brudgers Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 Ray, the screen refresh is an important feature that impacts many of us. Are you suggesting that high powered card will make a difference? If yes, where do you draw the line without it being an overkill? Will the cards shipped by Apple serve the need? Thanks There are limited options for graphics cards on the Mac. Considering that only the top of the line model even offers the option of changing graphics cards and Apple's compulsion to use a BIOS format incompatible with the defacto standards from windows, it is hardly surprising that there are limited options and that they come at a premium price. Quote Link to comment
Yoginathaswami Posted October 6, 2009 Author Share Posted October 6, 2009 First off, I'm not a graphics card expert, I only know what works for me.. Your opinion counts in my book Ray! Now 1GB sounds like good idea. it is hardly surprising that there are limited options and that they come at a premium price.. Thanks Brudgers...but many of just love our Mac so much and going to PC's is just unthinkable. Btw, you can't be too old for a Mac... Quote Link to comment
Jershaun Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 In this modern era of Multi-cores, 64-bit and super fast graphics cards, Vectorworks is a dinasaur. It does not truly support Multi-cores (contrary to documentation on their site). It does not support 64-bit systems. OpenGL is the ONLY part of VW that uses the graphics card. Every other rendering mode (including wireframe, hidden line, etc.) does not use the modern super fast graphics cards we have today. NOT even 2D navigation uses it (vw11 used to have hardware acceleration but because of their negativety, they stopped it since). Every other modern 3D application uses the graphics card and even entry level cards are super fast, so why vw doesn't use it, is beyond me. That's why I find this discussion of graphics cards very funny. IMHO one can just use a simple 32MB or 64MB card and vw will not even notice. Quote Link to comment
Jershaun Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 http://www.redway3d.com/pages/redsdk.php Just as NNA switched their modeling kernal/engine to Parasolid, I think it's about time for NNA to switch to another rendering engine. Lightworks isn't going forward as much as other rendering solutions. The above site shows there are other alternatives if only NNA is willing. Scroll down to "Viewport Interaction Tools"-this is one feature alone that could take vw forward in leaps and bounds. I think the above rendering engine could make better use of current graphics cards than what is currently implemented (3D wise) in vw. Quote Link to comment
VincentCuclair Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 In this modern era of Multi-cores, 64-bit and super fast graphics cards, Vectorworks is a dinasaur. It does not truly support Multi-cores (contrary to documentation on their site). It does not support 64-bit systems. OpenGL is the ONLY part of VW that uses the graphics card. Every other rendering mode (including wireframe, hidden line, etc.) does not use the modern super fast graphics cards we have today. NOT even 2D navigation uses it (vw11 used to have hardware acceleration but because of their negativety, they stopped it since). Every other modern 3D application uses the graphics card and even entry level cards are super fast, so why vw doesn't use it, is beyond me. That's why I find this discussion of graphics cards very funny. IMHO one can just use a simple 32MB or 64MB card and vw will not even notice. Does this mean that when it comes to VW and rendering (except OpenGL) it's the processor and memory one should invest in? Quote Link to comment
Jershaun Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Yes thats true. Same goes for 2D navigation (panning & zooming). Quote Link to comment
Rossford Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 I would think processor and RAM would be a good investment for almost any program, no? I presume that while VW doesn't use multi core, that if you were multi tasking that cores 2-4 (or 8) would still be helpful for those other programs you might have open? I guess the practical question from the above is, what is the reasonable RAM you need? I have 4MB, and see many computers with 6 or 8 now. Anyone ramp up and see a noticeable difference? For those of us who use open GL, I doubt it would be worth back shopping for a 64MB video card, when 256 or 512 are standard and 1GB doesn't cost that much more anymore. Same question as above - anyone see an Open GL difference when moving up? Quote Link to comment
brudgers Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 I would think processor and RAM would be a good investment for almost any program, no? I presume that while VW doesn't use multi core, that if you were multi tasking that cores 2-4 (or 8) would still be helpful for those other programs you might have open? I guess the practical question from the above is, what is the reasonable RAM you need? I have 4MB, and see many computers with 6 or 8 now. Anyone ramp up and see a noticeable difference? For those of us who use open GL, I doubt it would be worth back shopping for a 64MB video card, when 256 or 512 are standard and 1GB doesn't cost that much more anymore. Same question as above - anyone see an Open GL difference when moving up? I believe that 256mb of graphic card memory is required for the current version of vectorworks. My experience is that more cores and more ram are helpful. Quote Link to comment
M5d Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Sorry for reviving this thread, but I just came across the following quote in the VW2010 installer read me and figured it should be here. "IN GENERAL, STARTING WITH VECTORWORKS 2009, THE MORE POWERFUL YOUR VIDEO CARD IS, THE BETTER YOUR VECTORWORKS EXPERIENCE WILL BE." Quote Link to comment
Yoginathaswami Posted November 1, 2009 Author Share Posted November 1, 2009 I wonder if one of the tech. person at NNA can confirm this for all of us... Quote Link to comment
M5d Posted November 1, 2009 Share Posted November 1, 2009 Not sure if you're asking for NNA to confirm the validity of the statement or if you just want to confirm that the statement is in the readme.txt, if it's the latter you can find the readme.txt file in Path: /Applications/Vectorworks 2010/ReleaseNotes on your HD. Quote Link to comment
Yoginathaswami Posted November 1, 2009 Author Share Posted November 1, 2009 (edited) Actually, I wanted NNA to confirm the validity of the statement. I am planing to buy an iMac instead of MacPro. One of the factor that contributed to the decision is graphic card. MacPro?I have an option of installing card of my choice, however with iMac I am stuck with what Apple ships. It is about $500 savings and you get 27" display with it! As you can see?in this thread?conclusion was VW don't take advantage of the graphic card for most of its usage...until your post. M5d, thank you for reviving the thread with new information. Edited November 1, 2009 by Yoginathaswami Quote Link to comment
Vectorworks, Inc Employee Josh Loy Posted November 11, 2009 Vectorworks, Inc Employee Share Posted November 11, 2009 "IN GENERAL, STARTING WITH VECTORWORKS 2009, THE MORE POWERFUL YOUR VIDEO CARD IS, THE BETTER YOUR VECTORWORKS EXPERIENCE WILL BE." This statement is generally true. Large monitors require more VRAM and I would recommend at least 512 MB VRAM for a 30?. I would stress making sure you have enough video memory because once you run out thrashing happens and that will kill performance. See the following Knowledgebase article for a more in-depth discussion of video card considerations: http://kbase.vectorworks.net/questions/714/Video+Graphic+Card+Guidelines+for+Vectorworks+-+9%7B47%7D15%7B47%7D2009 Josh Loy Engineer Nemetschek NA Quote Link to comment
Yoginathaswami Posted November 12, 2009 Author Share Posted November 12, 2009 Thanks Josh! Quote Link to comment
MacG3Freak Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 I think the Quadro FX 4800 would be complete overkill. Vw doesn't use the graphics card for any rendering other than OpenGL. I think any of the newer Mac compatible graphics cards in the $150 dollar range would be fine. If you're running Mac OS 10.6 than the operating system will leverage additional processing power from the graphics card. So having a top shelf graphics card is never a bad idea. -G. Quote Link to comment
Ray Libby Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 1,300 dollars worth? Quote Link to comment
MacG3Freak Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 1,300 dollars worth? If you can afford it, then it's worth it. Not that I'm saying that it isn't HORRIBLY overpriced. That's why I model on my desktop and laptop but use a scalable server for rendering, so I've never needed a heavy duty graphics card, but if I didn't have that, I'd most certainly go with a heavy duty graphics card. The other upside to having a beast of a graphics card is if you ever intend on sending your models out to something like Cinema4D or Maya those suckers need a big-boy chipset. Quote Link to comment
brudgers Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 (edited) 1,300 dollars worth? You forgot the Cupertino Tax. http://store.apple.com/us/product/TW386LL/A?mco=NjM0NTg4Mw And while Slow Leopard theoretically allows applications to use the GPU for general computation, Vectorworks doesn't do so. Edited November 12, 2009 by brudgers Quote Link to comment
MacG3Freak Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 1,300 dollars worth? You forgot the Cupertino Tax. Hahahaha! Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.