Stop pretending Quadro cards are better than Geforce

[Anonymous]

Revit does not officially support Geforce cards, but they are a much better value than Quadro cards. The result is that architecture firms spend a lot of money on useless and slow Quadro graphic cards.

Please stop misleading customers to buy Quadro cards. This results in very slow models for offices that are spending a lot of money on useless cards. There is no reason to get Quadro cards for Revit, it is an impediment to performance, productivity and budgets.

The more people use Geforece cards, the better and more productive the Revit world will be.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, I'm still mad at Autodesk for censoring this issue and pushing it under the rug.

Make NVIDIA a lot of money and works against Revit users. I wonder if Autodesk gains any $$$ from lying to their customers like this.

[Anonymous]

When I ran the RFO Benchmark v.3.1 Graphics Acceleration Benchmarks for the P4000, here's what I got:

RVT 2018 - Graphics_Acceleration set - 2017.11.27 @ 06.59.42
    RFO Benchmark v3.1 (build 01.09.2017)
    RevitForum.org

All times are in seconds, lower is better.


Run on Revit 2018.1

_________________________________________________________________
Graphics - Standard View - with Hardware Acceleration
    3.80   activate View Styles view - hardware acceleration
    0.47   change view to Wireframe - hardware acceleration
    0.92   refresh Wireframe Line view x10 - hardware acceleration
    0.95   change view to Hidden - hardware acceleration
    3.92   refresh Hidden Line view x10 - hardware acceleration
    1.28   change view to Shaded - hardware acceleration
    4.08   refresh Shaded view x10 - hardware acceleration
    0.00   change view to ConsistentColors - hardware acceleration
    3.99   refresh Consistent Colors view x10 - hardware acceleration
    2.13   change view to Realistic - hardware acceleration
    4.22   refresh Realistic view x10 - hardware acceleration
    0.50   activate View Cube view - hardware acceleration
    2.85   rotate view x1 - hardware acceleration
   29.11   TOTAL

_________________________________________________________________
Graphics - Sketchy View - with Hardware Acceleration
    0.57   activate View Styles - Sketchy view - hardware acceleration
    2.77   change sketchy view to Wireframe - hardware acceleration
    1.83   refresh sketchy Wireframe Line view x10 - hardware acceleration
    1.33   change sketchy view to Hidden - hardware acceleration
    5.06   refresh sketchy Hidden Line view x10 - hardware acceleration
    1.83   change sketchy view to Shaded - hardware acceleration
    5.00   refresh sketchy Shaded view x10 - hardware acceleration
    0.00   change sketchy view to ConsistentColors - hardware acceleration
    4.89   refresh sketchy Consistent Colors view x10 - hardware acceleration
    1.76   change sketchy view to Realistic - hardware acceleration
    5.31   refresh sketchy Realistic view x10 - hardware acceleration
    0.62   activate View Cube - Sketchy view - hardware acceleration
    7.17   rotate sketchy view x1 - hardware acceleration
   38.14   TOTAL

Notes:
    Compare these Hardware Accelerated numbers...

_________________________________________________________________
Graphics - Standard View - without Hardware Acceleration
   26.49   activate View Styles view - no hardware acceleration
    0.83   change view to Wireframe - no hardware acceleration
    3.80   refresh Wireframe Line view x10 - no hardware acceleration
   13.00   change view to Hidden - no hardware acceleration
  112.56   refresh Hidden Line view x10 - no hardware acceleration
   26.07   change view to Shaded - no hardware acceleration
  112.27   refresh Shaded view x10 - no hardware acceleration
    0.00   change view to ConsistentColors - no hardware acceleration
  108.06   refresh Consistent Colors view x10 - no hardware acceleration
   24.99   change view to Realistic - no hardware acceleration
  108.02   refresh Realistic view x10 - no hardware acceleration
   12.28   activate View Cube view - no hardware acceleration
   61.46   rotate view x1 - no hardware acceleration
  609.83   TOTAL

_________________________________________________________________
Graphics - Sketchy View - without Hardware Acceleration
   18.54   activate View Styles - Sketchy view - no hardware acceleration
   37.22   change sketchy view to Wireframe - no hardware acceleration
   45.80   refresh sketchy Wireframe Line view x10 - no hardware acceleration
   20.98   change sketchy view to Hidden - no hardware acceleration
  144.43   refresh sketchy Hidden Line view x10 - no hardware acceleration
   32.26   change sketchy view to Shaded - no hardware acceleration
  142.33   refresh sketchy Shaded view x10 - no hardware acceleration
    0.00   change sketchy view to ConsistentColors - no hardware acceleration
  141.89   refresh sketchy Consistent Colors view x10 - no hardware acceleration
   31.84   change sketchy view to Realistic - no hardware acceleration
  140.34   refresh sketchy Realistic view x10 - no hardware acceleration
   15.54   activate View Cube - Sketchy view - no hardware acceleration
   96.82   rotate sketchy view x1 - no hardware acceleration
  867.99   TOTAL

Notes:
    to these without Hardware Acceleration

[Anonymous]

I've been busy with work and haven't been able to take the time to yank the P4000 out and test the 980ti. I'll try to do that this week.

[Anonymous]

Here's the bad news, brothers! RFO Benchmark v.3.1 Graphics Acceleration Benchmarks for the ROG 980ti Geforce:

RVT 2018 - Graphics_Acceleration set - 2017.11.30 @ 10.43.42 on IW.txt
    RFO Benchmark v3.1 (build 01.09.2017)
    RevitForum.org

All times are in seconds, lower is better.


Run on Revit 2018.1

_________________________________________________________________
Graphics - Standard View - with Hardware Acceleration
    4.28   activate View Styles view - hardware acceleration
    0.52   change view to Wireframe - hardware acceleration
    0.96   refresh Wireframe Line view x10 - hardware acceleration
    1.03   change view to Hidden - hardware acceleration
    3.94   refresh Hidden Line view x10 - hardware acceleration
    1.33   change view to Shaded - hardware acceleration
    4.13   refresh Shaded view x10 - hardware acceleration
    0.00   change view to ConsistentColors - hardware acceleration
    3.98   refresh Consistent Colors view x10 - hardware acceleration
    1.93   change view to Realistic - hardware acceleration
    4.29   refresh Realistic view x10 - hardware acceleration
    0.50   activate View Cube view - hardware acceleration
    1.82   rotate view x1 - hardware acceleration
   28.71   TOTAL

_________________________________________________________________
Graphics - Sketchy View - with Hardware Acceleration
    0.51   activate View Styles - Sketchy view - hardware acceleration
    2.30   change sketchy view to Wireframe - hardware acceleration
    1.89   refresh sketchy Wireframe Line view x10 - hardware acceleration
    1.36   change sketchy view to Hidden - hardware acceleration
    4.90   refresh sketchy Hidden Line view x10 - hardware acceleration
    1.77   change sketchy view to Shaded - hardware acceleration
    5.10   refresh sketchy Shaded view x10 - hardware acceleration
    0.00   change sketchy view to ConsistentColors - hardware acceleration
    4.93   refresh sketchy Consistent Colors view x10 - hardware acceleration
    1.76   change sketchy view to Realistic - hardware acceleration
    5.24   refresh sketchy Realistic view x10 - hardware acceleration
    0.60   activate View Cube - Sketchy view - hardware acceleration
    6.42   rotate sketchy view x1 - hardware acceleration
   36.78   TOTAL

Notes:
    Compare these Hardware Accelerated numbers...

_________________________________________________________________
Graphics - Standard View - without Hardware Acceleration
   25.47   activate View Styles view - no hardware acceleration
    0.75   change view to Wireframe - no hardware acceleration
    3.78   refresh Wireframe Line view x10 - no hardware acceleration
   12.50   change view to Hidden - no hardware acceleration
  107.06   refresh Hidden Line view x10 - no hardware acceleration
   24.41   change view to Shaded - no hardware acceleration
  108.45   refresh Shaded view x10 - no hardware acceleration
    0.00   change view to ConsistentColors - no hardware acceleration
  108.59   refresh Consistent Colors view x10 - no hardware acceleration
   25.03   change view to Realistic - no hardware acceleration
  109.07   refresh Realistic view x10 - no hardware acceleration
   12.09   activate View Cube view - no hardware acceleration
   61.96   rotate view x1 - no hardware acceleration
  599.16   TOTAL

_________________________________________________________________
Graphics - Sketchy View - without Hardware Acceleration
   18.45   activate View Styles - Sketchy view - no hardware acceleration
   37.11   change sketchy view to Wireframe - no hardware acceleration
   44.86   refresh sketchy Wireframe Line view x10 - no hardware acceleration
   20.99   change sketchy view to Hidden - no hardware acceleration
  144.09   refresh sketchy Hidden Line view x10 - no hardware acceleration
   32.14   change sketchy view to Shaded - no hardware acceleration
  142.64   refresh sketchy Shaded view x10 - no hardware acceleration
    0.00   change sketchy view to ConsistentColors - no hardware acceleration
  142.63   refresh sketchy Consistent Colors view x10 - no hardware acceleration
   32.45   change sketchy view to Realistic - no hardware acceleration
  141.93   refresh sketchy Realistic view x10 - no hardware acceleration
   15.75   activate View Cube - Sketchy view - no hardware acceleration
   90.33   rotate sketchy view x1 - no hardware acceleration
  863.37   TOTAL

Notes:
    to these without Hardware Acceleration

[Anonymous]

Nice,

So the Quadro that was released at $1000 USD in 2017 is slightly slower than the Geforce that was released at $650 is 2015.

Source for prices:

https://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Quadro+P4000

https://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GTX+980+Ti&id=3218

[Anonymous]

Well, well...I feel pretty stupid. My TWO-YEAR OLD ROG 980ti Geforce beats my spanking new, sooper-dooper Quadro P4000 card.

Is it any surprise Autodesk is giving us a good screwing over?

Is it any surprise, as of 11/29/17, Autodesk stock is in a tumble and fell $20, and they are getting rid of 1500 people?

Do I buy another P4000 and SLI them in the hopes I get something or do I throw it in my media server and buy the latest and greatest Geforce?

Hmm...I think my media server will be getting a fancy card....

[Anonymous]

Aye, sarsenault....aye, indeed!

All the other benchmarks were the same.....the 980ti beats the P4000.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, I had to explain o my boss all the Quadro cards we had made our Revit experience and that Quadro is a premium scam. Almost a year later, we spent about $10,000 fixing this problem for 22 graphic cards.

The previous IT guys was just following what Autodesk told him.

[Anonymous]

Yikes! That's an expensive fix!

Honestly, I should have known better since I've been working on computers since 1979 and building my own for 25 years. I let myself get bamboozled by "industry benchmarks" (let's all laugh) and a previous experience over 10 years old using completely different software.

I feel like an idiot because I broke the Golden Rule when it comes to getting eye-bleeding, heart stopping speed from a computer: GAMERS RULE, especially the modders. While not as big since the advent of tablets and gaming systems, the gamers know their stuff--they are freaking zealots about every aspect of the computer, especially the graphics.

Forget "technical support" from a software company. If I have some graphics issue, I can find some gamer who  has solved it or written a homebrew fix that ekes out even more speed.

Geforce is a cash cow and fixes are expected immediately when things go wrong. Not so with Quadro, though if they lowered the price, tweaked the drivers, and marketed them towards gamers, I expect the Quadro would sit up and rumble like a Dodge Hellcat.

Related example, but off-topic: Want the best 4K bluray player? Buy a new XBOX. Microsoft knows how to keep the gamers happy and that blasted thing will play anything with visual sweetness. Microsoft doesn't want to lose their easy money.

As an aside, I only started using Revit due to market conditions. I can't stand AutoCad and used Microstation for nearly  25 years. I beta-tested Microstation Triforma in 1995 (the first BIM, IMO), and it was awesome. Unfortunately, due to bad marketing, bad licensing and general ineptness, Bentley dropped the ball, and Autodesk took over with Revit.

I love a lot of the things Revit can do, but holy crap--I spend an inordinate amount of time screaming at the computer trying to make it do some of the simplest tasks.

[Anonymous]

From Autodesk University 2017 Handout

http://au.autodesk.com/au-online/classes-on-demand/class-catalog/classes/year-2017/revit/as125648#ch...

So, for the same money, the workstation-class card has a lower-end GPU, a slower clock rate, 50% fewer CUDA cores, a smaller memory bandwidth, and its fill and texture rates are a fraction that of the GTX 1070.

Why would anyone pay essentially the same amount of money for something that is decidedly slower? The closest comparable Quadro to the GTX 1070 would be the Quadro P4000. It also is built on the same GP104 GPU, but only has 1792 CUDA cores, a slower 1227/1480 MHz base/boost clock, 8GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit memory bus, and 4 DisplayPort 1.4 ports. It lists for $800, so you pay 86% more for a lesser card.

That is the same story with professional cards across the spectrum. You are paying more – often much more – to get even similar-class performance to a decent gaming card. Conventional wisdom states that just about any gaming card you buy priced from $300 on up will be fine for most AEC application usage.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the link to the Handout!

I just skimmed it, but I'm going to go back and read it more seriously when I have time. It's written well with a lot of technical information. I wish I would have had it BEFORE I wasted money on that Quadro.

I see I should have bought a Geforce 1070 or 1080 (or 1080ti). instead of wasting money on the Quadro. But what really gets my hackles up is Autodesk essentially kicking us in the cajones with their render engine implementation,  I see now why it takes exactly 40 minutes for this one view to render in Revit with both the P4000 and my 980ti--no GPU utilization.

I want that Iray renderer that NVIDIA has. I saw mention of www.bimiq.com and sent in my interest for the plugin. That jewel may make me not feel so bad about getting hosed by the Quadro and Auotodesk if it utilizes the GPU.

Remember what I said about Gamer's Rule? Those Unreal Engine renders in the handout were outstanding. I messed with the engine when it first came out but haven't since.

Oh, and a bit of a "duh" moment: I didn't realize Revit 2018.2 was out. Due to being on sat internet, I shut-off a lot of auto-updates to minimize bandwidth usage. I went and grabbed it  and will install it after I finish this post.

Thanks again, brother!

[Anonymous]

No problem.

Also, as a GPU rendering nerd, I suggest Enscape3d.com. We use it for exploration and basic renders.

For super advanced and fast renders I suggest Octane, but it's an advanced workflow.

Guide here: https://help.insitevr.com/hc/en-us/articles/226168207-360-Images-with-Octane

Iray in 3ds Max is great and idiot proof. Just click convert and render. I wrote a guide here:

https://help.insitevr.com/hc/en-us/articles/226619088-360-Images-with-Iray-

Enscape and Iray are probably your best bets.

Enjoy the GPU renders!

[Anonymous]

Wow! Thanks for the articles, Sam. You are hardcore into the rendering aspects.

I had planned to try the Iray this weekend, but as of this writing, I'm experiencing Revit h.e.l.l. Blasted clients made SIGNIFICANT changes at the structural level on a construction document file of a hotel, and Revit went nuts! It's blown my all my groups, joined elements.. the works. These fools think you just click a button and woo-hoo!...Pretty picture!

I have one of the design suites, so I'll follow your Iray guide and crank up 3ds Max when I get time and give it a whirl. I'll also, try Enscape3D.

Thanks again!

[Anonymous]

For my two cents.

I do not believe there is any benefit using Quadro or AMD Firepro workstation Cards for AutoCad or Revit.

Both Autocad and Revit switched to Directx acceleration some time ago which is a gaming card exclusive.

There are other software packages (such as Maya, Solidworks, etc) which DO directly benefit as they use the graphical power of the Chip to more decimal points in a more 'accurate' way at the expense of speed, than is required for gaming or in a way that enhances speed for AutoCad and Revit. 

I have yet to see ANY tangible benefit in using Quaddro or Firepro cards in AutoCad or Revit, either anecdotally or on youtube or dedicated professional websites.

If anyone can point us to some good weblinks that would be great.

The Autodesk IT groups in my experience are a complete waste of time as they don't know any better and obviously are in bed with nvidia / Ati to some degree.

It would not be hard for Autodesk to prove tangible benefits / benchmarks of current mainstream cards v quadro if they wanted.

b

[Anonymous]

Bazwaldo, I would give you a kudos if this thread had not been shut down and censored, bahahaha. This quote was priceless, approaching the level of art: "The Autodesk IT groups [...] bed with nvidia / Ati to some degree"

[Anonymous]

Came upon this thread researching Geforce vs Quadro and wanted to post my experience, even though I mostly use Civil 3D, Navisworks and Infraworks.

I have just switched laptops from the Dell Precision 7520 (Quadro M2200) to XPS 15 9570 (GeForce 1050 ti) and the performance is MUCH better! Civil 3D as slow as ever, but Navisworks and Infraworks scream along. Luckily our IT department are starting to see the light and realise that Quadro is a huge scam.

[Anonymous]

Quaddro only works on software that is optimised for it.Autocad and revit long ago Switched to DirectX graphics which is a gaming card, as raw horse power is preferred to traditional quaddro benefits. I think Navisworks also did but not100% sure.
Other 3d software does benefit from quaddro where accuracy is required over raw performance, but it's usually very specialised software, and is largely dyingout now as software gets rewritten.It's not the 1990's anymore.
Quadro and Firepro I think is really a scam to sell over priced cards, and software vendors have been complicit in it, (allegedly!)

[Anonymous]

This is an AutoCAD 2019 issue. I have a EVGA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB. I was having issues with copy and paste. When I "Ctrl+C" and then "Ctrl=V" It locks up for about 20 minutes. If I right click and copy from clipboard and then right click and past from clipboard it for some reason works faster. Maybe locks up for 10 minutes. I was told my graphics card was not in the Certified and Recommended graphics hardware and drivers list and that could be the problem. I gave the files to the tech support guy and he did it with a 8 to 15 second pause after pasting. He is using the NVIDIA Quadro K5200. Any suggestions before I look into getting a NVIDIA Quadro K5200?

[Anonymous]

Floyd,

I haven't been on that thread in awhile, but I don't think this is a video card issue at all. The type of video card may reduce/increase the problem, but the root probably lies in these areas:

On board memory

Video card memory

"Swap" drive space used when contents exceed memory allocation.

I'm using Revit 2018 on a system with 64GB RAM, two EVGA GeForce 1060ti cards, and 250GB dedicated as a static swap drive. Two months ago, I had to copy/paste a 170MB Revit file into a blank template. I used the Ctrl-C/Ctrl-V method, and it took maybe 5 seconds.

Your system memory and video card memory often "share" what's left when the ssytem is running, and then your swap space will kick in. I dedicate 250GB on a SSD purely for Swap purposes--been doing that since WIN NT.

I will say this: the tech guy is full of crap if he says you need a Quadro card. If you read that thread, you saw the nonsense I went through. Presently my $800 P4000 Quadro is relegated to a media server.

Possible solutions:

• Clear the clipboard.
• Here's a link that describes the process: https://www.nextofwindows.com/how-to-empty-the-clipboard-in-windows-7-tip
• Now test out your Ctrl-C/Ctrl-V method.

If that doesn't work check how much memory is onboard.

• If you have 16GB, double it, or higher.
• Test out your Ctrl-C/Ctrl-V method.

If you are still having problems, find a drive with some blank space and allocate 250-500GB to Windows as it's primary swap file. Of course, you might want to mix and match the steps to see what combo works best.

Whatever you do, do NOT get suckered into the Quadro game.

Good Luck!

Mike

[IhsanGinBaker]

Sorry to necrobump an "archived" thread, but I need to vent.

I agree that Autodesk's switch to DirectX has effectively killed the performance gains of QuadroFX cards of a decade ago.

That's fine, it is a business decision and I understand it, good OpenGL programmers are becoming a dying breed and clearly Autodesk does not want to pay for them. What I don't understand is, even though its own "system Requirements" says "DirectX11 with Shader model5", why Autodesk still pushes out an OpenGL optimized card as a "certified" card and how they can justify it.

I'm tired of sofware vendors come to us to demo their products on a "gaming laptop" and outperform our QuadroFX equipped "mobile workstations" on Revit/Navisworks etc. I believe it is "gaming laptops" for us from now on.