Posted by Eric Hahl on January 11, 2008 at 12:17 PM
Howdy all, I've got a few questions about putting together a new workstation. I thought some of our local techies might be able to help out.
Here's what I'm trying to accomplish.
I need a workstation that is capable of running high end 3D cad software(Solidworks), and pretty much every Adobe program there is. In my work I deal with creating vector and rastor images, CAD drawings, solid models, parts catalogs, magazine ads, technical documents, websites and all kinds of other stuff. I'm pretty much the graphics goto guy at work.
So I was thinking about building a PC based on a Xeon processor and running Windows XP-64 so I can utilize more than 4gb ram. After doing some research though I'm not so sure. Does anyone out there have experience running their Adobe programs on XP-64? How about the Xeon processors? I've heard stories of incompatibility but I hope they are that, just stories and not true.
Any insight would be much appreciated. Thanks.
Posted by Chris Hodney on January 11, 2008 at 12:47 PM
I use 3d Studio Max on several PC workstations in my office. We've tried a number of processor combinations, and done apples to apples tests with them of high quality, large format architectural images.
I can't say that XP-64 bit wouldn't be a bad idea, although there are still a lot of compatibility issues with some software. I am not a proponent of Xeon processors for anything but heavy gaming and Servers though. We have a dual Xeon 3.2ghz machine, a single Xeon 3.8ghz machine, and a new Pentium Core 2 Duo 2.8ghz machine, all with the same Operating system and 2 gigs of RAM. The COre 2 Duo blows away the Xeon machines.......renders nearly 2.5 times as fast. Something about the architecture of those Core 2 Duo processors is extremely efficient. Any Apple person will tell you the same I'm sure.
I'd put my money evenly into the processor, graphics card, and bulk memory given the kind of work you're doing; but would definitely forget about paying a premium for a lesser processor Xeon.
Posted by Eric Hahl on January 11, 2008 at 1:27 PM
Thanks Chris, that's the kind of input I'm looking for. I've talked with multiple persons now and I'm getting the feeling the Core2 processor might be the way to go.
Posted by Jim Jirka on January 11, 2008 at 1:39 PM
Eric,
I run Solidworks and Photoshop on Athlon 64/dual core 5600 with 2 gigs of Ram. The issue with Solidworks is not so much with the processor but with the graphics card used. Regular XP
Posted by Philip Kuglin on January 11, 2008 at 9:50 PM
I am not a proponent of Xeon processors for anything but heavy gaming and Servers though. We have a dual Xeon 3.2ghz machine, a single Xeon 3.8ghz machine, and a new Pentium Core 2 Duo 2.8ghz machine, all with the same Operating system and 2 gigs of RAM.
Apples to oranges comparison. The architecture of the older Xeons and the Core 2 Duo is very different and the newer Core 2 Duo would be much more efficient and therefore much faster. Try comparing a Core 2 Duo Xeon verses a Core 2 Duo Pentium and your opinion will change! The Xeon has much more resources, plus it allows multiple Xeons in parallel each with multiple cores. If you have SW which utilizes multiple cores then this set is kill a single Core 2 Duo Pentium - most of Adobe products and especially Photoshop use multiple processers. Go to Tom's Hardware if you don't believe me or simply go to Apple.com and read about the new 8x Mac Pros using the 4 core Xeons with 800Mb FBDIMMs and the 1600Mb front side bus. I got news for you 8x processors with all that local cache will kill a Core 2 Duo Pentium.
For video rendering it's all in the video card. Look for a new MB with supports PCI express 2 (5Gbps verses the older 2.5Gbps).
If your 3D SW supports OS X then forget Windows, buy a new Mac Pro - the one released on 1/8/2008. It will kill any XP box you build for 2/3 the cost. Try to price the same HW from Dell. Allows 32GB ram, has PCI express 2 video with awesome graphics cards (the standard one will drive 2 30" monitors), built in SAS drives, and 64 Bits OS. Oh the list goes on. I bought one just before Christmas (the older dual Core 2 Duo's) and since they just released the new 8X Apple allowed me to RMA it and get a new one. I'm never looking back. BTW I benchmarked my current Mac Pro (2.66GHZ) using a large Photoshop filter against a new Dell desktop with a standard Core 2 Duo Pentium 3GHZ at work (XP 64 bit) and the Mac Pro was 3.1x faster.
Benchmark them yourself. Create a full size JPG from your 5D, sent it to Mark H. and have him time doing a high value radial Blur on it using his Mac Pro. Then have someone try it with a standard Core 2 Duo and see for yourself.
Posted by Bryan Swan on January 12, 2008 at 3:27 AM
Uh, Phil...you may want to clarify what you mean when you say "for 2/3 the cost". The Mac Pros START at $2700, and in order to spec one up to a level that will run Solidworks and CS3 fluidly, you're looking at closer to $6000.
For giggles, I spec'ed one out as follows:
2x Xeon 2.8 ghz quad core procs
4gb ram
Mac Raid card
3x 1TB HD
2x ATI Radeon x2600 256mb vid
everything else standard (no monitor)
= $5749.00
And this isn't even has hardcore a machine as I'd personally build for CAD work either (though I do recall that the machines we were running AutoCAD, Solidworks and Rinoceros on in High School were probably pretty mediocre at the time so going too deeply into the build process is not likely as necessary).
The important thing, as mentioned, for rendering is the video card. I'd treat it like a gaming machine and get a pair of GeForce 8800s and set up SLI. A single Quad core processor would be plenty and 4GB of ram should be sufficient (the super souped up Mac rigs, as blazing as they are, are really geared more towards video editing and will be overkill - for the time being - for pretty much anything else). Something like that could be easily built for less than 4 grand, maybe even less than 3 grand.
Posted by Philip Kuglin on January 12, 2008 at 12:54 PM
Bryan,
You pretty funny - that is the machine that will run CS3 fluidly? You are joking right?
I spent $3750. I bought my drives and memory after market and only spend $1000 for 8GB of memory and 3x 750GB drives. You are nuts to by this from Apple. Buying 1TB drives is not cost efficient from anyone (~$300 for a 1TGB while a 750GB is only $150!). Why the RAID card? who needs that? disk speed? That alone is almost $1000. The standard 3Gbps SATA built in disk IF is plenty for CS3 or any Solidworks work. Also, why two video cards - what is the point. The stock video card can drive two dual-link DVI's or 2 30" monitors.
Bottom-line a 6GB (2GB from Apple, 4GB from after market), 3x750GB(After market), 1x320GB(apple), stock video and everything else stock is ~3500. (2700 for the mac, 300 for memory, 450 for drives) and if you only want 1 quad processor then it's only ~3K! so why the 6K???
Price the same from a company such as Dell and buy the memory/disk after market.
So lets hear you configuration for less than $3K that can match this with 6GB ECC 800Mbps DRAM, Fast processors (the latest 1600Mbps Frontside bus), PCI Express 2 and solid built mainframe, totally quiet etc - I would like to see it (because I have done it and I couldn't match it for this cost for this preformance level)
Posted by Eric Hahl on January 12, 2008 at 8:13 PM
Thanks guys, gives me lots to think about.
Posted by Bryan Swan on January 13, 2008 at 12:00 AM
Phil -
I'll have to do some pricing to see what I can come up with.
I'd do the RAID card for backup purposes (yeah, not absolutely necessary and the Mac one is certainly overpriced)
Storage is definitely flexible, a hefty scratch disk is a must. Whether the difference between 750gb and 1TB would make a difference (again tossing rendering into the equation - certainly wouldn't make a difference for PS), I don't know.
Dual Video cards is a must because it will cut rendering time in half for programs like Solidworks - it has nothing to do with multiple monitors.
I'll dig up prices and see what I can put together.
Discussion
8 repliesHere's what I'm trying to accomplish.
I need a workstation that is capable of running high end 3D cad software(Solidworks), and pretty much every Adobe program there is. In my work I deal with creating vector and rastor images, CAD drawings, solid models, parts catalogs, magazine ads, technical documents, websites and all kinds of other stuff. I'm pretty much the graphics goto guy at work.
So I was thinking about building a PC based on a Xeon processor and running Windows XP-64 so I can utilize more than 4gb ram. After doing some research though I'm not so sure. Does anyone out there have experience running their Adobe programs on XP-64? How about the Xeon processors? I've heard stories of incompatibility but I hope they are that, just stories and not true.
Any insight would be much appreciated. Thanks.
I can't say that XP-64 bit wouldn't be a bad idea, although there are still a lot of compatibility issues with some software. I am not a proponent of Xeon processors for anything but heavy gaming and Servers though. We have a dual Xeon 3.2ghz machine, a single Xeon 3.8ghz machine, and a new Pentium Core 2 Duo 2.8ghz machine, all with the same Operating system and 2 gigs of RAM. The COre 2 Duo blows away the Xeon machines.......renders nearly 2.5 times as fast. Something about the architecture of those Core 2 Duo processors is extremely efficient. Any Apple person will tell you the same I'm sure.
I'd put my money evenly into the processor, graphics card, and bulk memory given the kind of work you're doing; but would definitely forget about paying a premium for a lesser processor Xeon.
I run Solidworks and Photoshop on Athlon 64/dual core 5600 with 2 gigs of Ram. The issue with Solidworks is not so much with the processor but with the graphics card used. Regular XP
Apples to oranges comparison. The architecture of the older Xeons and the Core 2 Duo is very different and the newer Core 2 Duo would be much more efficient and therefore much faster. Try comparing a Core 2 Duo Xeon verses a Core 2 Duo Pentium and your opinion will change! The Xeon has much more resources, plus it allows multiple Xeons in parallel each with multiple cores. If you have SW which utilizes multiple cores then this set is kill a single Core 2 Duo Pentium - most of Adobe products and especially Photoshop use multiple processers. Go to Tom's Hardware if you don't believe me or simply go to Apple.com and read about the new 8x Mac Pros using the 4 core Xeons with 800Mb FBDIMMs and the 1600Mb front side bus. I got news for you 8x processors with all that local cache will kill a Core 2 Duo Pentium.
For video rendering it's all in the video card. Look for a new MB with supports PCI express 2 (5Gbps verses the older 2.5Gbps).
If your 3D SW supports OS X then forget Windows, buy a new Mac Pro - the one released on 1/8/2008. It will kill any XP box you build for 2/3 the cost. Try to price the same HW from Dell. Allows 32GB ram, has PCI express 2 video with awesome graphics cards (the standard one will drive 2 30" monitors), built in SAS drives, and 64 Bits OS. Oh the list goes on. I bought one just before Christmas (the older dual Core 2 Duo's) and since they just released the new 8X Apple allowed me to RMA it and get a new one. I'm never looking back. BTW I benchmarked my current Mac Pro (2.66GHZ) using a large Photoshop filter against a new Dell desktop with a standard Core 2 Duo Pentium 3GHZ at work (XP 64 bit) and the Mac Pro was 3.1x faster.
Benchmark them yourself. Create a full size JPG from your 5D, sent it to Mark H. and have him time doing a high value radial Blur on it using his Mac Pro. Then have someone try it with a standard Core 2 Duo and see for yourself.
For giggles, I spec'ed one out as follows:
2x Xeon 2.8 ghz quad core procs
4gb ram
Mac Raid card
3x 1TB HD
2x ATI Radeon x2600 256mb vid
everything else standard (no monitor)
= $5749.00
And this isn't even has hardcore a machine as I'd personally build for CAD work either (though I do recall that the machines we were running AutoCAD, Solidworks and Rinoceros on in High School were probably pretty mediocre at the time so going too deeply into the build process is not likely as necessary).
The important thing, as mentioned, for rendering is the video card. I'd treat it like a gaming machine and get a pair of GeForce 8800s and set up SLI. A single Quad core processor would be plenty and 4GB of ram should be sufficient (the super souped up Mac rigs, as blazing as they are, are really geared more towards video editing and will be overkill - for the time being - for pretty much anything else). Something like that could be easily built for less than 4 grand, maybe even less than 3 grand.
You pretty funny - that is the machine that will run CS3 fluidly? You are joking right?
I spent $3750. I bought my drives and memory after market and only spend $1000 for 8GB of memory and 3x 750GB drives. You are nuts to by this from Apple. Buying 1TB drives is not cost efficient from anyone (~$300 for a 1TGB while a 750GB is only $150!). Why the RAID card? who needs that? disk speed? That alone is almost $1000. The standard 3Gbps SATA built in disk IF is plenty for CS3 or any Solidworks work. Also, why two video cards - what is the point. The stock video card can drive two dual-link DVI's or 2 30" monitors.
Bottom-line a 6GB (2GB from Apple, 4GB from after market), 3x750GB(After market), 1x320GB(apple), stock video and everything else stock is ~3500. (2700 for the mac, 300 for memory, 450 for drives) and if you only want 1 quad processor then it's only ~3K! so why the 6K???
Price the same from a company such as Dell and buy the memory/disk after market.
So lets hear you configuration for less than $3K that can match this with 6GB ECC 800Mbps DRAM, Fast processors (the latest 1600Mbps Frontside bus), PCI Express 2 and solid built mainframe, totally quiet etc - I would like to see it (because I have done it and I couldn't match it for this cost for this preformance level)
I'll have to do some pricing to see what I can come up with.
I'd do the RAID card for backup purposes (yeah, not absolutely necessary and the Mac one is certainly overpriced)
Storage is definitely flexible, a hefty scratch disk is a must. Whether the difference between 750gb and 1TB would make a difference (again tossing rendering into the equation - certainly wouldn't make a difference for PS), I don't know.
Dual Video cards is a must because it will cut rendering time in half for programs like Solidworks - it has nothing to do with multiple monitors.
I'll dig up prices and see what I can put together.