Inventor General Discussion

Inventor General Discussion

Reply
Distinguished Contributor
2grumpy
Posts: 181
Registered: ‎11-26-2007
Message 31 of 44 (1,501 Views)

Re: Quadro (best available) vs Other Graphics Cards

04-29-2012 03:37 PM in reply to: jnielson65

Hi,

you have mention SLI - according to Autodesk advice - from few months back - Inventor does not benefit from SLI. other system to bust of graphic performance CUDA - has been developed by Nvidia. Quadro and GTX cards are CUDA compatible can benefit graphics processing.

would be worthy if somebody from Autodesk could comment on using CUDA and give some advice how to build good performing workstation not necessary using expensive Quadro or Tesla graphics card.

u have mention SLI - according to Autodesk advice - from few months back - Inventor does not

*Expert Elite*
sam_m
Posts: 638
Registered: ‎11-05-2003
Message 32 of 44 (1,480 Views)

Re: Quadro (best available) vs Other Graphics Cards

04-30-2012 12:45 AM in reply to: 2grumpy

Dunno what that guy was on about but SLI is not supported (as of R2012, never know what might happen in the future).  It may take advantage of the shared video memory across the 2 cards but only uses 1 gpu.  High-end graphics cards like the GTX590 with 2 gpus on 1 card will only work at their full speed if Windows only "sees" 1 graphics card in Device Manager - if it's listed as 2 display adaptors then Inventor will only use 1 of them.

 

Cuda - I beleive that at the moment the only Autodesk products with support are Moldflow and Ansys.

 

As has been said a million and 1 times - if you're suffering poor performance then check ALL drivers are up to date.  The majority of users only consider the graphics card driver but you need to keep everything else up to date too (motherboard/chipset, soundcard, etc.). 

----------
Please mark this response as "Accept as Solution" if it answers your question...
but please understand that the solution may not be the answer you're wanting to hear...

If you have found any post to be helpful, even if it's not a direct solution, then please provide that author kudos - spread that love :smileyvery-happy:

Lithium - helping nntp users with mania, depression and headaches
Distinguished Contributor
2grumpy
Posts: 181
Registered: ‎11-26-2007
Message 33 of 44 (1,449 Views)

Re: Quadro (best available) vs Other Graphics Cards

04-30-2012 02:47 PM in reply to: sam_m

as i understand CUDA parallel computing uses motherboard / graphic card facility and not a software. below is what i have found on Asus 'P6T7 WS SuperComputer' MB:

  

CUDA parallel computing power supported

The motherboard will achieve outstanding and dependable performance in the role of a Personal Supercomputer when working in tangent with discrete CUDA technology—providing unprecedented return on investment. Users can count on up to 4 CUDA cards(One of them should be Quadro graphic card) that are plugged into P6T7 WS SuperComputer for intensive parallel computing on tons of data, which delivers nearly 4 teraflops of performance. It is the best choice to work as a personal supercomputer on your desk instead of a computer cluster in a room

*Expert Elite*
sam_m
Posts: 638
Registered: ‎11-05-2003
Message 34 of 44 (1,428 Views)

Re: Quadro (best available) vs Other Graphics Cards

05-01-2012 12:38 AM in reply to: 2grumpy

CUDA is Nvidia technology allowing the gpu(s) to be used for highly mathematical calculations, originating from Physx (physics system for games which required special Physx cards) whom they purchased a few years ago.

And yes, the software needs to be programmed to take advantage of it... It's a pretty similar issue with multi-processor support - good for parallel calculations but questionable how it would work with a linear model/function tree (each command alters the model created by the previous one, so can't calculate them together but it has be done one at a time).

Dx11 incorporates some gpu-based calculations, so it will be interesting whether that allows a gpu to piggyback a processor, but again any software will been to be programmed to take advantage of it.

----------
Please mark this response as "Accept as Solution" if it answers your question...
but please understand that the solution may not be the answer you're wanting to hear...

If you have found any post to be helpful, even if it's not a direct solution, then please provide that author kudos - spread that love :smileyvery-happy:

Lithium - helping nntp users with mania, depression and headaches
Distinguished Contributor
2grumpy
Posts: 181
Registered: ‎11-26-2007
Message 35 of 44 (1,388 Views)

Re: Quadro (best available) vs Other Graphics Cards

05-02-2012 04:34 PM in reply to: sam_m

How annoying is absence of Autodesk programmers in explaining and helping with this issues. You can not 'wake them up' even by direct invitation. All they do is sending emails and asking to update status of issues raised for support request, by the way - issues never solved.

Member
bjlogsdon
Posts: 3
Registered: ‎11-14-2013
Message 36 of 44 (379 Views)

Re: Quadro (best available) vs Other Graphics Cards

11-14-2013 10:36 AM in reply to: 2grumpy

I am trying to upgrade a workstation that currently uses Inventor 2010 and is running crazy slow in loading multi-part assemblies and the frame rates are terrible.  I've been reading the discussions on graphics cards and whether gaming cards would be better suited for my purposes.  My current system setup is as follows:

 

-Intel Pentium 4 CPU 3.60 GHz  3.6 GHz

2.00 GB of RAM

-Nvidia Quadro FX 3400/4400 GPU (which I realized is very outdated)

 

I've looked at various cost/efficiency ratios for various cards and am thinking of replacing the Quadro with a GTX 770.  Would that card be better than the Quadro FX 3800 and would increasing the RAM to 12 GB help with Inventor's processing speed?  I'm really new at this so any feedback would be great.

Valued Contributor
WORKSTATIONresearch
Posts: 58
Registered: ‎05-05-2007
Message 37 of 44 (355 Views)

Re: Quadro (best available) vs Other Graphics Cards

11-14-2013 11:51 AM in reply to: bjlogsdon

I’ve been struggling with upgrade issues and have come to the conclusion that the only solution is a completely new system (hardware & software).  I attempted to rebuild after a catastrophic failure only to have my workstation catch fire.  I had found new components and decided to try and extend the longevity of my current workstation by improving the heat removal from the processor.  Everything checked out on a workbench.  But when I moved it to the office, connected all the cabling and started it up smoke poured out of the back.  I had an old APC UPS 650 Pro (1997) and had not delayed allowing it to cycle to the ready state before pressing the on button of the workstation.  It seems that caused the UPS to allow a spike to enter and caused the resulting catastrophic failure.

 

I took advantage of the APC warrantee by providing the cost of all new components added.  They were excellent in compensating me for the loss.  I got $1800 back.  I’ll be using that to partially offset the cost of a new workstation which will comprise eVGA parts and a top of the line Intel processor.

 

A must when protecting your system is a good UPS with a battery.  APC also provided a replacement UPS as part of their warranty, but it was refurbished stock.  In the meantime I bought a current APC UPS and an inexpensive ASUS desktop for communication purposes.

 

For your purposes I would suggest not attempting to stick with your old workstation with upgrades.  It’s not worth it.  eVGA has excellent warranty policies, some with lifetime warrantees on top of the line graphics cards.  Of course warrantees for electronic components have some questionable aspects as obsolescence becomes a factor.

 

If you build or buy a completely new workstation (that complies with Autodesk requirements for Inventor) matching it with current software is going to pay for itself in time savings.  When I was working for others, it was the most difficult task to get managers to understand that they couldn’t get the throughput required by driving their designers harder.  There simply is nothing the user can do if their hardware/software is sitting there churning away because it is obsolete.  But most of us that have been in that position know what floats to the top in many company hierarchical structures.  In a tough economy, like most companies are now experiencing, that makes the task even more difficult.

 

What I can’t understand is why the requirements for CAD hardware has to be so expensive when looking at the capabilities of things like cell phones.  I believe those providing the hardware and software are not looking hard enough at affordability issues that would remove much of the economic difficulties of upgrades by users.  Lowering costs would increase volume, possibly increasing profit margins as more gravitate to current CAD technology.

Mentor
BarryZA
Posts: 197
Registered: ‎08-27-2012
Message 38 of 44 (353 Views)

Re: Quadro (best available) vs Other Graphics Cards

11-14-2013 11:51 AM in reply to: bjlogsdon

Here's a great link showing how GT cards are better for Inventor than Quadro

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-workstation-graphics-card,3493-7.html

Mentor
BarryZA
Posts: 197
Registered: ‎08-27-2012
Message 39 of 44 (333 Views)

Re: Quadro (best available) vs Other Graphics Cards

11-14-2013 10:24 PM in reply to: WORKSTATIONresearch

Isn'**** strange how you PSU converts AC to DC, and your UPS converts DC to AC, talk about the long way round.

Valued Contributor
WORKSTATIONresearch
Posts: 58
Registered: ‎05-05-2007
Message 40 of 44 (328 Views)

Re: Quadro (best available) vs Other Graphics Cards

11-14-2013 10:42 PM in reply to: BarryZA

Thanks for the link.  I'll be considering the Radeon line.

Post to the Community

Have questions about Autodesk products? Ask the community.

New Post
Announcements
Do you have 60 seconds to spare? The Autodesk Community Team is revamping our site ranking system and we want your feedback! Please click here to launch the 5 question survey. As always your input is greatly appreciated.