Ok, I realize I've already made a few topics but I'm about to order a new system and want to make sure I get everything right (and cheap). 

I know Avid technically requires the Quadro series of cards but they are a bit out of my budget (at least at the level I'd like to use them at) and don't seem to work well for anything but video editing.  I've also seen a number of users here who have managed to get MC 3.0 to work with the GeForce series by using the Rivia tuner and forcing the card to just use Open GL 1.5 (whatever that means).  It seems pretty simple and I may be willing to take the risk. 

I'm planning on getting a GeForce 8800 GT, GTS, GTX (whatever is the best bang for the buck).  I'm curious how many people on these forums have gotten MC 3.0 to work with these cards and if one of this series works any better than the other with MC.  I'm also planning to run it on Windows XP Pro SP2.  Thanks.

 I popped a geforce 7600gs into my hp xw8200 with MC2.8 on, just to check what the graphics card was and it seem to run it, no extensive testing, I was just curious.  I then took it back out and put my quadro back in. No help I know but it was interesting to me, I don't have any Idea about MC3 and geforce sorry.

I'm running a NVidia GeForce 6600 PCI-E video card, works as fine as it did with 2.8. 

My GeForce 7900GTO is just fine for Avid MC3.0, even without any rivatuner tweaking. Of course I can't compare how much faster rendering would be with a true quadro card, but rendering speed isn't that important in my business.

Quadro is too rich for my blood sadly. 

Any of you guys who didn't list it mind telling me what operating system you were using?  I read on another thread about a guy who could get the card to work in XP but not Vista.

 I am running the GeForce 8800 GTX (with Open GL 1.5 enabled in RivaTuner) and it runs great on my machine with MC3.0. No soft mod into a Quadro required. The GTX is a very fast card and I can only recommend it. Unfortunately it is not oficially Avid tested.

AquaPix,

You seem to have pretty much the same specs I'm thinking of going with except I was debating shelling out a bit more cash for a Q6700 and am only going to go with 4 gigs of RAM.  Can I ask how Vista 64 is working for you?  I'm really debating between XP and Vista for my set-up.  I was all set for XP untill I heard I'd only be able to make use of 2 gigs of RAM at a time which seemed like a waste.  On the other hand, every software app. I've seen requires twice the RAM with Vista then it does with XP and a bump in processor speed so it seems like whatever gains I'd be getting might end up being offset by the system hog that is Vista.  I've also heard of a lot more driver issues (especially with GeForce Cards and Avid) and other hang-ups when using Vista.  Got any recommendations?

Also, since your rig is pretty close to what I'm building, can you tell me what kind of projects you've done?  I used Xpress Pro with my old rig (AMD Athlon 64 3200 | 1 gig of RAM | GeForce 6600 card) and I could edit 720p fairly smoothly (unless I had a ton of bins open) but it seemed to chug when I was working with 1080p.  What type of formats have you tried?  I want to make sure I get really smooth 1080p performance and perhaps the ability to even dabble a bit in 4k (even if it's choppy) in case I ever end up shooting RED.  Thanks.

Works with my 7800gs - salud!

MalachiX:

If you're going to buy new hardware, go for vista x64, especially if you plan to add more ram later (and you will want to, sooner or later, especially when you really get your hands on a red cam...). You can tweak vista to be almost as responsive as xp by turning off all that glamour and glitter, and with carefully selected hardware the risk of driver issues is rather low.

Of course you need to do a lot of reading to get the most "bang for the buck" out of your going-to-be-not-officially-approved avid system, but that's the same with xp. Concentrate especially on the gfx board and audio adapter.

MalachiX:

AquaPix,

You seem to have pretty much the same specs I'm thinking of going with except I was debating shelling out a bit more cash for a Q6700 and am only going to go with 4 gigs of RAM.  Can I ask how Vista 64 is working for you?

 The Q6600 (G0 stepping) is cheaper and easier to overclock than the Q6700. IMHO get yourself another 4GB of RAM  8GB total) and go with Vista Business 64.  All the programs listed in my system specs run trouble free on it (so far).

Out of curiosity, are 8 gigs going to be essential?  I've been working with 1 gig and havn't had too many issues with 720p.  Is 8 gigs going to make a huge difference given the rest of the specs (Q6600 and 8800GTX)?  Would it be recommended to go ahead and get that from the onset or are RAM prices likly to drop in the future (they seem pretty cheap now).  Are there even programs that can make use of 8 gigs of RAM these days?

If your system seems to be getting slower, ram is the most valuable investition you can make, although you'll only notice the difference once your sequences and bins get crowded. to use more than 3gb though you have to step up to vista x64 as well. In long terms, ram will always be getting cheaper, but as with any computer system: don't wait for the future, don't buy for the future - just buy today what you need today, and don't be sad when your pricy state-of-the-art workstation is considered mainstream at x-mas.

All good for me with Open GL 1.5 enabled in RivaTuner as well.

 Hello,

i have solved this for my machine:

- Windows Vista 64, 8GB RAM, Intel Quadcore Q6600 and Nvidia 9800 GTX

- use driver 174.74 (old, but for me more stable)

- Nvidia Control Panel > Manage 3D Settings > Threaded optimization > TURN OFF

This works for me and it works also for my Laptop with a Nvidia 8400 GT graphic (here with

the original driver from Sony).

You can try also the tool RIVATUNER and switch OpenGl to version 1.5.

 If you set:  Nvidia Control Panel > Manage 3D Settings >Extension Limit > ON, it will work,

but in MC 3.0 you have only SOFTWARE OpenGl.

I hope, this will help