I fail to see the dilemma, one is three generations old and a lousy performer (Quadro 2000) and the other one is the latest architecture and the fastest card around (GTX 680). Additionally only the GTX 680 can steer 4 monitors.
It is like comparing a Toyota Aygo to a Porsche Cayman S, but then for the same price.
Harm, you can now buy a new Quadro K5000 which (as far as CUDA cores goes to accellerate the MPE effects and features) is equivalent to the GTX 680. The 4 GB Quadro K5000 is only $1800 versus a 4 GB GTX680 for $530.
Both cards have !136 CUDA cores and the same memory bandwidth
For some strange reason my browser will not let me link to the sites
As far as real-time rendering are you talking about playback of the timeline or encoding for output? This is very dependent on what you media is and what effects and features you are using. Both should give you the same results and as Harm has said all the other Quadros are not in the same ballpark as the brand new Quadro K5000
Hi Bill, I made a wee table comparing the GTX660, GTX680 and the K5000 (I can't link it either, keep geting 'internal server error'), search the forum for
(that may be a link above?) and scroll to the second table.
It seems the GTX 680 has the better memory bandwidth, although the GTX will not give 10-bit colours. They are both Kepler, hence the 'K'. But the price is the clincher surely.
NB: Sorry this is so confused laptop and Adobe server are both being difficult right now...
The GTX 680, the Quadro K5000, and several other GPUs have been added to the list of cards that After Effects will use for GPU acceleration of the ray-traced 3D renderer in the After Effects CC (12.1) update.
See this page for details:
If you do not require 10bit color preview then the 680GTX or 780GTX would be the way to go as far as performance is concerned. The Quadro or I/O cards such as the Blackmagic are the options for 10bit color preview with Adobe.