Gaming GPU vs Business class GPU

I wasn't sure where to put this, but I figure the general hardware section was better than the gaming section.

Anyways, I know that there exists 2 types of GPUs: the standard everyday GPUs for media and gaming and the Business class GPUs for CAD work and such things.

Now, I'm planning on buying a laptop for Uni and I'm going into Architecture so I might be using rendering and CAD programs, therefore a business class GPU would be best, but at the same time, I'd like to run some few games and I know those GPUs aren't as good for games(idk how they are for multimedia, but I'm guessing they're the same as everything else in that department).

I know technically speaking, both these GPU families can crossover and do the other type's work, but less efficiently. So my question is which one would be the best for overall if I'd want to do both CAD, rendering and gaming(without buying 2 separate machines with 2 separate GPUs)?

 

Quadro range has support for OpenGL which allows accelerated rendering for professional 3D apps. Other than that, they are practically the same hardware.

You can soft mod it to become a geforce, gains are low.

Check the 3dmark/gaming benchmarks for both cards.

 

Well I did check some of the 3D marks and the cards seemed comparable, but someone said that Business class GPUs are slower at 3D processing(at least for games) so they didn't perform that well.

 

I do play 3d games with mine. Well had to overclock it but that went better than expected .. so eventhough mine is only 128MB I run games like Enemy Territory, Call of Duty 4, Command and Conquer 3 .. .etc.

 

This might be of help http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=539

 

According to another person here, Quadro cards are exactly identical to their Geforce counter parts. It makes sense, hardware is the same so they should act the same.

For example, my Quadro FX 770M is the counterpart of the 9600M GT.

Average 9600M 3DMark06 score (stock drivers): 5800-6000 (it could be lower, not sure)
My 770M 3DMark06 score (stock drivers): 6023

FPS in Half-life 2: 71 (built in console)
FPS in Bioshock: 45-58 (fraps)

Seems the Quadro card wouldn't completely FAIL in gaming, and excels in CAD'ing. But you never want to buy one series with intentions of using it for the other series' purpose, of course. Either way you go however, you won't be wrong off. Most people buy Quadros for extensive professional 2D/3D/OpenGL rendering, they don't buy it with gaming in mind at all at times. However, if you go with one, you wont be disappointed.

I bought this card thinking I'll never game, I'm an addict now and it's so smooth.

 

Quadros ARE based on the same GPU as their consumer counterparts. Since you're primary goal is school/work (architecture), go for the workstation card.

 

Go for the cheaper one if performances are equal.

 

Performances are not equal in CAD. The workstation card outperforms the gaming one, while still playing games equal to the gaming one.

----

I'm pretty sure the more expensive the card, the more "focused" it gets in on an objective. For example, 2SLI Quadro FX 5600s (a couple thousand bucks) will seriously outperform 3SLI GX280s (which will seriously outperform the Quadros in gaming, ~20K 3Dmark06).

But since we're talking mid-range cards, which are pretty close to each other. I'd get the workstation if you plan to work more than play.

 

Your best bet will be to go with a quadro imo.

As you said, they're the best for development applications, but they also hold their own in games. You don't sound like you're expecting to be able to run the latest games at max settings anyway, so I don't think you'll be disappointed.

 

the geforce and quadro's are not the same. I do not like how many say that they are the same core, because they are not. You can flash your video card bios to be optimized for open gl or not, but it really does not just transform your card from a geforce to a quadro.
I have proof that they are not the same core.
I have a Quadro FX2500M in my system. Many say that its just the same core as the 7900GTX. well my question is this:
Why is the core on the quadro like 1.5x bigger than the one on the 7900GTX?

and why do the graphics cards look nothing alike under the heatsink?

well the answer is simple.
the graphcis cards are not the same.
The quadros always have a higher power consumption than the equivalent powered geforce models (quadro fx2500m use 65 watts, whereas the 7900GTX uses 45 watts). This is because Quadro's are designed for quality. They will run 16x FSAA all of the time making sure the image is super clear and their are no jaggies.
I can tell the difference between a quadro and a geforce in cad, and many can as well. A geforce card will never run cad as well, because it does not natively run in 8xFSAA or 16xFSAA like the quadro cards do. If you draw a bunch of circles in autocad and zoomed really far in on them, you could notcie the difference in a heartbeat.
The geforce would produce circles out of a whole lot of straight lines, whereas the quadro would have mapped the texture, making the geometry seemless and actually round like a circle.
In gaming quadro's are usually much worse off because they run in antialiasing mode all of the time.
You need to foce antialiasing off so that the card can run games decently.

If you game, get a geforce, if you do CAD or 3d design get a Quadro based graphics card.
For ATI, get a radeon if you game, or a firegl if you do 2d/3d stuff.

For serious 3d applications for modeling, nothing touches a MATROX parhelia.

K-TRON

 

Hmm seems it is as I feared and I cannot get a compromise then. I was hoping I could get a laptop that could do both, but seems I'm going to have to sacrifice one or the other option.

Guess I'll just email the Unis and see what they want/require out of this laptop they're asking. If they don't require a working-class GPU, then I'll assume I won't be doing that heavy work and can settle for a normal GPU. My main concern is that laptops with those GPUs are rare and expensive here in Canada.

 

I'm in Architectural Science at Ryerson myself and I run 3D modeling programs like 3Ds Max 2009, AutoCAD, etc just fine on my GPU (sig) and it also leaves room for light gaming. As long as you buy a performance GPU and above you should be fine.

 

You meant the first machine or the 2nd one?

I mean, I know gaming GPUs can run CAD, and 3D modeling. I've had confirmation and tested that my 8800 in my desktop can run them no problem, but the thing is, I'm not sure how much I'll be doing and how intensively.

Anyways, I'm going to email the Universities and find out because I know higher ends GPUs can run those programs, but to a lesser extent, while the reverse is true for working class GPUs. The thing is, I'm not yet sure of the intensiveness of what I'll be doing so I can't yet properly decide if I need an actual GPU dedicated to CAD, 3D rendering and such or if I can get by with something lesser.

 

a friend of mine dose CAD software, on his dell Precision M6300 and it has the Quadro FX 3600M which is = a 8800m GTX or i know its really close to it and i game on just fine. and the screen res is at 1900 x 1200. honestly your not going to see a big hit in performance on games with the Quadro card

 

I mean the first one with the Geforce 9500M GS.
But anyhow I'd go with a gaming GPU over a Quadro. In most cases they're pretty much the same GPU, but with different drivers to optimize them for various different uses, so why not go with the GPU designed for gaming purposes which can no doubt run CAD software just fine anyway?

 

Same reason you can go with a GPU designed for CAD purposes which can do doubt run games.

 

There are many reviews, and comparisons out there that compare Quadro and fireGL cards vs thier Geforce, and radeon counterparts, in some cases in the CAD work, the gaming cards actually outperform the workstation class cards. In most other situations there's almost no performance difference in them. I have not personally compared the two types of cards directly, but as I said, there are many benchmarks and comparisons out there that compare the cards on buisiness and 3d design programs.
typical gaming cards have no problems rendering even over 20mil polygons in 3D programs. I used to use 3dsmax 08 student edition for a 3d art class and created things that were several million polygons, and it always ran pretty well on my last laptop's 8700m GT, not sure about anything professional though..