computergeek92 wrote:

I'm thinking on buying iClone 5 or 6 for making 3D characters. I read that each of these cards meet the recommended system requirements, but how well do they do they perform in max visual quality? I have an Asus GT 210 with 1GB DDR3 to start off with and i'm considering to get a GT 730 or GTX 750Ti in future. I try to stick to cards like these due to their low power draw.

I can't speak to the GT 210, but I've currently got a Geforce 660 which I believe has a higher bus bandwith (192 as opposed to 198) and more RAM, but I think the number of shaders on the 750ti is probably higher. I'm fairly happy with the 660, it will run Fallout 4 at 30-40 fps in 1440p. I don't know how well that translates in terms of content creation but I think you will be happier with the 750ti.

With the low prices of 750ti's I cant see any reason to skimp and go with something lesser. There was a Black Friday deal I saw where they were $60 And they are usually $80-90 on sale anyways.

Ok, I just checked the specs, memory is the same but the bus bandwidth and number of shaders on the 660 is higher compared to the 750ti. I imagine the 750ti would be your best bet of the cards you mentioned, I don't see a reason to go lower than that, especially if you plan on doing any gaming. A 750ti would blow a 210 out of the water, so would the 730 most likely but I think you'd be happier with the 750ti unless you are particularly budget constrained. GPUboss actually has the 750ti slightly edging out the Geforce 660, but that should be expected probably considering it is a generation ahead: http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-750-Ti-vs … GeForce-GTX-660

skip all and go to GTX 1050 Ti, no external power it runs very cool and sits inbetween a GTX 960 and GTX 970 in preformance

In high poly character modeling only the 750 will perform decently, the rest are pretty crap. When I'm modeling I want as fast as possible viewport performance, and the GT210 and GT730 are too slow. The GTX 750 is OK for character modeling as long as you don't use advanced viewport rendering like in 3dsmax 2016.

I'd say Quadro...

candle_86 wrote:

skip all and go to GTX 1050 Ti, no external power it runs very cool and sits inbetween a GTX 960 and GTX 970 in preformance

GTX 1050 Ti does not support Windows XP, and I don't use anything Vista onwards. (Only Linux) So it looks like the 750Ti is the best option. (Only 20W power consumption) I'm surprised the prices are crazy low now. Just around $80? What a steal.

The G210 is so low end that nVidia didn't give it a "T", people just started adding it out of habit. It's actually just called the "Geforce 210" or "G210". 😀 Low power card that can be useful for H.264 video acceleration but not for any remotely modern 3D demands.

konc wrote:

I'd say Quadro...

Quadro is for autocad (common misconception). They actually perform worse then regular cards in 3dsmax due to more conservative clocks. Rendering is not done on the video card anyway, so viewport performance is what you're looking for in a video card for a 3d modeling machine. If you do want to render on your video card, you'd want something like an nvidia Tesla (witch is not actually a video card 😜 ) + nvidia iRay (for max) or nvidia mental ray (for maya).

My 3d modeling and rendering rig uses a RX 470 + Dual Xeon X5690. Rendering is done on the CPUs, and the RX 470 gets great viewport performance even with complex scenes.

Uh.......my 3d modeling didn't really demand anything more than OpenGL complaince and big 24/32-bit texture support on the various hardware between 2000-2016. Input hardware was a lot more important than video for me

Blender 😀