1527 posts
  • Bought between 10 and 49 items
  • Envato Studio (Microlancer) Beta Tester
  • Exclusive Author
  • Has been a member for 3-4 years
webdesignerart says

Hey Guys i am going to buy 27inh Imac but they only have Geforce GTX 780M, as i know for 3D development rendering is Quadro k4000 is better but GTX 780M has 2150Cuda cores its 4x cores then Quadro, so confuse bit which i have to buy..

And second in apple website i can’t add this card.

So guys for 3d animation development is GTX 780m is better then Quadro k4000?

Singularity_Designs
Singularity_Designs Recent Posts Threads Started
63 posts
  • United Kingdom
  • Has been a member for 1-2 years
  • Sold between 100 and 1 000 dollars
  • Exclusive Author
  • Bought between 1 and 9 items
Singularity_Designs says

Most of the time I’ve always seen Quadro cards being incredibly expensive but not actually offering that much of a performance difference over normal consumer based cards such as the 780M. If anything 4GB of VRAM is probably better in terms of 3D work than 3GB

There’s a forum post discussing the above for a GTX 580 http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-1669344/gtx-580-quadro-k4000-blender-including-cycles-udk.html.

Either way I would think you’d be happy with a 27” iMac, otherwise there’s the Mac Pro which has AMD based workstation cards.

2500 posts Community Officer
  • Envato Staff
  • Community Ambassador
  • Repeatedly Helped protect Envato Marketplaces against copyright violations
  • Most Wanted Bounty Winner
  • Won a Competition
  • Envato Studio (Microlancer) Beta Tester
  • Beta Tester
+15 more
contrastblack Staff says

To sum it up, you may also ask why Xeon instead of i7, and the same logic will apply.

Added price accounts for stability, lesser power consumption and improved drivers for professional applications. That doesn’t mean that you couldn’t get a consumer grade (GTX) card to achieve the same if not better performance, but your electricity bill, noise levels, and stability would suffer greatly.

The professional alternatives aren’t meant to be “faster”. They are actually often times clocked at lesser speeds exactly for that very reason: lower voltages, less heat, more stability.

Also, S_D’s argument is also valid, but only if you are actually a professional 3D artist and need to load that sort of huge texture information into your VRAM (large level designs, at once).

There’s no magic answer there… you want professional reliability, you buy a professional, more expensive card. You want the best performance for your buck, disregarding the odd crash, go for the consumer one.

p.s: forgot to mention, unless you’re talking about GFX based rendering (octane/arion whatever else works) you still depend entirely on your processor, and the v-card will only be used for GUI and viewport animation, so the cuda core count outside of that usage scenario is about as relevant as the color used on the PCB :)

by
by
by
by
by
by