|
By:
Dave Altavilla
September 10, 2003
We've utilized
SPECviewperf version 7.1 in the following tests. This
is the most recent version of the benchmark and it has been
updated with new workload scenarios, that are representative
of today's multi-disciplined CAD and DCC environments.
The real advantage with this benchmark is that it draws
performance metrics on many data-points in several different
OpenGL based applications from various ISVs (Independent
Software Vendors). The SPECopc (SPEC OpenGL Performance
Characterization) project group is comprised of companies
like 3DLabs, Intel, AMD, NVIDIA, ATi, Dell, IBM, SGI, Sun
Micro as well as others, and helps define and endorse what
application viewsets are used in the SPECviewperf test.
|
 |
|
SPEC Viewperf |
|
A
Multi ISV Pro Graphics OpenGL Benchmark |
|
Currently, there are six
standard SPECopc application viewsets: (courtesy
SPEC.org)
-
3dsmax-02, based
on SPECapc for 3ds max 3.1 configured with the Open GL
driver, includes three models containing an average of 1.5
million vertices each, and tests performance of scenes
with different levels of lighting.
-
dx-08, based on
IBM's Data Explorer application, has 10 different tests.
-
drv-09, based on
Intergraph's DesignReview model review package, has five
different tests.
-
light-06, based
on Discreet's Lightscape radiosity application, has four
tests.
-
proe-02, based on
SPECapc for Pro/ENGINEER 2001, measures two models in
three modes - shaded, wireframe and hidden-line removal (HLR).
-
ugs-03, based on
SPECapc for Unigraphics V17, tests performance based on an
engine model containing 2.1 million vertices.
Weighted Geometric Mean - Higher Scores Are Better
In the first
set of viewperf benchmarks, we see the NVIDIA based cards,
with the exception of the GFFX5900 Ultra, dominate the
chart in two out of the three test runs. Again, the
picture is becoming clear that the GeForce FX product, in
no way has been optimized or targeted for Workstation
Graphics applications and the numbers show this boldly.
So, if you were expecting to get Pro Graphics performance
on the cheap and work with a consumer level product,
you'll have to re-think things a bit. Beyond that,
it is easy to see the strength of the Quadro FX product
line in these applications. However, the FireGL X1
actually put up a good fight in the Data Explorer viewset,
besting even the Quadro FX 3000. So if your gig is
scientific data visualization and analysis, perhaps the
ATi product and its more than attractive price point, is a
good option for you.
Weighted Geometric Mean - Higher Scores Are Better
Once again,
the Quadro FX 2000 and 3000 cards take two out of the
three tests, giving NVIDIA's product the lead in a total
or 4 out of 6 SPECviewperf viewsets. ProE is
definitely an application where NVIDIA took the time to
highly tune their drivers in an effort to drive
performance. In fact the Quadro FX 3000 bests a
FireGL X1 by 65% in Pro Engineer. So, for the masses
using ProE as their mainstay tool (and there are many for
sure), the Quadro FX 2000 and 3000 deliver on what you're
paying for. However, as it stands today, at least in
the workloads generated by SPECviewperf, ProE users have
little incentive to upgrade from a QFX 2000 to a QFX 3000.
The 3D Studio Max test seems to yield much the same result
as well, with the QFX 2000 and 3000 boards right on top of
each other. On the other hand, as our previous
SPECapc for 3DS Max 4.2 numbers prove out, future
generations of these applications will most likely tax the
graphics subsystem more and distance the Quadro FX 3000
from its mid-range sibling even more so.
An interesting
note here is the FireGL X1's strength in the Light-06
test, suggesting that if a lot of shading and lighting is
used in your daily tool-box, that perhaps the ATi product
is a real sleeper behind its modest price tag. Here
the ATi product actually beat out the high end Quadro FX
3000 by a notable 6%. While this isn't a huge
margin, it does call to our attention, the possibility
that the ATi card could have some innate strength in
radiosity algorithms, shading and lighting. Then
again, it could be that NVIDIA's driver team hasn't set
their sights on this application and as such, the drivers
are holding the Quadro FX cards back somewhat. We
may look deeper into this in the future.
|
|
|
Final Analysis |
|
Sizing up NVIDIA's Pro Graphics Flagship |
|
At this point
you've probably gotten the idea that the Quadro FX 3000 is
targeted exclusively at the high end of the market and you
would be perfectly correct. The Quadro FX 3000 has an
MSRP of $2295, which is a hefty price to pay for graphics
card, considering the rest of your workstation probably
doesn't even cost as much. However, if you need this
kind of performance and your project processing workloads
scale exponentially, as they probably do versus the
relatively small routines used in our benchmarks, then most
likely the seconds saved in rendering times will add up to
minutes and minutes add up to hours eventually. As the
saying goes, "time is money" and it just depends on the
applications you run and how precious your time is, as to
whether the NVIDIA Quadro FX 3000 is right for you.
The Quadro FX
3000, in general, is one of the fastest Workstation Graphics
cards money can buy right now and the numbers we've shown
you here today back that up. There were only a few
instances where ATi's offering was even in the ballpark
performance wise. Then again, from a price point
perspective, comparing a $500 FireGL X1 to a $2300 Quadro FX
3000, isn't exactly apples to apples. Regardless,
these are two of the top offerings from both camps, so we
can only provide reference points based on the hardware that
is available to us here. The Quadro FX 2000 or even
1000 however, may also be better options for most designers
and artists, with the performance of these cards falling
within about 5 - 15% of the QFX 3000 but with a much more
manageable price range. All told however, we have to
hand it to NVIDIA for delivering a product that brings best
in class performance in these highly specialized and
demanding CAD and DCC applications. If every second
counts, then open up those purse strings and belly up to the
bar, because NVIDIA's Quadro FX 3000 can certainly serve up
CAD and DCC Workstation performance.
Discuss This Article in Hardware's PC Hardware Forum!
|
