Quadro p4000 vs GTX 1080 TI
Daz 3D Forums > General > The Commons>Quadro p4000 vs GTX 1080 TI
Quadro p4000 vs GTX 1080 TI
hapciupalit
Posts: 121
So I'm going to build a new PC for rendering in Daz, I heard a lot of people talkin about the quadro graphic cards, but I saw that quadro p4000 and GTX 1080 TI have almost the same price but Quadro have half of the cuda cores that GTX has. For daz IRay. What do you guys recomand between a quadro and a GTX?
Post edited by hapciupalit on
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2025 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
If you will be rendering all the time, you will probably want to go with a Quadro card because they are meant for professional work loads, where as the Geforce line are consumer grade cards. Something to keep in mind too: The 1080 ti has 3GB more of VRAM, and is rated to use 250w (overclocked ones may use more). The Quadro P4000 has a single slot cooler and only uses 105w. The raw performance of the Quadro P4000 should be close to the GTX 1070. It's up to you in the long run.
Octane benchmarks is one of the yard sticks I go by for such things.. https://render.otoy.com/octanebench/results.php?sort_by=avg&filter=&singleGPU=1
No entries for the p4000, but I doubt it would beat a p5000, which benches only marginally better than a 1070, so James' estimation could be pretty accurate (but I think it is more likely way too over optimistic). The p4000 isn't a particularly impressive card. Quadros until recently weren't even a consideration for GPU rendering. They are much better now, but in terms of raw performance you will still get better performance for cost from consumer cards. Consumer cards tend to have better cooling too.
If I had the money I would go with the 1080ti.
Please don't recommend Quadro cards guys. They're not made for Iray and GTX cards beat them hands down.
You want as many CUDA cores and as much memory as possible, so it's the 1080 Ti for you.
Please? P100 holds the current top mark in the latest version of Octane bench. Otherwise I totally agree.
Go with the 1080 Ti. It is twice as fast as the P4000.
You pay a premium for Quadro, which is mostly compatibility and driver stability... not really a performance gain with Quadro unless you do a lot of high-level number crunching. Actually, Quadro's are much slower, dollar-for-dollar. But for a Holywood render studio like Pixar, they might prefer Quadro b/c of the extensive stability testing it undergoes prior to release. The 10xx is a consumer-grade product, which means more agressive tweaking/clocking, and more frequent updates for new games. So there is the added risk of driver issues/conflicts. But in practice, this is not really an issue. GPU's are "set and forget" components. Once you get your rig set up, then 95% of possible issues are overcome.
As an aside, I just updraded my rig from four (4) 780 Ti's to two (2) 1080 Ti's, and my render times have actually improved. lol. The 1080 Ti is a beast, and you will be rendering faster than most people on the planet.
-P
Do you realize that the Pxxxx series quadro cards are running the same Pascal chips that are on the GTX 10xx cards?
Do you also realize that you can get Pascal based Quadro cards with much larger amounts of Vram?
The two biggest differences between Quadro cards and Geforce cards: P series Quadros do not turbo boost, and the drivers are geared towards CG work instead of gaming.
Quadro P4000 is a GTX1070 with 1 SMM disabled and a 45w lower TDP
Quadro P5000 is a GTX 1080 with double the Vram (16GB)
Quadro P6000 is a Titan XP with double the Vram (24GB)
Quadro GP100 is a Titan X with HBM2 Memory (16GB with a 4096bit interface) instead of GDDR5X
If I can afford one when I do my next computer upgrade, I will be getting at least a Quadro P5000.
I think Nvidia would disagree..
Granted, for what we do, you get most bang for you buck with Titans and 1080's.. but to advise against Quadro's flat out is a bit ill informed.
If I could afford and justify the price as a hobbiest, I would go quadro; they are designed for what IRAY throws at them; consumer cards are not.
$650 for a 1080Ti vs. $6,000 for a GP100, with only marginally better render times. Unless you are a millionare and money is not an issue, the 1080 Ti is, dollar-for-dollar, hands down the way to go.
Note also, the original poster is inquiring about the P4000, which only scored a 95 on Octane. That is about equivelent to a 980, which is half the performance of a 1080 Ti.
There is simply no reason to recommend Quadro cards to most enthusiasts on these forums.
-P
Why do people keep saying this? Go look at all the render benchmarks and you will find time and again, when it comes to rendering, consumer cards are the better buy, especially when you are looking at equivalents between the consumer and workstation cards. The consumer cards are clearly designed for doing what Iray demands. If workstation cards were designed with this in mind they would absolutely thump the consumer cards. Clearly they are intended for other tasks.
The only real benefit, when it comes to render performance, is that the workstation cards have more RAM. If you spend more time doing other activities, like content creation, then the benefits of having a workstation card are clear, even with the lower end ones. I had a rather short lived W7000 experience and I still miss that thing.
If *all* that is going to be done is Iray under DS on a consumer grade desktop then using a Quadro is not likely to be the best dollar-for-dollar. If, however, you are doing more than simple scene renders then a quadro is the better solution.
Kendall
Yes I know all of this, but how about you post the prices for these cards? Unless you absolutely need those extra 5GB's of VRAM or 12GB's in case of the Xp vs P6000, there is no sane reason to recomment those cards in those boards.
99.9% of people here won't that kind of Vram compared to the CUDA cores they can get for the same price, so please don't recommend Quadro's. They don't justify their price tag unless you're some Pixar-style corporation.
...true but it costs as much as an entire workstation with a 16 GB P5000, the forthcoming 18 core Skylake-X CPU, 128 GB DDR4 memory, and multiple SSDs would..
The new Volta Tesla V100 compute card with 16 GB of HBM2 memory, over 5,100 CUDA cores and NVLInk interface is priced at a whopping 149,000$. In some cities you could buy a house for that. Of course it has the power to replace 400 individual servers.
Apparently cards with HBM2 memory from Nvidia are going to be very pricey compared to ones with GDDR5/GDDR5X, so I wouldn't expect HBM2 any time soon in the GTX market.
...actually the price for the GP100 is currently averaging about 10,500$.
...well they do have the edge on durability and longevity. They consume less power and run cooler (the Tesla V100 that I mentioned above consumes only 300 W). Consumer cards are not made for continuous high output.
So what if it means 15 - 30 more minutes rendering if I can get 16 GB of GDDR5X (P5000) to ensure 100% of the scenes I create at high quality rendering levels do not dump to CPU mode? Until a GTX card is released with that much memory (which won't happen because it would make their overpriced Titan XP obsolete) the Quadro series will also continue to have the edge in the memory department.
Hate to say it... but the one single word that I've highlighted in the quote says it all. Enthusiasts are the consumer level people who would be crazy enough to buy a Quadro card for the extra Vram.
I'm one of those people that I'm refering to as crazy. In a couple of months I'll be re-upping my Army contract and should get a pretty nice bonus. If my wife gives the OK, it will be Quadro P5000 or P6000 time for my desktop.
Here is the eye watering Quadro P6000 24Gb https://www.centrecom.com.au/leadek-nvidia-quadro-p6000-24gb-workstation-graphics-card this is Australian pricing but as you can see you could by an uber up to date complete system for what this card costs.. But would be very nice all the same..
Man, I would love to be a fly on the wall during that little chat.
Here it is on amazon in USD. https://www.amazon.com/PNY-Video-VCQM6000-24GB-PB-Quadro-PCIE3-0/ $4529.00 and amazon prime free 2 day shipping. That 24GB of Vram sounds like Iray rendering heaven.
@ Cost Scaling and product life span
- - -
Increased cost difference for your local render farm
- - -
Conclusion:
For 20'000$ you get a powerful local render farm with 20 GTX.
For the same price you get a 4 GPU workstation with Quadros.
- - -
Short Product Life Span
How much time will pass until a better version of the product will be released?
When are you going to replace 1, 2, 3, 4, 20 GPU to stay up to date?
In a few months or a few years?
Example:
Can you afford to pay every two years
20'000$ for 20 GTX.
100'000$ for 20 Quadros
- - -
My impression:
If your company has a yearly technology budget of 100'000+ $ you may be in the target audience for the Quadro line.
Anyone else is better off buying GTX cards for rendering in Iray and Octane.
- - -
What we are mainly talking about is what we would like to have, not a case of want it due to it costing so much and even if we did you would probably only go for 2 to 4 cards anyway.. Heck most PC enthusists go for between 2 to 4 of the normal Geforce Cards..
Heck I just had a quote done for a new PC I want built with a Core I7 7700K CPU, Gigabyte Aorus Mobo, 64 Gig DDR4 ram 2x 256 Intel M.2 SSD's PSU, Case one MSI GTX 1080TI and other minor bits and that is going to set me back about $4400 AUD inc GST.. And a good chunk of that cost is from the GTX1080TI which at the moment is about $1400 AUD..
Anyway with the Quadro cards it is a case of nice to dream about having since they are designed more so with what Iray and other renderers can do, since I am pretty sure they have more robust hardware components than a standard consumer card has to warrent the price that they go for..