Why choose Quadro FX 3800 over GTX 480? Main use: Adobe Photoshop & Maya
Hi, sorry for the naive question but I'm putting a new computer together that will primarily be used for Photoshop (photo editing, filters/effects of very large images, etc), Maya and After Effects. I'm trying to decide on the video card and I'm wondering why the [color="#0000FF"]GTX 480 is only $500[/color] while the [color="#8B0000"]Quadro FX 3800 is $900[/color], when the specs seem to indicate the GTX 480 is better in most if not all categories.

According to the specifications, it states:

[b]Cuda Cores:[/b]
[color="#0000FF"]GTX 480: 480 cores
[/color][color="#8B0000"]Quadro 3800: 192 cores[/color]

[b]Memory Bandwidth:[/b]
[color="#0000FF"]GTX 480: 177 GB/s[/color]
[color="#8B0000"]Quadro 3800: 51.2 GB/s[/color]

[b]Memory Interface:[/b]
[color="#0000FF"]GTX 480: 384-bit[/color]
[color="#8B0000"]Quadro 3800: 256-bit GB/s[/color]

Is there something that the Quadro offers that the GTX doesn't, that will make running Photoshop, Maya and After Effects much faster? Any extra insight would be appreciated.

Thanks.
Hi, sorry for the naive question but I'm putting a new computer together that will primarily be used for Photoshop (photo editing, filters/effects of very large images, etc), Maya and After Effects. I'm trying to decide on the video card and I'm wondering why the GTX 480 is only $500 while the Quadro FX 3800 is $900, when the specs seem to indicate the GTX 480 is better in most if not all categories.



According to the specifications, it states:



Cuda Cores:

GTX 480: 480 cores

Quadro 3800: 192 cores



Memory Bandwidth:

GTX 480: 177 GB/s

Quadro 3800: 51.2 GB/s



Memory Interface:

GTX 480: 384-bit

Quadro 3800: 256-bit GB/s



Is there something that the Quadro offers that the GTX doesn't, that will make running Photoshop, Maya and After Effects much faster? Any extra insight would be appreciated.



Thanks.

#1
Posted 06/19/2010 08:41 AM   
I'm sure there's someone here who can explain this in much more detail, but as I understand it, the Quadro line of cards are made specifically for graphics and video editing and production (including programs such as Maya, I think), while the GeForce line is made specifically with gaming in mind, and their architecture is different, as such. That being the case, the drivers are different for each line, as well, to take advantage of the capabilities of their architecture. That's the gist of it, but like I said, I'm sure someone here can give you a more in-depth answer.
I'm sure there's someone here who can explain this in much more detail, but as I understand it, the Quadro line of cards are made specifically for graphics and video editing and production (including programs such as Maya, I think), while the GeForce line is made specifically with gaming in mind, and their architecture is different, as such. That being the case, the drivers are different for each line, as well, to take advantage of the capabilities of their architecture. That's the gist of it, but like I said, I'm sure someone here can give you a more in-depth answer.

#2
Posted 06/19/2010 09:13 AM   
Right, that's how I "kinda" understand it too from reading some random reviews of the two cards. But to my simple mind, bigger numbers usually mean better when it comes to things like speed, memory and cores right?

I'm just trying to justify spending the extra $400 for the Quadro. For example, will Photoshop and After Effects render filters faster on the Quadro than on the 480? If so, approximately how much faster? Will I only notice the speed difference on HUGE files? Etc. etc.

Again, any other insight or info would be great.

Thanks!
Right, that's how I "kinda" understand it too from reading some random reviews of the two cards. But to my simple mind, bigger numbers usually mean better when it comes to things like speed, memory and cores right?



I'm just trying to justify spending the extra $400 for the Quadro. For example, will Photoshop and After Effects render filters faster on the Quadro than on the 480? If so, approximately how much faster? Will I only notice the speed difference on HUGE files? Etc. etc.



Again, any other insight or info would be great.



Thanks!

#3
Posted 06/19/2010 09:52 AM   
Quadro and GeForce each have functions not available to the other. A direct comparison of the cards is apples to oranges unless looking at the specific application.

Google finds on Chinese website a comparison of FX3800 and GTX260+.
In Maya 6.5 FX3800 is outperforming GTX260 by 50% - this is an application in which quadro should shine.

[url="http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.inpai.com.cn%2Fdoc%2Fhard%2F97334_5.htm"]http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=e...d%2F97334_5.htm[/url]

Considering the GTX480 is twice the performance of GTX260 I *guess* it would beat or at least equal performance of FX3800.
Quadro and GeForce each have functions not available to the other. A direct comparison of the cards is apples to oranges unless looking at the specific application.



Google finds on Chinese website a comparison of FX3800 and GTX260+.

In Maya 6.5 FX3800 is outperforming GTX260 by 50% - this is an application in which quadro should shine.



http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=e...d%2F97334_5.htm



Considering the GTX480 is twice the performance of GTX260 I *guess* it would beat or at least equal performance of FX3800.

#4
Posted 06/19/2010 04:35 PM   
Scroll To Top