good choice, or the 285 GTX is better under OSX? There are no serious benchmarks for 3d apps under OSX.... and that's ****ing bad. I think that Apple don't want people to make them.... Specs told 3 years ago that Specviewperf would have been made soon also for OSX (it exists for Win and Linux).... 3 years are passed..... and Apple can continue to keep her users under ignorance....
     
  11. lannister80 macrumors 6502

    lannister80

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    #12
    Grab yourself an XFX 1GB 4870 (PC version) and flash it.

    Low cost, amazing performance.
     
  12. Andrew Henry macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    #13
    That's what I did, I got mine on eBay for $149.99 shipped, and both DVI ports work! :cool:
     
  13. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #14
    The GTX 285 is the best choice. It has a slightly faster, newer, GPU and of course is much cheaper. Only ever buy the quadro if you plan to use bootcamp for optimized apps in Windows.
     
  14. Gnorkie macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    #15
    I usually model buildings with Autocad 2008 under windows....
     
  15. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #16
    While the Quadros offer some great features in performance and precision optimization the FX 4800 is a very high end card, capable of driving many views on multiple displays on fiendishly complex models. It is overkill for most autocad users and the raw power of the 285 coupled with Autocad 2008 supporting D3D are probably more than enough for you.

    I found this link that benches pro cards against an old 9800 GTX for autocad:
    http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/firegl-quadrofx_15.html#sect0
     
  16. risingforce macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 15, 2009
    #17
    but if the link speed of the PC GTX285 is 2.5GT /S instead of 5GT /S of de oficial EVGA Mac Edition, this is not a problem for the overall performance?
     
  17. Zokim macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    Location:
    New York
    #18
    Do you have 2 apple displays connected to it? I wonder if my 2 23" ACDs would work with it.

    Mind posting some benchmarks for the card?
     
  18. Andrew Henry macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    #19
    I have 2 x Dell S2309W's attached to it, but I did have 2 x 20" ACD connected, you would be fine. Here's a benchmark:

    [​IMG]
     
  19. 10THzMac macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    #20
    This is interesting question. I have yet to find a situation where this Link speed causes compromise, and I run a Mac and PC 285 side by side. Maybe I just have not run the right tests, but I have been getting similar numbers from both on the OpenGL benchmarks and Cuda apps. I'd really like to know if anyone has found an app where it shows.
     
  20. 300D macrumors 65816

    300D

    Joined:
    May 2, 2009
    Location:
    Tulsa
    #21
    Expensive=better. Since that Quadro costs as much as an entire MacPro, it must be the best.
     
  21. inigel macrumors regular

    inigel

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Location:
    Australia
    #22
    Never been steered wrong with that logic! :D
     

Share This Page