Originally Posted by Higgins
You guys are absolutely right, but these workstation cards are made and optimized to be put under heavy load for much of their lifetime without any room for instability or crashing. And from experience, desktop cards/drivers sometimes cant handle 100% load for more than a few hours without crashing.
Same reason xenons and opterons are more expensive than normal C2D/A64s.. the optys/xenons are a step above the rest
But see, even that I don't understand. Unless they're putting higher-quality chips in the cards themselves, how could they optimize it more or give it better stability? And if they were putting better quality chips on, I've never seen ANYONE say that, so you've got to find a source.
I've seen plenty of the quadro's we have here at my workplace crash (i.e. complete system lockups), and we've already had three of them with fans fail. Yeah, high-quality stuff right there.
Never understood the whole thing with Opertons and Xeons either, except the better MTBF and support. They are way overpriced because AMD and Intel know that companies will pay up for hardware that looks to have better reliability on paper.
Again, all I'm hearing is generic statements about workstation cards being "more reliable" and "better suited" to tasks like 3d modeling. I want to see proof that this is true, and also find out WHY it is true. Why doesn't a soft-modded gamers card take the place of a workstation card? And no more generic statements without unbiased proof please.
EDIT: And GuardianOdin, I appreciate those things you've listed out, but as far as I know you've made that list up. Do you have any proof that those things are in fact true, or is it just hearsay?