And even in the PC World article (which isn't very useful as far as articles go) they state it's targeting the Quadro, yet once again only compare it to the Titan Xp.
It's certainly a strange product launch for AMD.
AMD Vega 10, Vega 11, Vega 12 and Vega 20 Rumors and Discussion
It's certainly a strange product launch for AMD.
Anarchist4000
Veteran
From the article.
Which is specifically referencing the gaming performance comparison.
Of course, but a company can't use the excuse of work-in-progress drivers for a product they're launching now that is targeted to professional use. For gaming? Sure, we expect that with a new product.Since when are drivers ever „final“?
If there were hybrid GPU setup support, the ideal solution seems to be buying a cheap last-gen (or last-last gen) Quadro, then slotting a gaming card for the other half of this supposed workload.
I think I can remember a fair number of oddly specific benchmark comparisons with limited justification, and off the top of my head I can think of a decent run of CPU and GPU launches presaged by a trickle of uneasy disclosures.
For some others, it might be odd.
Well Nvidia seemed to have been doing very well over the years with their "hybrid" Titan GPUs, which is obviously the consumer they're targeting with the perf and price, trying to get in on that high profit action with their new product.
Anarchist4000
Veteran
Which are often ahead of pro drivers with the extended certification process.
D
Deleted member 2197
Guest
Very weird choosing the TitanXp to compare since a $450 P2000 Quadro beats a TitanXp in these benchmarks. The $850 P4000 offers similar or better performance than the Frontier Edition in SPECViewPerf 12.1 and the OpenGL test of Cinebench R15.
Last edited by a moderator:
Very weird choosing the TitanXp to compare since a $450 P2000 Quadro beats a TitanXp in these benchmarks. The $850 P4000 offers similar or better performance than the Frontier Edition in SPECViewPerf 12.1 and the OpenGL test of Cinebench R15.
It might seem weird, but after Polaris single-handily ushered in the era of pervasive, affordable VR, I think the marketing department deserves the benefit of a doubt.
Because the Quadro can't do games, and can't do UE4/U/CE/.... The Titan Xp can do games and can do CAD to some degree, same class/target as the FE.
D
Deleted member 2197
Guest
I thought the FE audience was the Pro market. I do not think any in the Pro market be using the Titan Xp for CAD.
Is it certain that Quadros can't run games? It might not be as well-optimized, but what necessarily stops them?
D
Deleted member 2197
Guest
I believe some run games on Quadro laptops.
Edit: Not exactly the same thing but I have modified Quadro drivers to run games on my Geforce products.
Edit: Not exactly the same thing but I have modified Quadro drivers to run games on my Geforce products.
https://videocardz.com/65014/nvidia-quadro-p6000-outperforms-titan-x-pascal-in-gaming-benchmarks
Doesn't really prove the point either way though, I'm sure some of the cheaper ones probably can't.
sheepdogexpress
Newcomer
The problem is the niche that has actually has this software won't be doing any gaming unless they are the boss of the company.
When the software starts at 4000 for one program and can go to 10k plus with a program like Catia on top of the 100k salary your paying engineers, your not going to be buying your employees prosumer cards. Cheapening for less performance when the other costs are so high(even if you need to, as someone else mentioned, get a p4000 or p5000 quadro) or helping your workers crank and play ultra settings just doesn't make sense. This is why workstation cards can cost 6k.
WX 7100 being pretty much the same performance as Vega FE in the professional benchmarks tells me they're unfinished.
I mean in the broadest sense. Computer Aided Design is also ZBrush, Blender, Unity, Substance Designer, Maya, Modo, and all of that. These programs have a very different profile than traditional CSG and bector based CAD applications like Rhino, Cinema4D or SolidWorks and Allplan. Additionally they tend to switch between design and visualization on-the-fly, because the the product is often actually real-time, for example VR viewables.
I thought AMD was mentioning that that is the target audience: game-studios, architects, designers, and independent artists which don't swim in corporate money. They don't buy Quadros and rarely FirePros, they buy the highest end gaming cards and hope that they can get a decent design performance by brute force, and they can estimate rather well that the product will perform as expected.
Getting a card which actually has really good design performance, and still allows the evaluation of performance on "display" machines, is a really attractive proposition.