right now 970 is best bang for backs. they do not heat too much, power consumption is prety low and they do really good job. and on top of that Redshift as perfect companion ;) viewport performance is not that big issue at all between two cards but being able to utilise GPU rendering with CUDA is way more higher on the list then couple more FPS in viewport
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Christoph Muetze <[email protected]> wrote: > I'd stay clear of the ATI/AMD consumer cards if I were you. From our > experience Soft becomes generally less stable (crashing a lot more), and > the raycast selection is going haywire sometimes. > > Chris > > On 11/12/14 04:44, phil harbath wrote: > > I went Redshift and have been very pleased. I can get by using a lot > less computers than before on most projects, volume smoke is pretty much > all I use MR for anymore. I have several computers with a combination of > 780TI, 770, and 970, while I think the 780Ti give the best performance, it > really makes more sense to buy the 970 as they are priced better or 980 if > you have more cash. The Redshift say go with the cards with the most ram > (that would be Titan 6tb, if you got even more cash), depends on your needs > of course. > > > > From: David Rivera > > Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 8:51 PM > > To: Softimage Mailing List > > Subject: Best graphic card for Softimage? > > > > I know this subject has been posted a lot over the years, but it happens > that I read a benchmark performance between autodesk products on certain > webpage. They tested Radeons vs Nvidias and turns out that Mudbox and > Softimage ran better on AMD (Radeons) - this is mental ray render. > > > > > > So I was wondering whether to go full on mental ray (CPU) or take my > savings and put it on a GPU renderer? Either case, now a days, which is the > middle ranked graphic card for softimage? (My budget is around 1k). > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > David Rivera > > 3D Compositor/Animator > > LinkedIN > > Behance > > VFX Reel > > > > >
