Hi, anybody knows how the two cards compared with each other in terms of performance and the level of noise generated? I prefer a silent machine. Thanks.
Posting on a PC related site will yield much better results.
This might not be the best place to get information on it. But maybe this will help:
http://www.nvidia.com/content/PDF/product-comparison/Quadro-Product-Comparison.pdf
Looks like the new Quadro K5000 was announced today. Release in October.
Thanks for the info. I need to order the machine this month. The sooner the better. With the announcement of the K5000, I guess it is stupid to order the 6000 now. Better to get the 5000 and upgrade later. Right?
If you plan on upgrading to the K5000 this year, then I would not spend $1800 now. To me, spending that much only to upgrade the component in a few months is not worth it. I would rather go with a Quadro 4000 for the next few months and then get the K5000 when it comes out. The Quadro 4000s are still extremely powerful:
http://vimeo.com/20154974
EDIT:
Also just read the post above me. Don't get a gaming card. In professional applications, workstation GPUs will always outperform gaming cards:
http://fireuser.com/blog/firepro_v8750_vs_radeon_hd_5870_benchmarks/
That is for AMDs workstation and gaming card offerings. But the same applies to NVIDIAs gaming and workstation cards. The performance difference is dramatic.
Since you seem to have the cash, given the price, get a GTX690 (yes, I know it's a gaming card), and when K5000 gets released, keep the 690 as a secondary card if you need to render by CUDA (3000 cores!!), and the K5000 to display. Best of both worlds, and after all, it's only a few months suffering the horrendous 690...
What are you going to use the Quadro for? I had the 4800 for a while (at the time it was the second best card, right after the 5800, like the 5000 is now), using 3ds Max, and I was very disappointed by its price/performance ratio. I use gaming cards now. Pretty much the same speed for most purposes, and much cheaper, so I can upgrade more often. If you can live with the 2.5GB of RAM of the 5000, you might be able to endure the 2x2GB of the 690 for a few months, and upgrade when the K5000 is out.
Is this for OSX? Because K5000 is unlikely to be supported any time soon.
Since you seem to have the cash, given the price, get a GTX690 (yes, I know it's a gaming card), and when K5000 gets released, keep the 690 as a secondary card if you need to render by CUDA (3000 cores!!), and the K5000 to display. Best of both worlds, and after all, it's only a few months suffering the horrendous 690...![]()
Also just read the post above me. Don't get a gaming card. In professional applications, workstation GPUs will always outperform gaming cards:
http://fireuser.com/blog/firepro_v8750_vs_radeon_hd_5870_benchmarks/
That is for AMDs workstation and gaming card offerings. But the same applies to NVIDIAs gaming and workstation cards. The performance difference is dramatic.
You do know that 1/2 of those core will not work in OS X right? Waste of money. OS X will only see 1 GPU if even that. Just get a known working 670/680. Same performance in OS X. In Windows the SLI bridge will work. Or should.
Is there anything higher than a 4000, for Mac? If he's looking at 5000/6000, he's looking at Windows, I guess.
You do know that 1/2 of those core will not work in OS X right? Waste of money. OS X will only see 1 GPU if even that. Just get a known working 670/680. Same performance in OS X. In Windows the SLI bridge will work. Or should.
Is this for OSX? Because K5000 is unlikely to be supported any time soon.
Sorry I am talking about under Windows. I have decided to forget about the Mac Pro and opt for the HP workstation.
----------
No. For HP Workstation.