• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

System components for a CAD computer

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
As far as specific part recommendations and price range, I didn't ask for any right now, because I'm probably a year away from building/buying such a system, just trying to get a general feel for types of components. Generally what's higher priority for a cpu: a high core count, large cache, or clock speed? Video card highest priorities: fast RAM, lots of RAM, OpenGL spec, etc.

I have been building my own systems for 3d work for over 10 years. The only thing you get by going to a pre-built system is support if something breaks. If you understand the hardware there is no reason not to build it yourself. There is nothing special about the components that Dell uses over ones you buy.

For 3d work there are two ways to approach this. You can build a beefy workstation and do your designing and rendering on it or you can build an adequate workstation and a box to render the work. If you put all the hardware into the workstation you will also have to use it for rendering the final output. This could mean tying up that pc for anywhere from 20 minutes to an entire day during which you cannot use it for other task. If you put the hardware for rendering into a separate pc then you can send the work to it and let it work on it for a week if needed and still have use of the workstation.

The #1 thing for final rendering is cpu power, more cores and as fast as you can afford.

Secondary is memory capacity. The more the better. It doesn't have to be the fastest memory speeds as long as you are not running out you should be fine.

Video card - most gaming cards work fine with 3d apps. Try to get something made in the last year or two and with at least 768MB of memory. The memory needs to be enough to cache textures and textures in 3d can be huge compared to games.

Hard drive - more capacity the better, speed is not really a concern here either unless you plan on generating video renders of your work, then speed helps it go along faster, but still is not something to be overly concerned with.

For a workstation I have that works very very well:
GIGABYTE GA-EP45-UD3P LGA 775 Intel P45 ATX Intel Motherboard $130
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8300 $154
OCZ Gold 8GB (4 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 $183
SAPPHIRE 100283L Radeon HD 5770 (Juniper XT) 1GB 128-bit GDDR5 $175
SAMSUNG Spinpoint F3 HD103SJ 1TB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb $90
Antec Nine Hundred Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case $100
CORSAIR CMPSU-650TX 650W ATX12V $100
LITE-ON Black 24X DVD+R $32

Total: $964
It will run any 3d app out there great. I would start with that and see if you want quicker render times before adding a render box. That system is not bad at all when rendering.

For a render box I use the same thing as above except without the video card and a smaller case . Use anything you like there because it just needs to boot, the renderer is a network run application. About $700 per render box. If you need faster renders then add more boxes .
I use 8 boxes that gives me 32 cores rendering 24/7 without the workstation ever having to be occupied so I can do other things while they render.


Another thing to look for is old rack servers. You can sometimes find them cheap. Ones like these for $150 may not seem like a lot with only 2 cores and 2GB ram , but at that price you can connect 10 of them and have a damn good render farm.
http://www.weirdstuff.com/cgi-bin/item/62016
 
Last edited:
Snag a mobo like the Asus M4a79xTD Evo

Buy some Crucial DDR3 ECC RAMs

Cruise by the Guru3D forums and search for "Radeon Softmod FireGL"

They provide the necessary scripts and outline the necessary steps using RivaTuner to create a FireGL workstation card from a Radeon desktop card.

IIRC, the last time I stopped by they were tweaking 4870s with 64-bit OSs. SolidWorks seem to be one of the 'high-flyers' with great success --- maybe because of OpenGL versus D3D ??? ...





--
 
I will add that SolidWorks might be a different than what Modelworks uses in that most CAD software *can* beat the heck out of the hard drive channel. Think in terms of a multiply linked database which are what 3D mechanical CAD software are ... with a 3D GUI.

I am completely unfamiliar with all of Modelworks software so I cannot give even a half educated opinion.

About using a notebook with SolidWorks ... it happens and for "parts" it is no big deal. Even for very simple assemblies it is not much of an issue.

So what I am saying for large assemblies of multiple parts & sub-assemblies, SolidWorks will beat the heck out of the drive channel meaning it could be HDD access limited regardless of the CPU or RAM. The way it sounds tho is that you are quite aways from that. If/when you get there, then that would be a high class problem. My $.02
 
As far as specific part recommendations and price range, I didn't ask for any right now, because I'm probably a year away from building/buying such a system, just trying to get a general feel for types of components. Generally what's higher priority for a cpu: a high core count, large cache, or clock speed? Video card highest priorities: fast RAM, lots of RAM, OpenGL spec, etc.

I didn't want to seem to push those parts, but those are the types of parts you would be looking for. OpenGL is important... somewhat...

1. Really what is most important with procs can be different from processor to processor, but more cores, higher Ghz, and Big (diverse) caches are all important. Getting something with L2 and L3 cache is good.

2. Video would be the next step down from processor, but the direction things are heading in GPU computing seems to be "The Future" so these could easily swap anytime now. Something with a 256Bit controller and 1GB GDDR# is good. 128Bit seems fine for 512MB GDDR#.

3. High amount of ram (6GB-8GB)

4. Display. High pixel count (ex. 2560 x 1600), High contrast ratio, high dynamic contrast, High brightness.

4. PSU

5. Case

A lot about building a workstation is making sure there are no bottlenecks in performance to get the most out of your money. Nobody can really "give you a general feel for that", it requires expert advice, or vast knowledge of detailed specs, and experience with different specs.

Why are you getting a feel for things now...? new technology will be out in the next year anyway.


What would you think of a laptop like http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...&skuId=9718877 for under $1k?

Would either of these be as suitable (obviously replace Win7 HP w/ Win7 Pro)? Though weaker graphics, the Core i7 would win out for 3D rendering from what you've all told me.

Laptops aren't all that cost effective for what you want to do. They will likely overheat and wear out if you are rendering a lot (which you will be) and they are a ton more expensive.

I know you don't want to be pointed to product examples for some reason, but you are forcing me into saying this:

The i7 9xx series is a different chipset from the 6xx,7xx and 8xx. The 9xx is more powerful for 3D while the rest are better for gaming and a smaller, more compact chipset. I would actually get the Xeon Bloomfield instead of the i7, because the chipset is more optimized for workstation apps, and it is made from better materials (even though they are VERY similar). Both the i7 and Xeon 1366 boards support up to 24GB DDR3 1600Mhz, while (most of) the i7 1156 boards only support 12GB DDR3 1333Mhz.

You are also going to run into you hardware getting outdated faster in laptops, since you can't replace graphics and you'll probably want to update ram eventually as well. The expensive ones support up to 8GB 1066Mhz now, but manufacturers will sell you a board with 4GB with no further expandability available for the mid-grade ones.
 
Last edited:
I didn't want to seem to push those parts, but those are the types of parts you would be looking for. OpenGL is important... somewhat...

1. Really what is most important with procs can be different from processor to processor, but more cores, higher Ghz, and Big (diverse) caches are all important. Getting something with L2 and L3 cache is good.

2. Video would be the next step down from processor, but the direction things are heading in GPU computing seems to be "The Future" so these could easily swap anytime now. Something with a 256Bit controller and 1GB GDDR# is good. 128Bit seems fine for 512MB GDDR#.

3. High amount of ram (6GB-8GB)

4. Display. High pixel count (ex. 2560 x 1600), High contrast ratio, high dynamic contrast, High brightness.

4. PSU

5. Case

A lot about building a workstation is making sure there are no bottlenecks in performance to get the most out of your money. Nobody can really "give you a general feel for that", it requires expert advice, or vast knowledge of detailed specs, and experience with different specs.

Why are you getting a feel for things now...? new technology will be out in the next year anyway.

Sure there will be new cpu's, new gpu's, maybe even new combined cpu/gpu's by then, but the principles of the types of components (as you pointed out, high core count, high clock speed, big cache), shouldn't differ at all. As far why I'm looking into it now? Partly in case things "don't go as planned" and I end up jumping into this sooner than expected. But also, as an engineer, I'm just plain interested in the technology. Same reason I check out all those benchmarks for games I never intend to play. I just like knowing I guess.



Laptops aren't all that cost effective for what you want to do. They will likely overheat and wear out if you are rendering a lot (which you will be) and they are a ton more expensive.

I know you don't want to be pointed to product examples for some reason, but you are forcing me into saying this:

The i7 9xx series is a different chipset from the 6xx,7xx and 8xx. The 9xx is more powerful for 3D while the rest are better for gaming and a smaller, more compact chipset. I would actually get the Xeon Bloomfield instead of the i7, because the chipset is more optimized for workstation apps, and it is made from better materials (even though they are VERY similar). Both the i7 and Xeon 1366 boards support up to 24GB DDR3 1600Mhz, while (most of) the i7 1156 boards only support 12GB DDR3 1333Mhz.

You are also going to run into you hardware getting outdated faster in laptops, since you can't replace graphics and you'll probably want to update ram eventually as well. The expensive ones support up to 8GB 1066Mhz now, but manufacturers will sell you a board with 4GB with no further expandability available for the mid-grade ones.

I don't think it's really that much more expensive. If I can get a laptop today with an i7-720qm, 4GB of RAM, nVidia GT 330M for ~$1,000 what's the minimum spend on a similar desktop? I also wouldn't have to buy a second monitor with the laptop, so there's value added there as well. And portabilitiy of course.

The wear, and quicker replacement cycle is very valid and I'll have to consider that.
 
well, that is a mobile processor. They are in a completely different pricing than desktop ones. They are factory clocked lower and sometimes have less cache, and normally a lower frequency FSB. Why would your monitor situation be any different with a laptop? using your current one I suppose... I guess it is kind of a perk.
I could build an i5 like the one you posted a link to for ~ $750-$800, an i7 860 for ~$900. These of course are nearly 25% faster due to better cooling, and nearly 2x the core clock speed.
Don't get me wrong. I have a friend with the same sort of laptop. He loves it, but he also tends to have laptops go bad after about a year and a half because of the wear and tear these apps inflict.
Unless you move around a lot, go with a desktop. It will last longer and it will perform better.
 
I got a price for an i5 with 4GB DDR3 for >$700

You can get the i7 for $80 more

6GB ram would cost ~ $70 more

so between $800 and $900.
 
well, that is a mobile processor. They are in a completely different pricing than desktop ones. They are factory clocked lower and sometimes have less cache, and normally a lower frequency FSB. Why would your monitor situation be any different with a laptop? using your current one I suppose... I guess it is kind of a perk.
I could build an i5 like the one you posted a link to for ~ $750-$800, an i7 860 for ~$900. These of course are nearly 25% faster due to better cooling, and nearly 2x the core clock speed.
Don't get me wrong. I have a friend with the same sort of laptop. He loves it, but he also tends to have laptops go bad after about a year and a half because of the wear and tear these apps inflict.
Unless you move around a lot, go with a desktop. It will last longer and it will perform better.

Thank you for your input.

I already have one monitor. If I buy a laptop instead of a desktop, I can have dual monitors, without having to purchase another separately. Is an i5 desktop chip ~= i7 mobile chip? If so, I don't think $150-200 is an unreasonable premium for portability and the extra monitor. The wear issue is bothersome though and hard to ignore. I'll have to really see where I'm at when I'm ready to buy. You're right, that it will have to come down to how much I need/would like the mobility.

Again I don't want to put too much stock into today's parts because possible that Core i7 will be relatively old news and we'll be talking Sandy Bridge and Bulldozer by that time. But I do enjoy thinking about what I would if I were buying today (both from a practical standpoint, as well as satisfying the geek in me). I really appreciate your time laying this out for me.
 
the i5 quad core is an underclocked i7 8xx from what I understand. So yes and no. I would think performance would be approximately similar, but again, you sacrifice graphics processing power and Ram also.

Those prices I gave you were generated with 6GB in mind. While 4GB is enough, you are paying much more for less memory.

It is not a problem. I enjoy helping. I would still advise against a mobile machine. It is a great experience to build the machine you work on, and it makes you even happier knowing you built it to perform great. Even though you are kind of spooked by building (maybe), it will make you courageous to invest in later upgrades.
 
Back
Top