Specing a system for a friend....

[bob4432]

just the main items are in this build - he is going to use current hdd/optical drives along w/ case and floppy. machine will be used w/ solidworks 2008 in a industrial enviornment - and i have looked at the info - a quad core won't help what he does. reliability is main concern so it will be running @ stock speeds.

Newegg List

* GIGABYTE GA-P35-DS3L
* C2D E6750
* 7600GT
* Antec Earthwatts 430W PSU
* G.Skill 2GB DDR2-800 (5-5-5-15)


thanks in advance,
bob

 

[bob4432]

bump for a look

 

[InflatableBuddha]

You should look at a Quadro or FireGL based video card - they perform better in CAD programs. CPU and PSU are good. The mobo looks solid too. Will this program run on a 32-bit or 64-bit OS? Stay with 2GB on a 32 bit OS, or move up to 4GB if it's running in a 64-bit environment.

Also, what is the budget? Does your friend already have a monitor(s)?

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha
You should look at a Quadro or FireGL based video card - they perform better in CAD programs. CPU and PSU are good. The mobo looks solid too. Will this program run on a 32-bit or 64-bit OS? Stay with 2GB on a 32 bit OS, or move up to 4GB if it's running in a 64-bit environment.

Also, what is the budget? Does your friend already have a monitor(s)?

yes, he already has monitor/s. we have looked into the cad type cards and from what we have read, they appear to only really help w/ a lot of windows open at once, not the way he works. his home machine is a 6300/7600gt setup and it runs very well. also, will be runing 32bit xp, so 2GB should be good as he just breaks over 1GB but never hits the pagefile. these will be replacing older p4 setups. we also based the setup off of this info from a benchmark for the solidworks community - http://spreadsheets.google.com...z7wTpIkC7LA28ybEyxyTPw . figured the 6750 was a good bang for buck. thanks for the comment

as far as budget, there really isn't one, but also there is no reason to buy stuff not needed and minimalist m/bs more than fit what is needed in features. i am personally amazed at how cheap this stuff has gotten.

still a bit in the air between this m/b or the gigabyte counterpart - the ga-p35-ds3l. i have used both brands and both have worked very well for me, so it may just be a flip of a coin decision...

 

[InflatableBuddha]

I looked at your spreadsheet - amazing to see how much faster the C2Ds are compared to the old P4s! I agree on 2GB; that seems to be the sweet spot.

Regarding the video card, I agree that it doesn't make sense to buy a faster one than your friend needs, but it doesn't make sense to skimp on features either. The 7600GT is a very good low-mid range gaming card, but it's not specifically designed for CAD programs.

Most of the systems in the spreadsheet have a Quadro card, the 3500 being the most common. Seems to be a trend. That card is over $800, which is a lot, but you could go for the Quadro 1500, which is under $500.

The 1500 has the same number of pipelines and the same 256-bit bus, so that makes it a great performer. It has 2 DVI outputs also; the 7600GT has only 1. One reviewer even mentions a SolidWorks driver! That's key - there are CAD drivers specifically targeted to these cards, which give them an edge over the Geforce cards. The 9th place system in that chart has one - not bad.

IIRC, the Gigabyte board has been recommended on these forums, but either will be good.

HTH.

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha
I looked at your spreadsheet - amazing to see how much faster the C2Ds are compared to the old P4s! I agree on 2GB; that seems to be the sweet spot.

Regarding the video card, I agree that it doesn't make sense to buy a faster one than your friend needs, but it doesn't make sense to skimp on features either. The 7600GT is a very good low-mid range gaming card, but it's not specifically designed for CAD programs.

Most of the systems in the spreadsheet have a Quadro card, the 3500 being the most common. Seems to be a trend. That card is over $800, which is a lot, but you could go for the Quadro 1500, which is under $500.

The 1500 has the same number of pipelines and the same 256-bit bus, so that makes it a great performer. It has 2 DVI outputs also; the 7600GT has only 1. One reviewer even mentions a SolidWorks driver! That's key - there are CAD drivers specifically targeted to these cards, which give them an edge over the Geforce cards. The 9th place system in that chart has one - not bad.

IIRC, the Gigabyte board has been recommended on these forums, but either will be good.

HTH.

thanks for the info. my question i guess is where does the cad card shine over a regular card? and how would the $500 be justified? if there is a night and day difference that is not a problem, but spending about the same amount on a gpu as the whole upgrade needs a lot of return on investment and that is where i am not familiar w/ the benefits. anything to read regarding this?

thanks in advance,
bob

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: bob4432
my question i guess is where does the cad card shine over a regular card? and how would the $500 be justified?

There two two things that determine the speed of a CAD program: the cpu speed, and the rendering speed of the video card. With most CAD software, a slower processor with either an nVidia Quadro, or an ATI FireGL card will seriously outperform a faster processor with a normal consumer gaming card. It makes sense in those instances to get the dedicated card, since the rendering times can be cut by more than half.

But, according to the link you've provided, the software your friend is using doesn't seem to benefit very much from having a Quadro, since someone with a 7100GS is in the top 15, and a 7100GS is roughly half as fast as a 7600GT, and two of the people using it are actually using the slowest nVidia card's of all, the 6200SE. So, I'd say that a 7600GT will provide him with the best performance/dollar.

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: bob4432
my question i guess is where does the cad card shine over a regular card? and how would the $500 be justified?

There two two things that determine the speed of a CAD program: the cpu speed, and the rendering speed of the video card. With most CAD software, a slower processor with either an nVidia Quadro, or an ATI FireGL card will seriously outperform a faster processor with a normal consumer gaming card. It makes sense in those instances to get the dedicated card, since the rendering times can be cut by more than half.

But, according to the link you've provided, the software your friend is using doesn't seem to benefit very much from having a Quadro, since someone with a 7100GS is in the top 15, and a 7100GS is roughly half as fast as a 7600GT, and two of the people using it are actually using the slowest nVidia card's of all, the 6200SE. So, I'd say that a 7600GT will provide him with the best performance/dollar.

thanks for the info. his current home machine (2GB DDR2-800 / 6300 / 7600GT) benchmarks a bit faster than the 6300s on the list, and my rig (2GB pc3200 / x2 4200 / x1800xt) benches a bit faster than the x2 4200s on the list, so that is where my confusion was. as far as m/b, he needs a serial port so looks like the gigabyte is the one

 

[bob4432]

last question - is there an issue w/ running a 1333MHz FSB chip w/ ddr2-800? i haven't seen one in the benches but i am still on regular ddr so i have not kept up to the ddr2 / FSB speed and if there are issues.

 

[F1shF4t]

Originally posted by: bob4432
last question - is there an issue w/ running a 1333MHz FSB chip w/ ddr2-800? i haven't seen one in the benches but i am still on regular ddr so i have not kept up to the ddr2 / FSB speed and if there are issues.

Run the DDR2 chips at 667 speed, since its dual channel it will be 1333 effective. There is not much point at running the memory faster than the FSB speed. Otherwise there should be no issues running the mem at 800.

 

[myocardia]

Maybe this will make it a little easier to understand. The FSB of Intel's "1333 Mhz" FSB processors is 333 Mhz. So, if you aren't overclocking, you could buy PC5300 RAM, which also runs @ 333 Mhz, or DDR 667. Of course, there's no real reason to buy PC5300, since PC6400 is roughly the same price, and will allow you to either run the RAM slightly faster (which doesn't help performance much at all, unless gaming), or give him the option to overclock a bit, if he desires.

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: myocardia
Maybe this will make it a little easier to understand. The FSB of Intel's "1333 Mhz" FSB processors is 333 Mhz. So, if you aren't overclocking, you could buy PC5300 RAM, which also runs @ 333 Mhz, or DDR 667. Of course, there's no real reason to buy PC5300, since PC6400 is roughly the same price, and will allow you to either run the RAM slightly faster (which doesn't help performance much at all, unless gaming), or give him the option to overclock a bit, if he desires.

:thumbsup: