View Full Version : Whats your Ultimate Fantasy Workstation setup
cyphyr 03-17-2007, 04:35 PM I'm in the fortunate position position of being able to get a pretty amazing system in the near future. I'm hearing good things about dual and quad core processors and even motherboards that can carry 2 or 4 chips at once. This brings up the possibility of a system with a rediculous amount of processing power, (something like 64GHZ ~ 4 quad core processors with each core at about 4ghz). I know this is something of an exageration but I was wondering what the ultimate single box system would be. I dont have the space for multiple systems so I have to fit everything in the one box. Theres a current upper limit of 4 gig on ram, whats the upper limit on processing.
My main apps are Lightwave, Photoshop and the rest of the usual suspects (Dreamweaver, Illustrator etc).
So what would be your no holds barred single box system be?
cyphyr
| |
RAM's upper bound only applies to 32bit systems (OS and CPU). If you have a 64bit CPU (and OS) and the appropriate motherboard (one that supports more than 4GB) the upper bound is 128GB in Windows 64bit, and 16TB in virtual memory.
As for the upper bound for CPUs in a single system, this depends on your OS. Windows XP Pro (and 64bit Pro) only support two sockets. So you can only get up to 8 cores (currently) into a box like this. If you wanted more than 2 sockets, you will have to go with Windows Server or Linux. But the price at the 4 and up sockets gets pretty insane. You can easily make a system that would cost you $40k in this market bracket. 8 Way systems get even more pricy.
There is also the problem of deminishing returns as you add more and more CPUs. The overhead in controlling all these CPUs will never make the speed gain a linear graph. 2 CPUs is never twice as fast as one. 4 is never twice as fast as two, etc. Most people will give you a 1.8x speed increase, at best. And this really depends on how well the scheduler in the OS and the software you use take advantage of multiple CPUs.
I'd aim for at most a dual socket machine with dual or quad core CPUs in it. I wouldn't go beyond that, as the price is just too much.
Signal2Noise
03-17-2007, 07:26 PM
My 'ultimate fantasy workstation' would be neural implants. I could be doing CG 24/7 and just imagine the creations derived from lucid dreaming! :eek:
A bluetooth implant connection would allow for hardcopy print images or sharing complete animation reels wherever I am. Or would I even have to 'leave' my home? :eek:
cyphyr
03-17-2007, 07:50 PM
Ok I'm following the logic of the decreacing gains in multiple processors. Intel and AMD now are both offering quad core solutions (Intel Yorkfield vs AMD Altair) and I'm getting that intel are ahead in the race at the moment. Comparing the two seems to be a contentious issue and one that seems not to be covered on the tech boards from a 3d graphics point of view. Of the two which would you reccomend? Of course in both cases I'll be going for 4 gig of ram.
cyphyr
You can't count AMD out on the quad core area just yet, as these CPUs have not come out, and they are getting really good bench numbers vs Intel's current line up (40% or so speed bost in FP for example..)
Vs Intel's new CPUs, who knows. Really its a waiting game at this point.
Randybob
03-17-2007, 10:51 PM
My ultimo fantasy system would do Monte Carlo radiosity in real-time.
CGTalk Moderation
03-17-2007, 10:51 PM
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.
vBulletin v3.0.5, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.