And how does it compare to Luxion's Keyshot<http://www.keyshot.com/how-its-different/> or now Lagoa<https://lagoa.com/>?
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Doeke Wartena Sent: 4 avril 2013 05:13 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Announcing Redshift - Biased GPU Renderer How is redshift compared to octane? 2013/4/4 James De Colling <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Welcome to the "pro" card market... I only use quadros because that's what the sells we use ship with... Long gone are the days when people cards were worth their sticker price On Apr 4, 2013 4:28 PM, "olivier jeannel" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I should be out of the office, but will test asap. For the quadro, well it was bundled with the workstation (HP Z620). It's no problem if the quadro is more expensive and produce better performance. It becomes a problem if they are really bellow game cards. Your gtx has more than 400 cores while the 4000 has 256... They are supposed to be stronger when working though... Le 04/04/2013 09:13, Octavian Ureche a écrit : Here you go: http://www.nvidia.com/object/product-quadro-4000-us.html http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-470/specifications The last one is what i currently have. as you can see, the quadro's memory bandwith, cuda cores and memory interface are below the gtx. But you have bigger vram which means you can cram more into the scenes. Speed wise, given the differences it might be slower at the actual rendering, but we're talking gpu rendering here so i'm not sure if it's going to be that much noticeable. Do a render with both scenes and post your times in the forum. Then we'll know better how hardware affects the performance. To be honest, i always found quadros to be extremely overpriced, but maybe that's just me.
