CAD Workstation

[Twinpeaksr]

Main reason for te switch is the MB had everything I was looking for, the Price was cheaper, and Conroe is a little too new, I am hearing of too many reliability and stability problems. Stability is one of the biggest things I am looking for, the AMD seems to be a better deal and fit.

I can definitly look at other power supplies, I have always had good luck with sparkle myself, but I will check out some of the suggestions.

Video is of high importance, but I am not sure if I can justify the Price for a Fire or Quadro. Graphics are important, but I am dealing with Architechtural Drafting mainly, Raw processing and RAM is what i really nead, most graphics cards today can handle what I am doing. I definilty agree that I do not want anything OC, to much of a stability risk. I have no need for SLI, but do need dual monitors, and DVI-D.

Thanks for all the input!

 

[Twinpeaksr]

Think I will switch to

1 FSP Group (Fortron Source) AX400-PN, 400W Power Supply

For the Power Supply, thanks for the input! Evaluating Video Cards now...

 

[Twinpeaksr]

Which Video Card:

ATI 100-505149 FireGL V3300 128MB GDDR2 PCI Express x16 Video Card

or

MSI NX7600GS-T2D256E Geforce 7600GS 256MB GDDR2 PCI Express x16 Video Card

 

[mleonard]

Originally posted by: Twinpeaksr
Video is of high importance, but I am not sure if I can justify the Price for a Fire or Quadro. Graphics are important, but I am dealing with Architechtural Drafting mainly, Raw processing and RAM is what i really nead, most graphics cards today can handle what I am doing. I definilty agree that I do not want anything OC, to much of a stability risk. I have no need for SLI, but do need dual monitors, and DVI-D.

Ahhh!!! Don't give in that easily. If you really want a "Workstation" you need a descent stable card. True, even the mid-range cards a bit prices, but then how about an Entry-Level card like the nVidia Quadro FX 350 -> 560. These cards are approx $100-$150 more than that MSI card you have spec'd. Take a little time to look into these entry-level and compare the graphic memory bandwith (overall memory size is of less importance). Dual DVI-D ports are pretty standarnd on many cards, including these.

I'm not sure if I'd agree "Raw processing and RAM" is of most importance for architectual drafting. What kind of number crunching is ther in drafting? Alot of it is done within a good graphics card. Drafting is all visual and interactive. Fast Ram is important, but you don't necessarily need alot of it, even the highest end workstations have 2GB of DDR2 667 (though its ECC and FB-DIMM).

Your graphics card is extremely important, and don't let anyone tell you it's not. True, you may be doing "just" architectual drafting, but that's exactly what these cards are made to do. When you are zooming and panning around your drawing, that's where you'll see the difference.... and 3D Orbit performance... huge difference. Bassically, you'll be much more productiive.

 

[Twinpeaksr]

Thanks for the input, I shall keep searching, Video Cards are not my specialty. I have no problem spending a little more, just not 5 times more.

On the Processing and RAM, I forgot to mention that I also do circuit simulation on ASIC Designs. That would be where the RAW power comes from as well as the need for RAM. The CAD can use it as well, mainly for things like automatic calculations for roof trusses, and calculation of survey data. probably not real taxing, but the simulation is.

Thanks, keep it coming!

 

[mleonard]

Originally posted by: Twinpeaksr
Which Video Card:

ATI 100-505149 FireGL V3300 128MB GDDR2 PCI Express x16 Video Card

or

MSI NX7600GS-T2D256E Geforce 7600GS 256MB GDDR2 PCI Express x16 Video Card

(sigh of relief......) ATI FireGL V3300 all the way! I compared the average prices for each and the ATI is not even that much more money than the MSI. You can now can your system a "workstation". You are getting a much better card that will be even more usefull down the road than a gaming card.

 

[Twinpeaksr]

That is what I though, glad to provide you some relief! Any concern on only 128MB RAM? Don't think that would be an issue, but you understand this better than me!

 

[mleonard]

Originally posted by: Twinpeaksr
That is what I though, glad to provide you some relief! Any concern on only 128MB RAM? Don't think that would be an issue, but you understand this better than me!

I wouldn't mind hearing some others folks input on this issue... but from what I understand the size of the memory is not going to make as much a difference for CAD and 3D perforamance, as this relies mostly on memory speed. Gaming cards sometimes do have more memory, as thet's where the games textures and such are stored.

Take a look at these specs:
nVidia Quadro FX series
ATI FireGL sereis
MSI NX7600GS-T2D256E

An interesting thing to note with the Quadro's, you don't see 256MB untill about the High-End range. I think probably the best thing to compare across all these cards is memory bandwith, memory interface, and memory type. It's difficult to compare the MSI card because they don't list all these specs. I'm sure you'll see in these spec sheets, there is more to it than just the amount of memory.... verticies per seconds... pixel operations...

Maybe look at the nVidia Quadro FX 560 (don't know much about the retailer). It's a bit more the the ATI FireGL V3300 and $100 more than the MSI, but from the specs it appears to have a significant performance increase than the ATI.

ATI FireGL cards have rulled mid-range workstation market for some time, but the new Quadro line have seem to passed them up. I've just switched from the FireGL to a Quadro in my new system.

 

[Twinpeaksr]

I posed the question to the Video Forum. See wat happens. Thanks for the input, might try for the FX560, see what others have to say!

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid=31&threadid=1923881

 

[mleonard]

Pardon me for maybe repeating earlier posts.... but have you considered the new Intel Core 2 Duo Conroe CPU? The E6300 is priceed about the same as the CPU you have spec'd and I'm sure you can find comparisons shows it outperforms the AMD.

And why the PCIe RAID card, why not put that money towards a better motherboard with on-board RAID-5 if that's what you need. That board will likely end up being Workstation class motherboard without changing the price much.

Just for your own amusment, here's what some of the high end 3D workstations have under their hood.
Edit: can't get the link to work, here again:http://www.spec.org/gpc/apc.data/specapc_3dsm8_summary.html

 

[mleonard]

Here's a pretty good Core 2 Duo workstation setup with onboard RAID:

MB Asus P5B Deluxe $209 @ eWiz
- RAID 0,1,5,10. 2x Gb Lan Ports, 6x SATA 3.0 Gb/s, eSATA, 1066/800/533MHz fsb, wireless bonus, DDR2 800 Dual channel

CPU Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 1.86GHz $187 @ eWiz
- 1066 MHz FSB, 2MB cache, Retail Box

MEM Corsair XMS2 1GB (2x512MB) $130 @ Newegg
- 240-pin DDR2 SDRAM Undbuffered DDR2 800 (PC2 6400)

FAN/GREASE $0 Intel retail box CPU come with grease and passive or active cooling

Core price: $526

 

[Twinpeaksr]

The onboard RAID is generally Software RAID. though for RAID 1 or 0 this is no issue, when you get to RAID5 the parity that must be calcuated starts to affect system performance. Using a RAID card that is hardware RAID, that parity generation is off loaded on to the card, and we all live happily ever after.

As for the Intel solution, could work, but still $100 higher than a 2.2Ghz X2. The big questions is will the Chipset be stable, (read of some issues) and will I see a noticable performance increase over the 2.2Ghz (4200+). Numbers may be higher, but is that really going to be noticably faster?

Just my thoughts thus far, if there is good reason to use the Intel, show me what you got, I am still open and researching.

Thanks!

 

[d3n]

As far as shootings I manage to keep my groupings pretty tight.

As for the system. I would try to avoid peicemealing it and take a hard hard look at a Dell Poweredge 2900 tower or any of the new precision workstations on the small buisness web site. The big deal with this is that it has SAS support. I would also look hard at the Perc5 controller and set up a raid 1 for the OS and any log files with two disks if you do DB work.

I especially love the 2900 becuase you can have up to 8 built in hard disks and 2 dual core CPUS. With that I would get enough SAS or SATAII disks to do raid 10 on the other drives. You dont have to pick up the disks from Dell if you don't want too.


With the Dell all the components are tested and a backed up, so no weird glitch when your pushing the system to its limits. Twinspeaksr shadowed at this in his post. If it is day to day productivity I would not want to have to worry about it.

 

[Twinpeaksr]

I just use big bullets.

I thought about the Dell, but it is one of those "Almost what I want, but not quite". I like custom systems, a little more freedom of choice but as you pointed out, more risk of problems.

I am also trying to make this affordable, it is a home system, and it would be several hundred more for the Dell, not sure if it is worth it or not, still evaluating.

I would probably stick with RAID5 as well, RAID 1 is great for reliability, but is a waste of space. The performance hit is minimal as well, assuming a good RAID card. RAID 10 would be nice, but big $$$, about $800 for the drives I am looking at!

I will play with the Dell systems tonight and see what I can come up with. Thanks for the input!

 

[d3n]

Yeah the Dell website always takes a bit of tinkering. The SMB section all sorts of free upgrades for the 2900 and stuff that have to be selected to subtract them off of the price. Seems sneaky or just not obtimized by the web team

Anyhow I see some good value with going with a prefab system in some cases.

 

[Twinpeaksr]

Well Dell is a bust, no matter what I tried, I never got all that I wanted, and it was anywhere from $400 to $700 more than if I buit a system.

On the plus side I have had a chance to review CPU and decieded that AMD is great, but Intel is tops now, and they own that spot. By the time I purchase, I think the chipsets will be mature and ready for higher stability than now. See what I can come up with, but am think that the E6400 or E6600 would work well.

Let me know other thoughts, I know they are out there! Thanks!

 

[d3n]

I would have to say, at least for databases the Woodcrest CPU's from intel can't be touched right now. Anything with the 51x0 series labels I think.

 

[Twinpeaksr]

So what about CAD and Simulations? Any thougts on best power for those?

Any thoughts on a MB for an E6400/E6600 or an alternate CPU? What about XEON?

Thanks!

 

[markten]

Originally posted by: Twinpeaksr
So what about CAD and Simulations? Any thougts on best power for those?

Any thoughts on a MB for an E6400/E6600 or an alternate CPU? What about XEON?

Thanks!

I would have chosen the Asus P5WDG2 WSPro at about $270. In the event, I've chosen to wait until years end when I've read boards will be more stable and there will be more choice. Also, this new quad core may be avialable; I'm not sure what effect that will have on pricing but it seems one of those will obviate the need to go to a two CPU board.

good article on this board here:-
http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.aspx

which also includes how this board can utilise a hardware RAID card

Or I might go for that MacPro :¬)

PS - I read this very informative article about graphics cards:-
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/2006/08/08/graphics_beginners_3_uk/

 

[Twinpeaksr]

Thanks for the info, I will check it out!