As several people mentioned the most bang for your buck is going to come from the high end GeForce cards (e.g. GTX 590). It's a bummer the article doesn't discuss those boards, as I think a 590 w/3gb ($900) will probably give you comparable (or better) performance vs. a Quadro 6000 w/ 6gb ($4000).

When we were developing for CUDA I asked one of the nvidia folks what the difference was between the GeForce and Quadro, and mostly it comes down to testing. They do a lot more testing of the 'professional' cards and test them with pro apps. So theoretically they should play nicer than the Geforce cards. However, in our testing, if you have a CUDA/OpenGL bug, it's just a bug and it's going to show up on the Quadros the same as the GeForce cards. There's no notable difference other than the Quadros are more expensive and slower than top of the line GeForce.

If anyone from Adobe or nvidia wants to chime in on it, I'd love to hear a different perspective. But in 3 years of GPU testing, we've built up a stack of video cards that get swapped in and out. The GeForce cards (currently a 570) are the ones that reside in my desktop machine most of the time while Quadros gather dust. (I've got a 4000 sitting on my desk at the moment)

Cheers,

Jim

----------------------

Jim Tierney

President

Digital Anarchy

http://www.digitalanarchy.com