GTX 460 for 3D rendering software?
  1 / 2    
I purchased a new machine two weeks ago with the following specs:

[size="3"]*OptiPlex 780 MT:
OptiPlex 780 Minitower for Standard PSU
*Operating System(s):
Genuine Windows® 7 Professional, No Media, 64-bit, English
*Processors:
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E7500 with VT (2.93GHz, 3M, 1066MHz FSB)
*Memory:
8GB DDR3 Non-ECC SDRAM, 1333MHz, (4 DIMM)
*Boot Hard Drives:
160GB 10,000 RPM 3.5" SATA, 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive with 16MB Cache
*Hard Drive Mode:
No RAID NORAID 1 <341-8036> 15
*Video Cards:
512MB NVIDIA Quadro NVS 420 (4 DVI), Full[/size]

I currently use Softplan, a residential CAD program with 3D Rendering capabilities. Since then I have not been able to achieve anything outside of a wire model without the display driver failing. Dell has issued an RMA for the NVS 420 and I have the ability to choose a new card. I use three screens daily - two of which I use to render. Can I get away with (1) GTX 460? I've heard people regarding (2) GTX 460's or (1) GTX 480. What would you recomend? Does anybody have a platform similiar to mine using the GTX 460 or 480? I still don't know the reason for the NVS 420 not working. The last thing I want is to order a new card and still have the same issues. Any input is greatly appreciated.
I purchased a new machine two weeks ago with the following specs:



*OptiPlex 780 MT:

OptiPlex 780 Minitower for Standard PSU

*Operating System(s):

Genuine Windows® 7 Professional, No Media, 64-bit, English

*Processors:

Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E7500 with VT (2.93GHz, 3M, 1066MHz FSB)

*Memory:

8GB DDR3 Non-ECC SDRAM, 1333MHz, (4 DIMM)

*Boot Hard Drives:

160GB 10,000 RPM 3.5" SATA, 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive with 16MB Cache

*Hard Drive Mode:

No RAID NORAID 1 <341-8036> 15

*Video Cards:

512MB NVIDIA Quadro NVS 420 (4 DVI), Full



I currently use Softplan, a residential CAD program with 3D Rendering capabilities. Since then I have not been able to achieve anything outside of a wire model without the display driver failing. Dell has issued an RMA for the NVS 420 and I have the ability to choose a new card. I use three screens daily - two of which I use to render. Can I get away with (1) GTX 460? I've heard people regarding (2) GTX 460's or (1) GTX 480. What would you recomend? Does anybody have a platform similiar to mine using the GTX 460 or 480? I still don't know the reason for the NVS 420 not working. The last thing I want is to order a new card and still have the same issues. Any input is greatly appreciated.

#1
Posted 11/09/2010 08:21 PM   
I purchased a new machine two weeks ago with the following specs:

[size="3"]*OptiPlex 780 MT:
OptiPlex 780 Minitower for Standard PSU
*Operating System(s):
Genuine Windows® 7 Professional, No Media, 64-bit, English
*Processors:
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E7500 with VT (2.93GHz, 3M, 1066MHz FSB)
*Memory:
8GB DDR3 Non-ECC SDRAM, 1333MHz, (4 DIMM)
*Boot Hard Drives:
160GB 10,000 RPM 3.5" SATA, 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive with 16MB Cache
*Hard Drive Mode:
No RAID NORAID 1 <341-8036> 15
*Video Cards:
512MB NVIDIA Quadro NVS 420 (4 DVI), Full[/size]

I currently use Softplan, a residential CAD program with 3D Rendering capabilities. Since then I have not been able to achieve anything outside of a wire model without the display driver failing. Dell has issued an RMA for the NVS 420 and I have the ability to choose a new card. I use three screens daily - two of which I use to render. Can I get away with (1) GTX 460? I've heard people regarding (2) GTX 460's or (1) GTX 480. What would you recomend? Does anybody have a platform similiar to mine using the GTX 460 or 480? I still don't know the reason for the NVS 420 not working. The last thing I want is to order a new card and still have the same issues. Any input is greatly appreciated.
I purchased a new machine two weeks ago with the following specs:



*OptiPlex 780 MT:

OptiPlex 780 Minitower for Standard PSU

*Operating System(s):

Genuine Windows® 7 Professional, No Media, 64-bit, English

*Processors:

Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E7500 with VT (2.93GHz, 3M, 1066MHz FSB)

*Memory:

8GB DDR3 Non-ECC SDRAM, 1333MHz, (4 DIMM)

*Boot Hard Drives:

160GB 10,000 RPM 3.5" SATA, 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive with 16MB Cache

*Hard Drive Mode:

No RAID NORAID 1 <341-8036> 15

*Video Cards:

512MB NVIDIA Quadro NVS 420 (4 DVI), Full



I currently use Softplan, a residential CAD program with 3D Rendering capabilities. Since then I have not been able to achieve anything outside of a wire model without the display driver failing. Dell has issued an RMA for the NVS 420 and I have the ability to choose a new card. I use three screens daily - two of which I use to render. Can I get away with (1) GTX 460? I've heard people regarding (2) GTX 460's or (1) GTX 480. What would you recomend? Does anybody have a platform similiar to mine using the GTX 460 or 480? I still don't know the reason for the NVS 420 not working. The last thing I want is to order a new card and still have the same issues. Any input is greatly appreciated.

#2
Posted 11/09/2010 08:21 PM   
You should read up on this. Form what I hear, the performance of the GTX400 series in 3d apps is very poor. These cards are for gaming only. If you are thinking of moving away from Quadro, you may be better with a GTX200.
You should read up on this. Form what I hear, the performance of the GTX400 series in 3d apps is very poor. These cards are for gaming only. If you are thinking of moving away from Quadro, you may be better with a GTX200.

Core i5 4670K @ 4.3GHz with 4GHz uncore
Corsair H100 water cooler
8GB Patriot Viper DDR3 @ 2400MHz
Gigabyte Z87X-OC mobo
SLI eVGA GTX670 FTW (1227MHz boost 6800MHz VRAM)
Soundblaster Z with 5.1 speakers
112GB OCZ Vertex 3 SSD
240GB OCZ Vertex 4 SSD
Corsair Carbide 500R case (white)
Akasa PowerXtreme 1200W PSU
HP ZR2740W 2560 x 1440 27" IPS panel
Windows 7 Pro 64bit

#3
Posted 11/09/2010 09:41 PM   
You should read up on this. Form what I hear, the performance of the GTX400 series in 3d apps is very poor. These cards are for gaming only. If you are thinking of moving away from Quadro, you may be better with a GTX200.
You should read up on this. Form what I hear, the performance of the GTX400 series in 3d apps is very poor. These cards are for gaming only. If you are thinking of moving away from Quadro, you may be better with a GTX200.

Core i5 4670K @ 4.3GHz with 4GHz uncore
Corsair H100 water cooler
8GB Patriot Viper DDR3 @ 2400MHz
Gigabyte Z87X-OC mobo
SLI eVGA GTX670 FTW (1227MHz boost 6800MHz VRAM)
Soundblaster Z with 5.1 speakers
112GB OCZ Vertex 3 SSD
240GB OCZ Vertex 4 SSD
Corsair Carbide 500R case (white)
Akasa PowerXtreme 1200W PSU
HP ZR2740W 2560 x 1440 27" IPS panel
Windows 7 Pro 64bit

#4
Posted 11/09/2010 09:41 PM   
I've read from multiple sources that the GTX400 series has been gimped in 3d apps by the drivers, I would strongly advise against getting a 400 series for 3d rendering.
I've read from multiple sources that the GTX400 series has been gimped in 3d apps by the drivers, I would strongly advise against getting a 400 series for 3d rendering.

CPU: Intel Core i7 920 @ 4.01Ghz \Titan Fenrir TTC-NK85TZ

Mobo: MSI X58 PRO iX58

NB: Thermalright HR-05 IFX + 8cm Akasa Fan

Ram: Corsair 12GB (6x2GB) DDR3 1600MHz XMS3 Memory CL9(9-9-9-24)

GFX: Nvidia GTX 460 SLI @850/1700/2000

PSU: Corsair 650W TX Series PSU

RAID: PCI-E Silicon Image Sil 3132 Raid Controller

HDD: 90GB OCZ Agility 2 SSD | 2x 120GB WD1200JS (Raid 0) | 2x 1.5TB WD15EADS | {3x 2TB WD20EARS 1x 160GB ST3160023AS (DAS401)}

Sound: Creative Sound Blaster Audigy SE 7.1 (X-FI Drivers) | Logitech X-530 5.1 Speakers

Case: Coolermaster CM690 Dominator Black

Monitor: 24" BENQ G2420HD | 19" Samsung SyncMaster 940BW

Mouse: Razer Deathadder Special Edition

Keyboard: Saitek Eclipse

Headset: Ozone Gaming Gear Attack

Image

#5
Posted 11/09/2010 09:52 PM   
I've read from multiple sources that the GTX400 series has been gimped in 3d apps by the drivers, I would strongly advise against getting a 400 series for 3d rendering.
I've read from multiple sources that the GTX400 series has been gimped in 3d apps by the drivers, I would strongly advise against getting a 400 series for 3d rendering.

CPU: Intel Core i7 920 @ 4.01Ghz \Titan Fenrir TTC-NK85TZ

Mobo: MSI X58 PRO iX58

NB: Thermalright HR-05 IFX + 8cm Akasa Fan

Ram: Corsair 12GB (6x2GB) DDR3 1600MHz XMS3 Memory CL9(9-9-9-24)

GFX: Nvidia GTX 460 SLI @850/1700/2000

PSU: Corsair 650W TX Series PSU

RAID: PCI-E Silicon Image Sil 3132 Raid Controller

HDD: 90GB OCZ Agility 2 SSD | 2x 120GB WD1200JS (Raid 0) | 2x 1.5TB WD15EADS | {3x 2TB WD20EARS 1x 160GB ST3160023AS (DAS401)}

Sound: Creative Sound Blaster Audigy SE 7.1 (X-FI Drivers) | Logitech X-530 5.1 Speakers

Case: Coolermaster CM690 Dominator Black

Monitor: 24" BENQ G2420HD | 19" Samsung SyncMaster 940BW

Mouse: Razer Deathadder Special Edition

Keyboard: Saitek Eclipse

Headset: Ozone Gaming Gear Attack

Image

#6
Posted 11/09/2010 09:52 PM   
The GeForce 400-series cards cannot drive 3 monitors from a single card, only a maximum of 2 monitors. You need 2 cards in SLI to drive 3 monitors using the Nvidia 3D Vision Surround feature. And as previous posters have stated, seems like the 400 series cards perform poorly in non-game 3D applications compared to previous generation cards. However some people have claimed that their 400-series cards run fine in non-game 3D apps, and Nvidia is absolutely silent about the alleged slowness of 400-series cards in non-game 3D apps compared to older cards. Better not risk it though, so either stick with a Quadro card or buy 2 GTX 200-series cards for a 3-monitor setup.
The GeForce 400-series cards cannot drive 3 monitors from a single card, only a maximum of 2 monitors. You need 2 cards in SLI to drive 3 monitors using the Nvidia 3D Vision Surround feature. And as previous posters have stated, seems like the 400 series cards perform poorly in non-game 3D applications compared to previous generation cards. However some people have claimed that their 400-series cards run fine in non-game 3D apps, and Nvidia is absolutely silent about the alleged slowness of 400-series cards in non-game 3D apps compared to older cards. Better not risk it though, so either stick with a Quadro card or buy 2 GTX 200-series cards for a 3-monitor setup.

CPU: Intel Core i5-2550K @4.4GHz
Mainboard: MSI Z77A-GD43 (Intel Z77 chipset)
Graphics: MSI N660Ti PE 2GD5/OC (GeForce GTX 660 Ti @1019MHz)
RAM: 2 x 4GB Visipro PC3-12800 (1.5V @933MHz)
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Service Pack 1
PSU: Seasonic Eco 600W SS-600BT Active PFC T3
Monitor: Asus VX239H (23" Full HD AH-IPS LED Display)

#7
Posted 11/10/2010 06:29 AM   
The GeForce 400-series cards cannot drive 3 monitors from a single card, only a maximum of 2 monitors. You need 2 cards in SLI to drive 3 monitors using the Nvidia 3D Vision Surround feature. And as previous posters have stated, seems like the 400 series cards perform poorly in non-game 3D applications compared to previous generation cards. However some people have claimed that their 400-series cards run fine in non-game 3D apps, and Nvidia is absolutely silent about the alleged slowness of 400-series cards in non-game 3D apps compared to older cards. Better not risk it though, so either stick with a Quadro card or buy 2 GTX 200-series cards for a 3-monitor setup.
The GeForce 400-series cards cannot drive 3 monitors from a single card, only a maximum of 2 monitors. You need 2 cards in SLI to drive 3 monitors using the Nvidia 3D Vision Surround feature. And as previous posters have stated, seems like the 400 series cards perform poorly in non-game 3D applications compared to previous generation cards. However some people have claimed that their 400-series cards run fine in non-game 3D apps, and Nvidia is absolutely silent about the alleged slowness of 400-series cards in non-game 3D apps compared to older cards. Better not risk it though, so either stick with a Quadro card or buy 2 GTX 200-series cards for a 3-monitor setup.

CPU: Intel Core i5-2550K @4.4GHz
Mainboard: MSI Z77A-GD43 (Intel Z77 chipset)
Graphics: MSI N660Ti PE 2GD5/OC (GeForce GTX 660 Ti @1019MHz)
RAM: 2 x 4GB Visipro PC3-12800 (1.5V @933MHz)
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Service Pack 1
PSU: Seasonic Eco 600W SS-600BT Active PFC T3
Monitor: Asus VX239H (23" Full HD AH-IPS LED Display)

#8
Posted 11/10/2010 06:29 AM   
Thanks for the responses. My old card was FX 5200. It seems like another FX card may be the way to go.
Thanks for the responses. My old card was FX 5200. It seems like another FX card may be the way to go.

#9
Posted 11/10/2010 01:13 PM   
Thanks for the responses. My old card was FX 5200. It seems like another FX card may be the way to go.
Thanks for the responses. My old card was FX 5200. It seems like another FX card may be the way to go.

#10
Posted 11/10/2010 01:13 PM   
How about (2) Quadro 600's for three screens. I've tried to research the ability to do three screens and just confused myself, again. Will this give me the ability to use 3 or even 4? the NVS 420 has one connector which goes to a 4-way dongle. This is different from the last setup I had where I had 2 connectors for one video card and one for the other. This is probably a lot simpler than I'm making it, but could someboday clarify.
How about (2) Quadro 600's for three screens. I've tried to research the ability to do three screens and just confused myself, again. Will this give me the ability to use 3 or even 4? the NVS 420 has one connector which goes to a 4-way dongle. This is different from the last setup I had where I had 2 connectors for one video card and one for the other. This is probably a lot simpler than I'm making it, but could someboday clarify.

#11
Posted 11/10/2010 03:49 PM   
How about (2) Quadro 600's for three screens. I've tried to research the ability to do three screens and just confused myself, again. Will this give me the ability to use 3 or even 4? the NVS 420 has one connector which goes to a 4-way dongle. This is different from the last setup I had where I had 2 connectors for one video card and one for the other. This is probably a lot simpler than I'm making it, but could someboday clarify.
How about (2) Quadro 600's for three screens. I've tried to research the ability to do three screens and just confused myself, again. Will this give me the ability to use 3 or even 4? the NVS 420 has one connector which goes to a 4-way dongle. This is different from the last setup I had where I had 2 connectors for one video card and one for the other. This is probably a lot simpler than I'm making it, but could someboday clarify.

#12
Posted 11/10/2010 03:49 PM   
[quote name='Ital' date='09 November 2010 - 10:29 PM' timestamp='1289370582' post='1144311']
The GeForce 400-series cards cannot drive 3 monitors from a single card, only a maximum of 2 monitors. You need 2 cards in SLI to drive 3 monitors using the Nvidia 3D Vision Surround feature. And as previous posters have stated, seems like the 400 series cards perform poorly in non-game 3D applications compared to previous generation cards. However some people have claimed that their 400-series cards run fine in non-game 3D apps, and Nvidia is absolutely silent about the alleged slowness of 400-series cards in non-game 3D apps compared to older cards. Better not risk it though, so either stick with a Quadro card or buy 2 GTX 200-series cards for a 3-monitor setup.
[/quote]

Is the inability to drive more than two at a time a hardware or software (driver) issue? I don't think it makes any sense for cards to be coming out with three outputs but can only drive two at a time. Seems like a failing in comparison to EyeFinity. I was kind of let down when I bought my GTX 460 that my old 5830 could run three monitors at once no problem but the 460 could not.
[quote name='Ital' date='09 November 2010 - 10:29 PM' timestamp='1289370582' post='1144311']

The GeForce 400-series cards cannot drive 3 monitors from a single card, only a maximum of 2 monitors. You need 2 cards in SLI to drive 3 monitors using the Nvidia 3D Vision Surround feature. And as previous posters have stated, seems like the 400 series cards perform poorly in non-game 3D applications compared to previous generation cards. However some people have claimed that their 400-series cards run fine in non-game 3D apps, and Nvidia is absolutely silent about the alleged slowness of 400-series cards in non-game 3D apps compared to older cards. Better not risk it though, so either stick with a Quadro card or buy 2 GTX 200-series cards for a 3-monitor setup.





Is the inability to drive more than two at a time a hardware or software (driver) issue? I don't think it makes any sense for cards to be coming out with three outputs but can only drive two at a time. Seems like a failing in comparison to EyeFinity. I was kind of let down when I bought my GTX 460 that my old 5830 could run three monitors at once no problem but the 460 could not.

#13
Posted 11/12/2010 03:20 AM   
[quote name='Ital' date='09 November 2010 - 10:29 PM' timestamp='1289370582' post='1144311']
The GeForce 400-series cards cannot drive 3 monitors from a single card, only a maximum of 2 monitors. You need 2 cards in SLI to drive 3 monitors using the Nvidia 3D Vision Surround feature. And as previous posters have stated, seems like the 400 series cards perform poorly in non-game 3D applications compared to previous generation cards. However some people have claimed that their 400-series cards run fine in non-game 3D apps, and Nvidia is absolutely silent about the alleged slowness of 400-series cards in non-game 3D apps compared to older cards. Better not risk it though, so either stick with a Quadro card or buy 2 GTX 200-series cards for a 3-monitor setup.
[/quote]

Is the inability to drive more than two at a time a hardware or software (driver) issue? I don't think it makes any sense for cards to be coming out with three outputs but can only drive two at a time. Seems like a failing in comparison to EyeFinity. I was kind of let down when I bought my GTX 460 that my old 5830 could run three monitors at once no problem but the 460 could not.
[quote name='Ital' date='09 November 2010 - 10:29 PM' timestamp='1289370582' post='1144311']

The GeForce 400-series cards cannot drive 3 monitors from a single card, only a maximum of 2 monitors. You need 2 cards in SLI to drive 3 monitors using the Nvidia 3D Vision Surround feature. And as previous posters have stated, seems like the 400 series cards perform poorly in non-game 3D applications compared to previous generation cards. However some people have claimed that their 400-series cards run fine in non-game 3D apps, and Nvidia is absolutely silent about the alleged slowness of 400-series cards in non-game 3D apps compared to older cards. Better not risk it though, so either stick with a Quadro card or buy 2 GTX 200-series cards for a 3-monitor setup.





Is the inability to drive more than two at a time a hardware or software (driver) issue? I don't think it makes any sense for cards to be coming out with three outputs but can only drive two at a time. Seems like a failing in comparison to EyeFinity. I was kind of let down when I bought my GTX 460 that my old 5830 could run three monitors at once no problem but the 460 could not.

#14
Posted 11/12/2010 03:20 AM   
[quote name='cosine83' date='12 November 2010 - 10:20 AM' timestamp='1289532004' post='1145312']
Is the inability to drive more than two at a time a hardware or software (driver) issue? I don't think it makes any sense for cards to be coming out with three outputs but can only drive two at a time. Seems like a failing in comparison to EyeFinity. I was kind of let down when I bought my GTX 460 that my old 5830 could run three monitors at once no problem but the 460 could not.
[/quote]

Only Nvidia engineers can answer that, and they will never talk. /tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':tongue:' />

Regardless of whether the limitation is hardware-based or driver-based, there's marketing incentive to keep it that way so that people will buy 2 cards if they want to drive more than 2 monitors on their GeForce cards. Some Quadro cards (NVS 4xx series) can drive 4 monitors from a single card, but they're sh*tloads more expensive than GeForce cards. The HD 5870 can drive 6 monitors from a single card through EyeFinity, so AMD has the edge when it comes to multi-monitor support.
[quote name='cosine83' date='12 November 2010 - 10:20 AM' timestamp='1289532004' post='1145312']

Is the inability to drive more than two at a time a hardware or software (driver) issue? I don't think it makes any sense for cards to be coming out with three outputs but can only drive two at a time. Seems like a failing in comparison to EyeFinity. I was kind of let down when I bought my GTX 460 that my old 5830 could run three monitors at once no problem but the 460 could not.





Only Nvidia engineers can answer that, and they will never talk. /tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':tongue:' />



Regardless of whether the limitation is hardware-based or driver-based, there's marketing incentive to keep it that way so that people will buy 2 cards if they want to drive more than 2 monitors on their GeForce cards. Some Quadro cards (NVS 4xx series) can drive 4 monitors from a single card, but they're sh*tloads more expensive than GeForce cards. The HD 5870 can drive 6 monitors from a single card through EyeFinity, so AMD has the edge when it comes to multi-monitor support.

CPU: Intel Core i5-2550K @4.4GHz
Mainboard: MSI Z77A-GD43 (Intel Z77 chipset)
Graphics: MSI N660Ti PE 2GD5/OC (GeForce GTX 660 Ti @1019MHz)
RAM: 2 x 4GB Visipro PC3-12800 (1.5V @933MHz)
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Service Pack 1
PSU: Seasonic Eco 600W SS-600BT Active PFC T3
Monitor: Asus VX239H (23" Full HD AH-IPS LED Display)

#15
Posted 11/12/2010 02:03 PM   
  1 / 2    
Scroll To Top