Processor help for a CAD system

[radiosity]

What is a better processor for a CAD graphics workstation:

Dual Core Intel® Xeon® Processor 5120 1.86GHz, 4MB L2,1066

vs.

Intel? Core®2 Duo E6300 1.86GHz/1066MHz/2MB L2/Dual-core

 

[corsa]

Judging by your sig... why change what aint broken 😕

 

[Atheus]

Looks like the only difference between those is the extra cache, so I guess the first one.

But yea - why are you upgrading? You have a powerful system in your sig which has not reached the end of it's useful life. How much extra performance are you looking for? Because it won't exactly be night and day between the old rig and the one you suggest buying. If you're looking for a _lot_ more power than you already have it might be quad Opterons for you. Or quad Conroe, if such a thing exists :Q

 

[radiosity]

My current system is a socket 706 dual xeon with a 533 FSB. The noise is crazy. But is it time to upgrade this system?

 

[radiosity]

These are my specs:

sSpec Number SL6VP
Processor Frequency 3.06 GHz CPUID String 0F29h
Package Type 604 pin Core Voltage 1.525
Bus Speed 533 MHz Thermal Guideline 85.0W
Core Stepping D1 Thermal Spec 73°C
L2 Cache Size 512KB Manufacturing Technology 0.13 micron
L2 Cache Speed 3.06 GHz Bus/Core Ratio 23

 

[SickBeast]

In my experience, systems running on AMD processors are more responsive within CAD.

If you're planning to do heavy rendering and 3D work, I would focus more on the graphics subsystem than anything else. The renderings take time to generate no matter what. I find the realtime responsiveness of the AMD setups to have a greater impact than the shorter render times on the Intel rigs.

That said, if it were my money, between those two I would go with the Core Duo (and buy double the memory with the savings - the amount of RAM you have is critical if you intend to generate complex renderings with "radiosity").

What software do you intend to use, and what are you trying to create?

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
In my experience, systems running on AMD processors are more responsive within CAD.

Yes it has been that way until C2D came into the picture.

 

[ForumMaster]

there won't be such a difference between your current rig and the one you plan on getting. if you're looking to do incredibly complex work, get a quad core xeon system (like the Mac Pro) otherwise, i would keep what you have.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: MS Dawn

Originally posted by: SickBeast
In my experience, systems running on AMD processors are more responsive within CAD.

Yes it has been that way until C2D came into the picture.

I'm still skeptical. I have yet to try a C2D rig out, though. The Athlon architecture seems as though it was custom-built for CAD. To be honest, the Athlon XP rigs I have worked on have been more responsive than the Dual Core P4 rigs that I have used. I would be rather shocked if Intel managed that great of a turnaround with their new architecture.

How does the C2D do in raw FPU performance? Is its pipeline longer than that of the A64? How is its power usage compared to that of the Athlons?

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

I'm still skeptical. I have yet to try a C2D rig out, though. The Athlon architecture seems as though it was custom-built for CAD. To be honest, the Athlon XP rigs I have worked on have been more responsive than the Dual Core P4 rigs that I have used. I would be rather shocked if Intel managed that great of a turnaround with their new architecture.

How does the C2D do in raw FPU performance? Is its pipeline longer than that of the A64? How is its power usage compared to that of the Athlons?

It's better on all accounts. Kentsfield is going to be a beast. A pair of quadcore Xeons - given enough memory (4-8 GB is a good start) and a fast SAS RAID HBA with a gig or more cache - should tear through multiple jobs with ease.

Netburst is a joke compared to Conroe. IPC all the way around on C2D systems beats AMD64's - with lower power consumption. I have a FX60 running at 3.0GHz and a similar system with an E6600 and the 6600 at default clock of 2.4GHz has no problem keeping up or even exceeding the FX60 system! The 6600 is clocked currently at 3.5GHz. At this rate the gloves are off and the system just flat out flies. The system board is the brand new Asus P5WDG2 WS Professional - w/ 64 bit PCI-X 133MHz slots. There's an Intel SRCU42X RAID card with 512MB cache in there with 8 Fujitsu MAU 15k drives striped and mirrored. It's pretty darn fast and surprisingly cheap considering what a pair of Nocona Xeons at 3.6 GHz cost in a Super Micro board, along with 4GB ECC Buffered DDR400 - and the new system totally smokes it while using less power.