Serious Professional workstation question.

[GregHess]

Matt,

Whats the budget for this system? Any particular reason you aren't budgeting for a dual processor workstation? (Be it Xeon or Opteron?)

What applications are you going to be running with this machine? Max? XSI? C4D? Maya? Lightwave? Combustion? Etc, etc.

[mattwright]

Heya Greg (spratt here).

My budget is around 2000 for the workstation, without a monitor.

I have been looking around for manufacturers within this price-range, and XI and HP came up. I have had good experiences with XIComputers (ordered from them before).

If I could find a good dual processor machine in that price-range, that would be great!!

Also greg, can you recommend a processor to go with? I am really out of touch with them, and have no Idea what processor is really a good bet.

Cheers!

Matt

[MCronin]

I currently use an HP xw8000 running Linux and it's fantastic. It's been the most solid workstation I've had, even better than computers I've built myself. It's a 3.2 Ghz Xeon with a Quadro 2000, but I've also had a Quadro 1000 which I think is a fantastic card. I assume the 1100 is a bit better. I recently got to use an Intel based Boxx system at work (not sure, but it was probably also a 3.2 Xeon), also running Linux (RH 7.3, not Fedora), and I beleive it had a Quadro 2000 as well... Great machine. I don't think you can go wrong with Boxx or HP, except I really don't like Boxx shipping Fedora, but that's not a big deal. Boxx is a bit more bleeding edge when it comes to hardware than HP is.

XI, I've heard of but never used nor do I know anyone who has used thier computers, so no comment.

I wou;dn't bother shelling out the money for the extra processor, unless your apps are multithreaded (I don't think Maya is) or you plan to do a lot of rendering with a distributed renderer (Mental Ray for Maya I don't think is distributed). If you plan on using the machine mostly to model and animate within Maya, the extra processor will be idle most of the time. Save yourself a few bucks and spend it on the pro graphics card, an 1100 or better, and some RAM (1 gig is good, 2 is better).

Oh I did have a Fire GL X1 and one point, and I wouldn't recommend it to anyone. I'm sure things have improved, but when I had one, BSOD's due to the graphics driver were a regularity in Windows, and X would lock up every couple of hours in Linux like clockwork. Stick to Nvidia for pro graphics, the are more stable than ATI and they have 3D labs beat for price/performance.

[mattwright]

Thanks for the reply MCronin

Yep, I agree about the extra processor. I had a workstation years ago that was a dual P3 - it was great for rendering - but that was about all the extra processor got used for. I wont be doing a substantial amount of rendering - the extra cash would be better off being spent on a processor or RAM upgrade.

Thanks for the info about the HP machine. I know someone with a HP home machine, and they are having problems with it... but that could just be because they didnt know what they were buying.

Is it worth forking out the extra cash for a XEON over a P4? if so what is a good XEON to get, because the ratings seem completely different.

[GregHess]

Hey Matt,

I replied to your email a few months back, but never got a reply! I assume it got lost in the grand internet bandfest to counter all the massive spam I was getting. :)

What apps ya usin bud? That info would help with the processor choice.

[MCronin]

Keep in mind the HP xw8000 and all the workstations are a completely different build quality and support system than the HP home machines.

Honestly, I can't tell the difference between a Xeon and a PIV at the same clock in my work. All I know is I have less problems with them than the Athlon's I've had. I had an Athlon 750, a Tbird 1333 and a 2200+ XP, all of them gave me trouble, the Tbird was by far the worst CPU I have ever purchased.

[mattwright]

Heya Greg

All I remember getting from you was a message saying that you would reply in a few days - but I got nothing else. Can you let me know if you did send anything else - I have a feeling some of my business emails aren't coming through - which is extremely worrying.

Mainly using Maya, MAX, Photoshop, Adobe AfterEffects.

I really have no idea what processor to get... i would prefer Intel to AMD though....

Cheers mate :D

[mattwright]

Here are the specs of the two systems I am considering:

HP XW6000

Intel XEON 2.8ghz (533Mhz)
1GB 266 FFR Reg ECC RAM
NVIDIA Quadro FX1100 128Mb
80GB HD EIDE ATA100 7200
XP PRO
$2054.00


HP XW4100
Intel P4 2.8Ghz/1Mb 800FSB
1GB DDR/400 ECC (2x512) RAM
NVIDIA Quadro FX1100 128Mb
80GB HD EIDE ATA 7200
XP PRO

$1733.00

Right now, the P4 is sounding a better bet. Doesnt it have a higher front side buss? And isnt the RAM faster?

Comments welcome!

[mattwright]

Oh one more quick question..

The case for the P4 is described as "a convertable mini-tower" - does anyone know what they mean by this?

Thanks :D

[GregHess]

It means that you can flip the computer tower on its side, and va la, its one of those annoying desktop things.

Hmm...Maya does best with Athlon64/Opteron, Max tends to lean towards the P4/Xeons (but nearly the same performance). So either or would do fine, since your Intel biased, you might as well go that route. That way if something goes wrong, we can wave an AMD finger at you :).

Of the two systems you listed, I'd definitely go for the dual xeon, unless you REALLY thought you wouldn't be rendering much. Otherwise I'd swap the P4 2.8 w/1meg to a 3.2 P4 with 512k l2.

[mattwright]

Hi Greg

Could you explain a little more about the differences between the XEON and the P4 - and the different cache levels, and bus speed?

I thought that a P4 1Mb 800 FSB would be better than something with only 512k cache (the 3.2Mhz P4 512 l2 you suggested) or does the L2 suggest something?

The only processor options i have there are:

Intel P4 processor (2.4Ghz, 2.6Ghz, 2.8Ghz, 3.0Ghz, 3.2Ghz) /800
or the P4 procesor (2.8Ghz, 3.0Ghz, 3.2Ghz) /1Mb /800

the only numbers I know is the Ghz ratings :D

Is the XEON processor much faster than P4? If so I could go for a single XEON instead???

Thanks guys :D

[mattwright]

what about a P4 3.2Ghz 800FSB 1MB ? would that be ok? I'm confused by all these bloody numbers :D

[GregHess]

Ignore the cache...Megahertz is still more important. Since your constrainted by budget, stick with the 512k l2 cache chips, so you can maximize the available gigahertz.

The "primary" difference between a Xeon and Pentium IV, is the Xeon's are multiprocessor capable, the P4's are not. Besides that fact, they are very close in performance and architecture.

If your going with a single processor system, I'd try and get the FASTEST cpu you can afford, as to maximize your benefit.

From a price standpoint however, the 2nd and 3rd tier chips (down the line from fastest) are usually significantly cheaper.

Right now I think a 3.2C Pentium IV, with 512k l2 cache is probably your best bank for the buck (if your going with intel).

[mattwright]

Thanks for the help Greg - without ya I would most likely have ordered completely the wrong thing!!!!

I am going to place an order for an HP system today!

Cheers

Matt

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.