|
|
|
video card comparing
|
|
|
HazelB
Member
|
4. December 2007 @ 19:20 |
Link to this message
|
|
I was given three video cards as a gift...2nd hand parts, and older, yes, but gifts. Since I know very little about video cards, even though I built my own system several years ago, I would be grateful for any help.
What would be the benefits/non-benefits of each card? I have a 550w power supply, 3 gig RAM, and P4 CPU.
They will be supporting my graphic efforts with Photoshop on a Microsoft platform:
1. nVida Quadre 4, TW-03N245-56182-310-0349
and on the fan hub: NV-1035-C3
2. nVIDA GeForce FX5200 AGP8x 128MB
3. ATI R96 TD3 256MB
Thanks
Hazel
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Senior Member
|
4. December 2007 @ 20:09 |
Link to this message
|
Wow, thats all you have to choose from? Well, I guess those will do photoshop.
I think the Quadro 4 would be the best. The Quadro series was devoloped for CAD applications, and intense 3d rendering (not to say that the Quadro 4 is that intense).
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
5. December 2007 @ 08:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
I don't know much about the Quadros. However, if they'll all fit your PC, try them out and run a 3DMark test with them all!
|
Senior Member
|
5. December 2007 @ 10:59 |
Link to this message
|
Well the Quadro will definetly get the lowest score. The architecture for the card is based for CAD programs, not games.
This card would suck at Crysis vs a GTX: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.as...3189&Tpk=quadro
Even know it costs that much, the GTX will definetly beat it since its not a gaming card, but the FX5500 would kill the GTX in a CAD program.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
5. December 2007 @ 11:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
What I believe he has there (after some googling I hasten to add, I don't know much about workstation graphics cards) is a Quadro4 900, which is based on the GeForce 4 Ti4600 platform. However, I'm not sure how that benchmarks. If you're editing video, that'd almost certainly be the one to go for, but I don't know how well it would fare in games applications, nor do I know if Photoshop even requires a proper graphics card, I was under the impression that used CPU rendering, but maybe I'm out of touch, I don't do such work myself. One thing it's worth checking is if all the cards are compatible with your PC. The Quadro 4 900 is an AGP 4x product, the old standard. The Quadro 4 980 is the 8x standard, like the FX5200 is.
The ATI card is a Radeon 9600XT.
Assuming your board supports 8x and 4x, for workstation uses you might want the Quadro. However, if there's any shadow of doubt, stick the ATI card in, it's probably going to be the most powerful card of the three for normal uses (3d benchmarks, Games etc.) and it'll almost certainly be compatible with your motherboard.
|
Senior Member
|
5. December 2007 @ 11:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yeah, I though that photoshop was cpu dependent too. On my pc, it lags when I render the sunflares, while at my pcs at my old school with C2Ds (they're apples), the sun moves like nothing. I am pretty sure I have a better gpu than the ones at school too. (Almost certain)
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
5. December 2007 @ 11:40 |
Link to this message
|
|
Your GPU will be better than that in any Mac, I'm almost certain.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
HazelB
Member
|
5. December 2007 @ 16:08 |
Link to this message
|
After more research, yes, the nVIDIA Quadro4 is the 900XGL, 128MB AGP dual output.
Given the options, then, the card best suited to my needs seems to be the Quadro4.
And my needs are for graphic art, not video, so Gel Force isn't as useful. I think that's what I've learned...
Thanks, guys
Hazel
|
|
