New Quadro 4000 is not giving me the results I expected?


#1

Okay, I got a fermi quadro 4000. I expected that it would allow me to handle relatively complex model without any stuttering or slowness on the view-ports. It has definitely improved things, but with complex models such as this 222mb Lamborghini, from grab-cad (link below), or others I have made myself, view ports are very slow and chopy.

https://grabcad.com/library/lamborghini-reventon-2008

I Have a Core Quad processor over-clocked to 3.0gh, 8G ram, and the Quadro, all running rhino 5.5 on windows 7. The qudro is set to ‘workstation app - dynamic streaming’, and Rhino OpenGL is set to use accelerated hardware, redraw scene when view-ports are exposed, 4x AA, and low anisotropic filtering.

Am I just expecting to much? I get great marks on SpecView perf. and a very high windows rating. I see others with comparable setups getting high frame rates with models that have millions of polygon using 3ds max or Maya.

Is it just me? is there something I can do with settings?

I’ve looked at other articles about video cards on the forum but not found any definitive answers.

Any thoughts, ideas, or information that would provide resolution?

Much appreciated.


New GTX780TI is not giving me the performance i expected!
#2

It’s the model. Select bad objects shows 164 bad polysurfaces and 2 bad surfaces.That’s better than 10%. Shading took 2 minutes and I have a smokin’ haswell 64G machine with quadro power. I guess also that 227mb is kind of large for a typical rhino file.


#3

227MB isn’t so big, my files are often in this size or bigger. The GTX285 doe’s a quite good job, better than the most new cards.
The problem seems to be some models with complex internal data. For example the test bike model:
www.simulacrum.de/download/Testmaxspeed.rar

Interesting is, if I open the model per MoI3D, than the display is fast like expected. I’m curious how long we need to wait for this stable speed and support of modern cards.

But also you list an other problem - 2 minutes for shading. The same problem can be found at the bike model, the initial shading is horrible slow. At MoI3D is quick done. It’s only a simple bike!

Mesh creation and display - two basic features, at the moment not up-to-date.

@jazzcat81: millions of polygons are not a problem for the display, also at Rhino, the problem are the NURBS data and curves. You can test it, a display mode where curves and iso-curves are disabled is much faster. And if you extract the render mesh and delete the curves/NURBS, than you get high speed and full GPU usage. The times are for full NURBS/curves 20s, no curves 8s and only meshes 4s (_testmaxspeed).
It’s a bad situation, we have a NURBS modeller with a display problem with NURBS data.


#4

Yes, I have the same problem with the bike model. Even when surface isocurves and edges are not displayed I get very choppy motion, and slow response. Also, on initially opening the file I took more than two minutes, maybe 3-4, to shade and display the model.

Perhaps I will get a trial version of MOI to test the difference.

Its just disappointing because I got this powerhouse video card, and I still have problems with what are relatively simple models.

Maybe I should have bought a GTX? Have you tested its performance with rhino against a quadro card?


#5

Yes, tested. The Quadro 4000 is approx. 0% … 25% faster than the GTX285 for display modes with lines/NURBS. If only meshes are shown, than the Q4000 is three times faster, because there is pure OpenGL performance needed. But this mode is quite uninteresting, since Rhino is a NURBS modeller.

So, there was no big difference between the Quadro 4000 and the GTX285, except the price.

I’m very curious how good a K4000 acts, because I’m looking for more graphic card memory always. I would like to buy the K4000 3GB. It’s a pity that there is no interest at the McNeel side to provide the best graphic power for pro users and high end usage. Looks like hobbyist, semi-pro user or lightwight pro user are in the main focus of deveoplment. I wished, there would be an alternative display pipeline for the high end user, for example special optimized for Quadro cards only. Rhino is a great tool for universal pro 3D usage, only the display pipeline is out-dated, not ready for the GPU power of modern cards.


#6

rhino’s mesher and shader is baddly need to be improved,at this point it even worse than the one man developed program moi3d.


(Pascal Golay) #7

Hello- one thing that you can try, if you have not, is to set, in the nVidia control panel > Global setting page is set to use 'Workstation App- Dynamic Streaming"

of course, even on a new machine the drivers may be behind, so make sure you get the latest.

-Pascal


#8

I’m using that setting and still not getting great results. Its a shame, I spent all this cash and still get laggy performance with relatively simple models.

If a single bike or a car model brings my frame rate to a halt then how am i ever going to make a big archvis scene ?!

:frowning:


#9

Do You have any other nurbs modeling software to test? Just to see how is Rhino standing against the competitions?


#10

Try the moi3d.com demo


#11

Ill do that and let ya’ll know how it goes


#12

I cant even get MIO to open any of the models that make Rhino laggy. I see a loading bar in the top right corner but it never moves. gave it a full 10-15 min, but nuttin. Opened simple models very nicely though.

Nice program, its like sketch-up for nurbs. I like the XYZ handling with helper lines. It would be nice to have something like that in Rhino perspective mode that could be toggled on and off.

so, anyhow, I got no new info really.


#13

The bike model works fine here. But MoI isn’t available as 64bit, so the RAM usage is quite limited. Maybe it’s the problem in your case.

Also I changed the moi.ini in the past for opening large models. My changes makes that the display mesh is light. I use MoI for meshing complex models only, so a light display mesh is good for me. (MoI is using an independent mesh for display and mesh export)

At the MoI.ini need to be set under the [View] options:

MeshAngle=40.0
MeshDoDetailedInflections=n


#14

i have same sort of problem using a gtx780.
i can work a double or triple model in max, but cannot move it in rhino…
it’s distressing,
i spent 600€ for my new graphic video card, i can work with all programs at 100% except for rhino.
i tried to install quadro driver (modyfing .inf file and forcing them…) to have full opengl support, but i didn’t have improved performance.
we are a small study and cannot buy a different machine for every software…
Why rhino does not use Directx as most of other software?
Someone know if there will be support in the future?


#15

Micha,

Can you tell me more about the meshing in MOI? What are the advantages over Rhino? Do you take your meshes into MAX after that?


#16

Best you try the MoI demo. MoI can give very clean result for low poly meshes where Rhino create ugly kinks. So for example, fillets can be a single row of polygons. Also MoI do what I say :smile: if I set a divide larger than … than it do it. Rhino ignores some settings. Also MoI is using multicore, so it’s quite fast, not like Rhino where it needs ages some times. For example fences with a lot of holes are difficult to mesh at Rhino, so for rendering I premesh it per MoI.

Some predefined settings can be set at the MoI.ini only. Here attached is my mesh part of the ini file. If I remember me right I set AvoidSmallerThanRoughAngle=135.0 to the high value because I like to get very low poly meshes some times.

I didn’t export to MAX.

Disadvantages: MoI is 32bit only. There is no “max distance between original surfaces and mesh” option. Layer names with spaces are a problem, but if someone would write a script, it could be solved.


[Mesh Export]
Display=shadedwithedges
OutputType=quads
DialogLocation=166,227
Expanded=y
Weld=y
CentroidTriangulation=y
ThreadLimit=
Angle=4.0
DivideLargerThan=150.0
DivideLargerThanApplyTo=all
AvoidSmallerThan=3.0
AspectRatioLimit=0.0
PersistSettingsBetweenSessions=y
CombineSameNamedObjects=y
AvoidSmallerThanRoughAngle=135.0


#17

Very good to know. Thanks so much for the quick response.

Ive just started going between Rhino and MAX and have found Rhino meshing to be troublesome. Perhaps the reasonable investment in MOI is a viable option.


#18

Hello,
I have Sandy Bridge Xeon E3-1280 machine with 8GB RAM and the newest Quadro K4000 card. Managing a model ~2000 surfaces and similar number of curves becomes difficult (geometrical modelling, no materials applied, no advanced visualisation). I have noticed, that while the use of processor is very high, the graphic card is barely loaded (tested with CPU-Z and GPU-Z). Navigating “rendered” display is faster than “shaded”. Maybe it is Rhino that uses mainly CPU, not GPU? Maybe future versions will be able to take better advantage of a powerful graphic card?