• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Graphics with AutoCAD

U

uvi

Weaksauce
Joined
Sep 16, 2004
Messages
126
Has anyone here ever used AutoCAD? I do, but only for landscape architecture, purely topographical wireframe 2d imagery. No 3d whatsoever. Well im trying to decide on a new video card to get with my next system purchase, and while i keep hearing about these 600 dollar and up 'workstation graphics' cards, i dont really see the point. Just because im doing work on a computer doesnt mean i need to have a workstation graphics card. What the hell are these cards offering over consumer desktop boards such as the 6800 and X800? I realise they can kill all when it comes to intense maya/lightwave/3dstudio renderings, for professionals doing animation, but what about smiple CAD designs? I mean occasionally i deal with a wireframe map file upwards of 250megs, but usually more around 30-60 megs in file size. That doesnt necessarily mean its all appropriated to video memory does it? Theres no telling exactly how the CAD software and pc interact to handle all that. I also sometimes handle some geographic information based tiff's, ranging from 40-400 megs. Again though, this doesnt all require onboard video memory to work does it? And even if i had a 512meg card, that doesnt mean the system would just throw it all in there right

If anyone has any experience with CAD software from a purely 2D standpoint, tell me what you think the necessity is of having ridiculously overpowered 3D workstation capability just to render your 2d shots in wireframe, versus using a typical desktop board.
 
in class we have matrox G400 etc cards on dual monitors. look into them
 
Matrox is the best for 2d by far. But if you are rendering 3d to 2d nvidia or the best would 3dlabs.
 
Agreed on Matrox for this use.
I use ACAD almost daily (2D architecture, survey and LA), with a G400 at work running dual monitors, and a Parhelia in my home office running triple displays.
Nobody can touch Matrox for 2D and multi-display (and if you've never used ACAD with multi-display, you really need to try it).
 
As everyone has stated, 2D quality is what matters most.

I'd say for a new system to skip the fancy video cards, sticking somewhere around a 9600 Pro or so. Just make sure it has DVI-out, and spend the money on a good flat panel with DVI-in. My father's been buying those for his engineers, and they love it.
 
what are the specs of your pc's that you use in class? I think we have a few g400's laying around the office. Right now we're all using p4 3.2ghz with 1gig ddr dual channel ram, and FireGL Z1's. I am reeeallllyy interested in dual monitor support. The g400's are several years old arent they? I definately cant make a purchase that is gonna be slower than what im using today.
 
The Matrox G400 is severely dated. Theres newer G500 and G450Max cards that can be had for the cheap right now. Those cards aren't worth much. The Parehelia is of course better, but costs more.

On pricewatch I found this: Matrox G450 Dual Head 32MB for $52.00. Theres no reason not to get this over the G400.
 
There is no such thing as a G500. There is a G550
There is no such thing as G450MAX. Only G400 had a MAX version.
Of the G series, the oldest (G400) was the best. It was clocked higher and had better memory interface than the later G series cards. G400 also had a dedicated Maven chip for TV-out, where G450/550 sucked at TV-out.
The only reason to buy G450 or G550 over G400 is if you need DVI (G550 has DVI, available with dual DVI) or high resolution on a secondary monitor (G450 and 550 will go to higher res on secondary output).

So, there are several reasons to get a G400 over G450/550. Just depends on your needs.
I have had all of the above, and the G400 was the one I kept, specifically for the superior TV-out and faster performance.
You can get a refurbed, warrantied G400 from Matrox direct, or a used one off eBay.
 
You're right. I got my models confused. I don't stay up on Matrox cards too much. We've got several where I work. But I don't use them. I just replace them when or if they go bad.

I'm a gamer so nothing Matrox makes is compelling enough for me to buy.
 
really im just wondering whether or not a consumer desktop based card is good enough to handle 'workstation loads'. Such as buying a geforce instead of a quadro, a radeon or x series instead of a firegl. Since im not doing high res 3d renderings for magazine covers or cinematics, is the 2d performance of both vendors the same? I mean how can it get any better to look at wireframe 2d images from one genre to the next?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top