I saw at the 'shack that NVIDIA has announced what looks like a version of their GeForce 256 chip targeted at the graphic design/workstation market. They seem to be excited about their price/performance ratio, but I was perplexed by this bit from the press release:
For example, Quadro delivers a Viewperf Advanced Visualizer score of 74, compared to the more expensive Intense3D Wildcat 4000 score of 57 and 3Dlabs GVX1 score of 27. On industry standard application benchmarks like Gbench99 for Pro Engineer, Quadro posts a score of 84, compared to 77 for Intense3D Wildcat, and 78 for 3Dlabs GVX1. This equates to more than 5-times the price/performance of the Intense3D Wildcat.
If price is over performance in this whole equation, doesn't that make the NVIDIA card a really lousy performer for the price?
|Silverstone's Strider Titanium PSUs are ready for a high-power future||4|
|Steam 2017 Summer Sale, part deux||3|
|Deals of the week: Z270 mobos, spinning storage, and more||1|
|G.Skill readies up for X299 with quad-channel DDR4 at 4200 MT/s||6|
|Asus' VivoBook S510 is an ultrabook for the budget crowd||7|
|Windows Insider Build 16226 gives users a look at GPU utilization||15|
|Steam's 2017 Summer Sale is downright hot||44|
|Asus XG-C100C NIC breaks the gigabit barrier||31|
|Stuff a terabyte of RAM in Gigabyte's MZ31-AR0 Epyc motherboard||37|