quadro 4000 vs gtx 590

[NastyCircus]

Hi, i'm graphic designer.

I know more CUDAs the render is faster in OCTANE...

i use 3DS MAX and ADOBE. gtx is OK for OCTANE but, what about the other design software??

there're much difference if i use a GTX 590 - QUADRO 4000 (octane-adobe)???
(the prices between the quadro 4000 and the gtx 590 are the same where i live)

what about performance/temperature??

i'm using a geforce210 only for display

PLEASE I NEED YOUR HELP.

tanx!

[mib2berlin]

Hi, you have a better viewport/display performance with quadro because special drivers for maya, 3dsmax, etc. and a little more memory.
Quadro 4000 uses an old chip and slow DDR3 VRam.
But, the GTX 590 is four times faster then a quadro 4000 for octane and adobe products because there are also use cuda.
In germany the quadro is 150-200 € more expensive.

GTX 590 = 1024 Cuda Cores 384 Bit 1.5 GB VRam DDR5 (3GB shared between the two cards)
Quadro 4000 = 256 Cuda Cores 256 Bit 2 GB VRam DDR3

Only the Tesla Cards are comparable in technology but also slower.

Cheers, mib.

[karanis]

AFAIK comparing Quadro (and Tesla is composed of quadro) and GTX is comparing apples and apes. Because Quadro family has double precision floating point computations where GTX has single point precision floating point computations.

Again AFAIK This means, "forgive the speed of cores" : if the software is depending on double precision floating point calculations, Quadro+ family is the choice but if it does not, GTX family`s fast children will be the winner.

Depending on the software you use, the answer lies on this fact, not the clockspeed and cores.

I have a question for the Octane team (which is very important for me to decide on my new setup)
" Is octane depending on single or double precision floating points ? "

Thanks

[FooZe]

Hi karanis,

Octane uses single precision. GTX's will give you more "bang for your buck" with octanerender.

Cheers
Chris.