NVidia Quadro FX

pmooney wrote on 3/7/2008, 11:47 AM

Is there any one on this forum using an NVidia Quadro FX in their editing computers?

I'm just curious about why that line of video cards is so much more expensive than other cards and whether that price mirrors an amazing gain in video editing performance.

Even if Vegas used the GPU for rendering, would a card like that be worth it to you guys if you had the budget for it?

Comments

Bill Ravens wrote on 3/7/2008, 11:53 AM

I've got an FX1500 in my desktop workstation. Vegas doesn't need this level of video card, but, if you ever run any high order apps, you won't regret having the quadro. Without the quadro, CAD and rendering apps had corrupted displays. The quadro fixed all that for me.

UlfLaursen wrote on 3/7/2008, 12:13 PM

I have a small quadro in one of my PC's and it's ok, but I think Bill is rigth, Vegas is ok w/o.

/Ulf

Leigh wrote on 3/7/2008, 2:20 PM

My work laptop (a Dell Precision 2300) has an FX 350M video card. From what I've read about the card, it's not that great. I've not actually installed Vegas on the laptop yet though, so I haven't really had an opportunaity to test it myself.

goshep wrote on 3/7/2008, 2:43 PM

I have a 1500. Was part of my new quad rig that I built in anticipation of Vegas 64 bit with GPU acceleration.

Save your money.

JohnnyRoy wrote on 3/7/2008, 6:27 PM

> [I]I'm just curious about why that line of video cards is so much more expensive than other cards[/I]

They are more expensive because of the support that you get. They are tailored to the CAD / 3D community and the drivers actually get tested and tweaked for all of the major 3D applications (3D MAX, Maya, Lightwave, etc.). These cards are certified to work. You are paying for the rock solid stability of the drivers when using the software they certify for. The drivers also provide outstanding OpenGL support (required for most 3D applications)

> [i]... and whether that price mirrors an amazing gain in video editing performance.[/I]

Absolutely not. The Gamer cards that most of us buy are every bit as powerful, but the drivers may or may not work on your system with your programs and the OpenGL support is minimal at best. In short, the Quadro FX series are special purpose cards for the CAD / 3D community. They offer video editors absolutely nothing but a hole in your wallet.

Having said that, if you use 3D MAX or Maya to do 3D work for video editing, it might be worth getting one. But you'd have to do a lot of 3D video work to justify the price. Also remember that NONE of these 3D applications use the GPU for rendering! They only use the card for OpenGL while editing. All of the 3D rendering engines are software only.

~jr

Bill Ravens wrote on 3/7/2008, 7:12 PM

I am so, so glad to be out of this Wizard of Oz reality that you get on this forum.
Every serious graphics product on the market recommends the same card---a quadro.
Key word..."serious". My own experiences confirm the recommendation. Pay the money, throw the dice...the choice is yours and yours alone.

(BTW, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain....heheheheh...the king ain't got no clothes...hahaaha...harrr...harrr))

jonathan-kenefec wrote on 7/27/2008, 4:04 AM

Just a quick note of thanks to JohnnyRoy for his post.

I'm about to start buidling a PC (when I've worked out how to do it!) and this was the biggest query for me:

Do I need a video capture card of this type (MATROX RT.X2, or Nvidia Quadro FX) etc, or can I get away with a 'normal' video card of the types the young 'uns use for their video games?

I'm grateful that the gaming cards will suffice because the price on the others was prohibitive!

I only use Vegas btw and for HDV. So now all I need to worry about is picking my way through the myriad options for processors, RAM, Mobo' etc.

Thanks again for the clarification. I should have come here first and saved myself a morning on Google!

Cheers

Jon.

farss wrote on 7/27/2008, 4:23 AM

For Vegas your video cards doesn't matter. I'd suggest anything with 2 DVI ports in case you want to go dual monitor. Aside from that the GPU on the card isn't going to matter at all.
Unless you want to run dual 30" monitors, then you need two dual DVI or dual display port cards.

However most things 'video' apart from Vegas do use the GPU so I stick with the Quadro FX cards but they are expensive and probably any of the cheaper "gaming" cards would do anyway.

Bob.

megabit wrote on 7/27/2008, 4:27 AM

As a CAD/CAM professional for 20 years, I can confirm the Quadro is one of the best cards available for these applications, whose 3D capabilities are mainly using OpenGL.

For video editing, the current "gamer" cards are more appropriate (provided your driver version is stable). For BluRay, they offer what is necessary to play HD (both retail and your own BD's) in their full glory.

I'm using the ATI HD 3870, and am quite satisfied with it (even though it took ATI some time to issue the Catalyst software version that is fully HDCP-compliant; now it is - version 8.7 recommended).Works great under both XP and Vista; with Vegas and Edius, as well as PowerDVD for retail BD playback on my 50" plasma, connected to the secondary DVI output (with a DVi->HDMI cable).

JohnnyRoy wrote on 7/27/2008, 7:10 AM

> They offer video editors absolutely nothing but a hole in your wallet.

Since making this statement back in March I have purchased Boris RED and I had an opportunity to speak with the Boris folks when I was at NAB2008 in April and I was told that a Quadro FX card would make a difference over a gamer card with Boris. So if I retract my statement. If you are a video editor that uses RED and I assume After Effects or other 3D compositing applications, it may be worth it to purchase one of these cards.

I haven't made the jump yet because there is no way for me to tell which one to buy that will noticeably out perform my GeForce 8600GTS. For 3x the price I expect a huge kick in performance.

> Every serious graphics product on the market recommends the same card---a quadro. Key word..."serious". My own experiences confirm the recommendation.

Bill Ravens if you read this. Do you use RED or other 3D application and do you notice a significant difference with your Quadro FX1500? How have you confirmed the recommendation to go with a Quadro FX? What did you have before to compare it to?

~jr