More would have been revealed if the P500X used something like a GTX 680 (In other words,about 2nd from the top of their respective lines) rather than a Quadro 2000 which is two generations past and in effect, just a much lower line ancestor of the K5000. The systems compared were, however, not at the same level relative to their categories. To others it might matter, but in my design, I could care less about AA I am just happy when SolidWorks does not crash.Ī very good and welcome review. I just might run SpecviewPerf 11 on my system to see how it performs. Now SW Simulations and PhotoView360 is a different story. How odd is that?Ĭorrect if I am wrong, but as far as I know the basic S*#tWorks is not optimized for multi-threading (hence I am only running an i7 3820 and anything higher would not benefit the performance). In fact, SolidWorks performs better with AA on. The tests seem evenly split between single- and multi-threaded workloads, and some of them incur little or no hit from AA, which points to something other than the GPU bottlenecking performance. This sure has makes me think twice about wanting to upgrade my 2000 to a K4000. 11768418 said:Am I reading this right, in the SPECviewperf 11 bench graph: the ($480-ish) PNY Quadro 2000 (P500X) beat the ($ 1800-ish) PNY Quadro K5000 by significant margins in the SW-02, as well as some other ones as well.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |