Work Station / Game System

[vandervliet]

Don't quote me on this, I'm sure someone can better explain this to you.
But from my understanding, if you have a good single graphics card (like the quadro), it will be better then a sli.

So I'd say go with the quadro, you'd be better off.

The Quadro 4500 is a pretty top of the line card as well as pretty $$. Since you're just starting out as a student, you don't need that high of a card. A 1500 Quadro would do you just fine.

Put the extra cash in the ram, not the video card. That's more important. Best of luck to ya.

edit:
The Dual Xeons are the fastest right now. In other threads they explained it, but I believe depending on what kind of work you do the Core 2 Duo is better for some things then the Dual Xeons visa vera.

[gorosh]

Forget SLI, it's just for gaming performance, go for Quadro definitely.

As for Windows Vista, I hope you realize that Vista won't be very usable the moment it hits the streets (Q1 2007 supposedly). With Windows it usually takes at least a year for OS to be usable for serious work. It will mostly be just resource hog, plus eye candy (very resource hungry eye candy), and the best feature won't be implemented yet (I'm talking about new file system, Win FS). It will take time for DX10 to catch up, so I wouldn't plan anything serious before 2008 (Q1 - Q2).

If you want 64-bit Maya, just get Win XP 64, and don't bother thinking about Vista.

Since you're looking for workstation, and you're mentioning Quadro 4500, which is quite expensive card, I guess you got good budget, therefore I would suggest investing into new Mac Pro. It's Xeon based, Quad cores, and Quadro FX 4500 is listed as optional graphic card. It has great benchmarks, and would be great for your needs.

Here are some Luxology Modo 202 benchmarks for various configurations (Mac Pro, Core 2 Duo PC, iMac, Mac Book Pro, Woodcrest etc. - basically all possible configurations, both overclocked and not):

Modo 202 Benchmarks (http://vertexmonkey.com/benchmark_intro.php)

And here are Quadro FX series benchmarks:

NVidia Quadro FX series benchmarks (http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=3321&page=3)

I would strongly suggest you new Mac Pro, it's perfect machine for you.

[vandervliet]

There's a good forum were they were dicussion the Mac Pro vs. PC for something such as thing. Good thread, it's worth a read if you do think about going Mac. I would suggest staying with the PC, though. There's some really great topics in the Tech thread regarding getting a computer.

If anything I would highly recommend getting a Boxx. There's a Boxx rep somewhere on this forum named Ed Caracappa I believe. He would be a good guy to talk to.

[Col-Phil-Bilko]

So much information to process. It is making my head spin ;) anyways I am thinking of going with a Dell workstation with the following settings:

Dell Precision Workstation 690:
Dual Core Intel® Xeon® Processor 5060 3.20GHz, 2X2MB L2,1066,Eng

Operating System:
Genuine Windows® XP Professional, x64 Edition with Media

Memory:
2GB, DDR2 SDRAM FBD Memory, 667MHz, ECC in Riser (2 DIMMS)

Monitors:
Dell 20 inch UltraSharp™ 2007FP Widescreen, adjustable stand, VGA/DVI

Graphic Riser Options:
512MB PCIe x16 nVidia Quadro FX 4500, Dual Monitor DVI or VGA

CD-ROM, DVD, and Read-Write Devices:
48XCDRW AND 16XDVD+/-RW

Sound Card:
Sound Blaster® X-Fi™ XtremeMusic (D), w/Dolby® Digital 5.1

Boot Hard Drive:
160GB SATA 3.0Gb/s,7200 RPM Hard Drive with 8MB DataBurst Cache™

I also have a secondary 300GB Sata drive I am installing into the box once I get it for storage.

Now I am pretty sure this would play games more than fine. But I am concerned how will this perform . . . . I have read the supplied bench tests (above post) and it talks about CPU speed but not render times for this card....

Also the reason why I am considering Dell is their tech service is really good and if something goes wrong it is covered, even though I could build a computer for half this cost I would not have the coverage on the hardware.

Is this more than enough or Overkill?

Thanks

[Tej]

Well cool going to VFS. I wanted too go there but quite expensive for me for the time being.
I would suggest you to wait for another two months to get your system. Your system is quite fine according to what you need. Quadro is definitely the way to go for a workstation. But if you are going with X64 go for additional 2Gb Ram make it 4Gb.
And the processors maybe the 51xx series is better i think? but more expensive i suppose.

But i would still sugggest to wait couple of months because core 2 quadro will be out and you might want to consider buying a system that will support those processors if not buying them right away.

Because you can scale upto quad core when you feel like because you will have a motherboard that supports them and already this system is going to be expensive so I wont mind a system with upgradation in mind when spending so much.

Well i dont think its going to be overkill, but as for the benchmarks dont worry so much about them, you will enjoy working on a machine like this. It would be just fine for heavy modeling and good quick renders too. You can render a 2 mins high quality short in like 3-4 weeks on that alone if you need an idea for benchmarking.(well hopefully lol)

Well Good luck then!

_______________________________________

[newman]

In most cases, graphic cards will not improve rendering times. There are exceptions - if you use certain nvidia's cards with gelato, for instance - but in most cases, you won't notice much of a difference when it comes to rendering. As for SLI, it's unsupported by the major 3D packages - SLI was meant for games, and even there it's usefuleness is questionable at best. When building a 3D animation workstation - forget about SLI and use the money thus saved to get a more powerful CPU.

[GregHess]

Dell Precision Workstation 690:
Dual Core Intel® Xeon® Processor 5060 3.20GHz, 2X2MB L2,1066,Eng

Thats the old processor core. You want to get a Xeon 51xx, otherwise you just bought an obsolete, though new, computer.

Remember that gigahertz/megahertz is not a measure of performance, and only valid for comparison among the same processor family.

ie a Pentium IV 3.4 gigahertz is not faster then a Core2duo 2.4 gigahertz.

[Col-Phil-Bilko]

Thanks for clearing the core issue up guys, I was not sure.

So should I just hold off then and get Quad core? They say that the top of the line Quad 2.66 will run about $1000 which is not at all bad, I read a review of this chip on Toms Hardware and he runs a test using 3DS Max 8 - Characters "Dragon_Charater_rig" rendering HTDV 1920x1080 taking 0:49, that to me is fast, with power like that in a processor, the question arises, how needed is that highend Nvidia Quadro Card. I have so many questions and so many great answers, but still I am just losing my mind on the choices I need to make. Dropping this kind of cash, one has to be cautious, as I want this to last me the year and beyond as a workstation.

Take care.

Oh here is a link to that review article: http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/09/10/four_cores_on_the_rampage/index.html

[mattmos]

Computers are always being improved and there is always some new technology on the horizon, but right at the moment I really would wait a bit - by january there will be quad core kentsfield and quad xeons, there should be performance tests with the new dx10 cards to compare to quadros, basically it should be pretty interesting... quadros aren't really the fastest in some areas any longer but they do have stability with 3d packages. You only need the graphics card for viewport performance, rendering will be taken care of by the processors - most of time game card performance should be more than adequate, its only really heavy duty modelling that may need more.

[lots]

So much information to process. It is making my head spin ;) anyways I am thinking of going with a Dell workstation with the following settings:

Dell Precision Workstation 690:
Dual Core Intel® Xeon® Processor 5060 3.20GHz, 2X2MB L2,1066,Eng

.....

Also the reason why I am considering Dell is their tech service is really good and if something goes wrong it is covered, even though I could build a computer for half this cost I would not have the coverage on the hardware.

Is this more than enough or Overkill?

Thanks

That particular configuration is trash. The main point here, is the fact you are using a Xeon 50xx based CPU. What Dell's configuration does not tell you is that the Xeon 50xx CPUs are bad :) These are based on the dead Netburst Architecture (the same one found in the Pentium4). This means that you are not buying a modern processor, and it is highly out classed by both AMD solutions and Intel's latest Xeons. Insted, you want a system based on the Xeon 51xx, or a system based on Core 2 Duo (same chip but the Xeon has multi processor support). I would personally go for the Core 2 Duo. You'll save money.

Also, there's no need for the ultra high end Quadro, unless you create very demanding scenes or very very complex models. I'd save my money here as well.

A Core 2 Duo based machine paired with a Quadro 1500 and at least 2GB of RAM should be plenty. And, depending on your skills, will be more than enough.

By saving money (going for a single processor, and a lower class Quadro), you can save a ton of money. And, later down the line, when you do reach the point at which you are slowed down by your hardware, you can upgrade. If you buy a system with a 975X chipset, it should be quad core ready (Core 2 Quadro), and the graphics slot should easily support the next generation of Quadros that hit the market. So you should be set to upgrade this system later down the line, when you need it. Basically the take home point here, is that the longer you wait, the faster and cheaper hardware will be.

[Tej]

So well ok here is the system configurations for both high end and beginners. If i had loads of money to throw on new system.

HIGH END(my dream machine kinda) throwing crazy money

2 X Quad core intel xeon 5300 series (available in first quarter 2007) or AMD 4 x 4 (whichever scores higher in benchmarks)
Good Workstation Motherboard supporting tons of memory
8Gb Ram
2 x 15,000 Rpm SCSIs
2 or 3 X 500Gb 7200rpm Satas
Windows vista x64
2 X quadro 5500s (2 X 1Gb)
2 X Big LCDs
Running all the crazy 64 bit softwares,keep working with bloodshot eyes.
now this sounds crazy right.

But because technology is evolving so rapidly, every new item gets obsolete the day after it is released, one should get the system according to what one needs for the time being and yeah invest in one or two components which will support future upgrades like Motherboard, which would support next generation processors.

So keeping the upgrade process in mind, opt for motherboard that will support quad cores in my opinion or go for them if you have the money, they will be best when they are going to be released but dont forget in matter of time, that technology will be obsolete no matter how much you have spend on it, but you have to keep in mind how long its gonna serve your needs.

So if you dont mind spending on quad cores wait for them then, but if you want to get a system now, not spending lots, Xeon 51xx series with quadro fx 1500 will be sufficient, or even core 2 duo is not bad. But fx 4500 would be great no second thought on that.

Quadro fx 1400 is like a starting segment luxury car and quadro fx 4500/5500 are like maybachs i would say. well you can compare fx 1400 to a mercedes hehe. You wont mind a mercedes e class right away. When you want more luxury you can go for maybach, but yes with money in pocket you can buy it straight away. same with core 2 duo and core 2 quadros ;) and if you are curious geforce7xx or 8xx series are sports cars in my opinion.hehe (i can have bad sense of humor at times)

Well by the way AMD is not lagging behind in this race, 4x4 will be out next year, with 2 FX dual cores and what 4 GPUS, that is why they are calling it 4x4 and thats why ati was bought by them, so that integration of technologies would be lots better.

So not to get confused, just wait for another 2 months, your session starts feb, you have quite some time till then, let the new releases come out, including Vista and then go for your system next year starting.

I dont know how familiar you are with 3d thing, but if you have already like 1-2 years experience and know how to model those complex scenes and complex lighting setups, go for a high end machine, but if you are just starting but are willing to spend the money go for Xeon 51xx series or if you are like NEO IN MATRIX WANTING TO SAVE MORPHEUS AND WANT CRAZY GUNS LOTS OF THEM, JUST SAY "QUAD CORES LOTS OF THEM" HAHA i mean in the end want crazy system no matter what (which i would surely do if i have money to spend) go for quad cores. (sorry for my bad jokes)
Good luck!

______________________________________________

[vandervliet]

I configured the Dell computer you had posted to a Boxx (Dell came to $4,824, so I'm guessing that's around what you had?)

For about $30 more I configured a far supierior computer from Boxx for $4,853.00. The only difference is I took down the video card to a Quadro 3500, which is the highest in the Quadro 3000 numbers. Specs are includes:

BOX 8300 Series

PROCESSOR:
WS DUAL XEON 5140 2.33GHz, 4MB cache, 1.33GHz FSB

MEMORY:
4GB FBDIMM DDR2 667 REG ECC (4 -1GB FBDIMMS)

GRAPHICS CARD:
NVIDIA Quadro FX 3500 256MB

PRIMARY STORAGE:
120GB 7,200rpm SATA 8MB Cache

OPERATING SYSTEM:
Windows XP Professional x64 Edition


You had mentioned you were getting a dell for their tech support, Boxx has excellent tech support, best I've run into. They build top of the line workstations for artists in the CG world. That's what they specialize in verses Dell is a little for everyone and gamers, not specailized for CG artists That's why I highly recommend Boxx. I'm not saying what you should do, I dont' mean for you to take it that way, just trying to open up the options to you for what's better out there for either cheaper or the same price.

But if you can afford it, the Quad cores are going to be very fast and if you can wait for it I would. From what I undersand they're going to be expensive (I'm not positive on that) so yeah, if you have the cash, I'd wait.

It really comes down to how much you can afford to spend in a computer.


Oh, I forgot to add. I would recommend NOT getting a widescreen monitor. They're nice for movies but not so much modeling/animating. I would stick with a regular 20in if I were you. I recently purchased a Dell 20in. and a day later I had a dead pixel on it in the center of the screen. Hopefully you won't have that case.

--edit--
Day 3 with my Dell 20 inch. A small cluster of dead pixels just showed up on my screen. *sigh*

[lots]

Apparently I didnt finish writing my post :P And since I walked away from my comptuer while writing it others posted similar things to what I was saying :)

Anyway the other half of my post was going to be about tech support. Boxx has some pretty good support from what I hear. My first hand experience with Dell's support (I call them fairly regularly :P) is that they're quick, if you've paid for the proper support. If you just go for the run of the mill home user support, you probably wont get what you're looking for, in terms of customer service. Additionally, Dell's systems are not the most stable, or reliable systems out there. Talk to the guys at Boxx, they'll be more than willing to help you out.

[Col-Phil-Bilko]

Wow hahaha what a ton of awesome info, ok where to start....Thanks all so much for this helpful info.

I have $5000 to spend on a system, I live in canada thats why I was thinking Dell for their 3 year support. I also did some calling around today and was also told to hold off and wait till the Core 2 Quadro comes out, I was also told to get 4GB of memory.... Oh and I was allllssssooo told not to get vista right away because it will not really be a good stable OS for what I am doing compaired to say Windows XP x64, however I can always upgrade to vista in a year or so....

So let me see if I am getting this right. Rendering is mostly based on CPU power and ram not really the video card? The video card is for the viewport. So if I was to buy a Core 2 Quadro, Dual SLI DX 10 Gaming cards (even though 3D apps do not use SLI, hence it will use only ONE of the cards) 4 GB memory and Windows x64, I will have a system thats not only slightly cheaper than what I was looking at, but will do what I need it to do for school and also my recreation? Or should I GET a quadro card not the 4500, something like the 3500?

Thanks again guys.

[vandervliet]

I would stick with the Quadro 1500 no more then 3500. I mean, unless you plan to get a 30in. moniter, I would invest in a Quadro 3500. A Quadro 3000, 34XX, ect. would suite you just fine. If you really want to get the 4500, make sure you know WHY you would want to purchase a high end graphics card, and what a high end card like that DOES verses, higher numbers must be better. If you don't know why you would need that high end of a card and what it does and and how it would fit your needs better then a lower graphics card, I wouldn't get it. I would put the cash in the extra ram, other components that would really shine through when you're working on your CG work.
It sounds like you want to use this computer for games as well? If you spend 4000 or 5000 on a computer it will handle any game you throw at it ^_^

Boxx has a 3 year technical service as well just so you know. The video card has very little if nothing to do with rendering.

[PanzerMKZ]

Ok I woiuld say this is a case of spending the money just cause you have it to spend. You are going to Uni. As someone said unless you can push your current hardware then I would wait until you can. Maybe cause I am still new to it myself and have much to learn I see it this way. And why does not more people look into workstation and second computer for rendering?


Panzer

[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.