While both the FireGL V7700 and the Nvidia Quadro FX4600 are well known within the professional workstation graphic space, each card has much to offer in many areas. The nail biting question is which of the two cards is quicker, has good cost/performance ratio and finally is the better buy. Our aim here is to run a very quick appraisal of both cards and then you can all decide for yourselves.

These professional workstation graphic cards are targeted to tackle the specific needs of users who are running engineering applications for computer aided design, rapid prototyping as well as architecture, engineering, and construction. In addition these products target digital content creation markets like game development, digital publishing, film and broadcast animation and visual effects. Both these professional graphic cards also address the requirements of medical imaging and life sciences to oil and gas industries. All major CAD and DCC applications with ISV Certification are fully covered. An outline of what each card supports may be found on the Nvidia and ATI websites.

What does each card have to offer? There are many terminology terms banded about which are confusing. Therefore, in order to get across the fundamental basic key components and to keeping it simple we summarise:

System Set-up and Software Used

Benchmarks and Software Used (32 Bit Mode)
To maintain our target audience of the professional market place we opted for the correct professional graphic card applications benchmarks. we only had a very short time in which to complete this basic but factual review.

Microsoft Windows XP Professional SP2c with complete updates
Cinebench 10
SPECapc for SolidWorks 2007™
SPECviewperf® 10.0 – ran at 1280 X 1024 Resolution.

Each card completed the tests on a clean system hard drive to ensure that no residue drivers were left installed with all updates/patches applied. Maintaining the fair play rules of SPECviewperf and SPECapc for SolidWorks 2007 we did not manipulate any of the mainboard's functionality and left it at its default settings in which it was supplied. Tests ran at 1280 X 1024 @ 60Hz in 32 bit colour. Results that have been shown within this review are from the application / benchmarks first run in accordance with the SPECviewperf fair play rules. Not an average of three runs as many seem to think is right.

Results and Benchmarks
Cinebench 10 - Intel X38 Mainboard

1 CPU and X CPU results are neck and neck as to be expected. The biggest jump to be seen is within the Open GL test saw Nvidia jump ahead by some 800 points which is really a massive leap over its AMD competitor.

Intel S5400XS Mainboard

Once more, both sets of CPU tests side head to head, any steep advances would indicate overclocking has been engaged or a faster hard drive has been used. Within the Open GL test Nvidia once more leapt ahead by some 600 points. This goes to show that the Quadro driver has been properly optimised for the Maxon software giving it good overall performance within the application.

Moving on, we next take a look at the SPECapc for SolidWorks 2007. This is a very sound test but the models contained within are small and in some opinions not large enough to show each card in its true light. So running the benchmark on Intel’s S5400XS Mainboard we see the following results:

This is where it gets a little complicated for those who do not understand the benchmark. Day in the Life Scores, lower is better in all instances and the SPECapc Composite Scores, higher is better in all instances.

In Day in the Life scores, the Nvidia Quadro FX 4600 is well ahead of the AMD FireGL V7700, though this is reflected in the SPEC Viewperf 10 scores you will see below. Within each sub section of this sector the Quadro still maintains its lead. Within the SPECapc sector of the benchmark we would as expect the Quadro maintains its lead and shows faster times to complete and better composite scores. If you want to find out more information on how the composite scoring works then visit the SPEC website here and all will become clear.

SPECviewperf 10.0 - Intel X38 Mainboard

Throughout most of the strenuous test that this heavy duty benchmark applies, we see the FireGL romping ahead with the exception of two of the tests, catia-02 and proe-04. This has always been ATI’s weakness in this area since SPECviewperf 10.0 was first launched.

Intel S5400XS Mainboard - Specview Bonetrail

Once more, we see near complete dominance by the FireGL in all the tests by some good increases in performance on this system. Oddly, the FireGL shows a slight drop in sw-01 benchmark. Again the Quadro still maintains its lead in both catia-02 and proe-04.

Conclusions
Where to find these professional workstation cards? If you are a buyer and like to stick with branded names such as Dell, HP, IBM, and Fujitsu Siemens, you may purchase a pre-configured system from any of these companies that comes out supplied with either the ATI FireGL or Nvidia Quadro. All good system integrators and VARS will supply a system with either card fitted. In our opinion, it's best looking for a company that specialises within the professional graphics arena - there are plenty of them about.

Cost/Performance Ratios.
ATI FireGL V7700 comes in at approximately $1099, and the NVIDIA Quadro FX 4600 is $1999 before taxes and delivery. It’s worth paying a visit to ATI or PNY websites, which supply out to the US & Europe for NVIDIA, for buyers in the Far East Elsa in Japan or Leadtek’s websites are worth looking at. Both ATI & NVIDIA do, at times, offer ‘trade in’ of your old professional workstation graphics card. At times they can save you a substantial few dollars so it’s worth the time and effort to look and see. Another port of call is your S.I. or VAR supplier they sometimes have the offer to hand, once more its worth the call to see what the current deals are.

Each company provides exceptional support for these cards, so once a bug has been raised the driver teams ferret away quickly to push out the fix. It's worth noting that both companies have nearly 200 personnel supporting their professional graphic cards.

One factor that must also be observed is the power consumption drawn and required by each of these cards. With everyone trying hard to cut back on emissions and saving on energy, the FireGL wins out here, drawing less current on the system and requiring a smaller footprint PSU.

Which is the better card? Clearly, in SolidWorks, the Quadro dominates, though this is an older benchmark and is about to be replaced very soon so a visit back is well merited. In Maxon’s Cinebench we see that the Quadro has OpenGL dominance over the FireGL. Throughout the SPEC Viewperf results the FireGL nearly clears the board in all sectors. Taking into consideration this is what many buyers’ look at very stringently, then without a doubt here’s your clear cut winner.

Finally we have to take into full consideration the cost/performance. At nearly half the price of its competitor and on the evidence shown above, without a doubt the FireGL takes this one home. X