Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Xeon or i7 for 3D Rendering?

Tags:
  • Intel i7
  • Autodesk
  • CPUs
  • Rendering
  • Xeon
  • 3D
Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 1, 2014 4:15:38 PM

I am building a completely new system for 3D Design/Animation and rendering. Programs that will be used will be Autodesk 3DSMax/Maya, ZBrush, Realflow as well as some 2D programs such as Photoshop. The question I have is whether or not it is beneficial to invest money into an Xeon or just stick with a standard i7 and overclock it for Rendering in autodesk maya. As far as I know, rendering in autodesk maya performs better when using the GPU than the CPU but does anyone know if its still beneficial to have a very strong CPU or one with many threads or is it overkill? The other reason I may want to go for the Xeon is that they support ECC RAM which may be beneficial for long renders as there is a less of a chance for it to error, however ECC RAM is slightly slower I think.

What do you guys think? I will be dependent on this machine for many years as it is what will allow me to work and do my job, so I want something that will last a long while.

More about : xeon rendering

a b à CPUs
July 1, 2014 4:17:19 PM

Altiris said:
I am building a completely new system for 3D Design/Animation and rendering. Programs that will be used will be Autodesk 3DSMax/Maya, ZBrush, Realflow as well as some 2D programs such as Photoshop. The question I have is whether or not it is beneficial to invest money into an Xeon or just stick with a standard i7 and overclock it for Rendering in autodesk maya. As far as I know, rendering in autodesk maya performs better when using the GPU than the CPU but does anyone know if its still beneficial to have a very strong CPU or one with many threads or is it overkill? The other reason I may want to go for the Xeon is that they support ECC RAM which may be beneficial for long renders as there is a less of a chance for it to error, however ECC RAM is slightly slower I think.

What do you guys think? I will be dependent on this machine for many years as it is what will allow me to work and do my job, so I want something that will last a long while.


The 4790K has an advantage because it can be overclocked, but 3D Rendering is mostly GPU dependent.
m
0
l
a c 816 à CPUs
July 1, 2014 4:24:31 PM

Buy an E3 1231v3 for i7 4770 performance, and use money saved towards GPU.
m
0
l
Related resources
July 1, 2014 4:46:05 PM

Alright so I have two different opinions now. One says to get the 4790k and someone else says to get an E3 1231v3. If I get the i7 I will in fact be overclocking it so please take that into consideration. Although one did say that rendering is dependant on GPU so should I put more money towards the GPU over the CPU?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 1, 2014 4:47:42 PM

Altiris said:
Alright so I have two different opinions now. One says to get the 4790k and someone else says to get an E3 1231v3. If I get the i7 I will in fact be overclocking it so please take that into consideration.


Because the Xeon E3 1230 v3 cannot overclock and is slower than a stock 4770.
m
0
l
a c 816 à CPUs
July 1, 2014 4:48:12 PM

From what I understand, the GPU matters more for you. Take the money saved and spend it where you need it most. There is nothing a 1231v3 cannot handle. It is essentially an i7 4770 without IGP. ;) 
m
0
l
a c 816 à CPUs
July 1, 2014 4:49:09 PM

Andrew Buck said:
Altiris said:
Alright so I have two different opinions now. One says to get the 4790k and someone else says to get an E3 1231v3. If I get the i7 I will in fact be overclocking it so please take that into consideration.


Because the Xeon E3 1230 v3 cannot overclock and is slower than a stock 4770.


1231v3 not 1230v3. ;)  1231v3 is a Haswell refresh with the same clock speed as an i7 4770. Not that you would ever be able to tell the difference with the 100mhz slower 1230v3. The 1231v3 is going for the same price now as the 1230v3. Free 100mhz boost and better TIM, so cooler running chip.

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=E3-1231V3B
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 1, 2014 4:53:33 PM

logainofhades said:
Andrew Buck said:
Altiris said:
Alright so I have two different opinions now. One says to get the 4790k and someone else says to get an E3 1231v3. If I get the i7 I will in fact be overclocking it so please take that into consideration.


Because the Xeon E3 1230 v3 cannot overclock and is slower than a stock 4770.


1231v3 not 1230v3. ;)  1231v3 is a Haswell refresh with the same clock speed as an i7 4770. Not that you would ever be able to tell the difference with the 100mhz slower 1230v3. The 1231v3 is going for the same price now as the 1230v3. Free 100mhz boost and better TIM, so cooler running chip.

http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php?name=E3-1231V3B


Sorry, thought you typed the 1230 v3. Yes, but he specified that he will be overclocking with the i7.
m
0
l
a c 816 à CPUs
July 1, 2014 4:56:35 PM

Which is totally unnecessary if GPU does in fact matter more. I believe it does, especially for Cad type programs. Use the money saved towards a decent workstation GPU.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 1, 2014 4:58:48 PM

logainofhades said:
Which is totally unnecessary if GPU does in fact matter more. I believe it does, especially for Cad type programs. Use the money saved towards a decent workstation GPU.


I agree, but $100 won't do much.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 1, 2014 5:01:04 PM

if money doesn't matter, then the I7 will be quicker than the Xeon E3 when o/c'd because you can't o/c the E3. However for your application, the GPU is more important. If money matters, get the Xeon and a better GPU.
m
0
l
a c 816 à CPUs
July 1, 2014 5:01:23 PM

I am not overly familiar with workstation cards, but in desktop gpu's, $100 is a lot.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 1, 2014 5:25:25 PM

logainofhades said:
I am not overly familiar with workstation cards, but in desktop gpu's, $100 is a lot.


Workstation GPUs basically go like this: $100 for the basic card equal to probably a Gt 630 Desktop GPU in gaming performance, $400 for the decent GPU equal to maybe a Radeon HD 7770 in gaming Performance, $1000 card that is equal to maybe an R9 280, $3000 GPU equal to a GTX 770, and finally, a $4850 GPU equal to a GTX 780, all progressing very high in CAD rendering and performance.
m
0
l
a c 816 à CPUs
July 1, 2014 5:27:18 PM

So probably best to just go with an R9 290 and be done with it, then. :lol:  At least, hardware wise, AMD doesn't gimp compute performance like Nvidia does on their graphics cards.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 1, 2014 5:36:56 PM

logainofhades said:
So probably best to just go with an R9 290 and be done with it, then. :lol:  At least, hardware wise, AMD doesn't gimp compute performance like Nvidia does on their graphics cards.


Well, the $100 GPU is probably equal to an R9 270X in animation, the $400 is equal to 2 GTX 780s in SLI, the $1000 is equal to 3 780 Ti's in SLI, the $3000 is equal to 8 (not possible, but how the performance would be) 780 Tis in SLI, the $4850 is equal to around 12 780 Tis in SLI in terms of CUDA applications and 3D Design.
m
0
l
July 1, 2014 6:22:48 PM

Sorry for not replying at all I was away. Money does matter but I have a kind of mid-range/high budget of $800 but of course I will go with the option that I can save the most money. So, I will try going with the Xeon chip you suggested and see how that goes. As far as GPU goes, I wont be getting the quadro GPUs because I have seen GTX cards that have performed variably well and are a lot cheaper. I have never heard of nvidia gimping their card performance, the extra CUDAs or whatever are apparently good for rendering so I will stick with nvidia.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 1, 2014 6:25:48 PM

Altiris said:
Sorry for not replying at all I was away. Money does matter but I have a kind of mid-range/high budget of $800 but of course I will go with the option that I can save the most money. So, I will try going with the Xeon chip you suggested and see how that goes. As far as GPU goes, I wont be getting the quadro GPUs because I have seen GTX cards that have performed variably well and are a lot cheaper. I have never heard of nvidia gimping their card performance, the extra CUDAs or whatever are apparently good for rendering so I will stick with nvidia.


I would either go with a $400 Quadro 4000 or a $500 GTX 780 for that build and a Xeon E3-1231v3.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 1, 2014 6:41:37 PM

Altiris said:
Okay I dont have the money for either of those cards. I was thinking of going with this GTX 750TI http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... for $160.


That wouldn't do you much for rendering, I would wait and save up for a GTX Titan Black or Quadro. You would see a large performance improvement.
m
0
l
July 1, 2014 7:49:08 PM

I thought it would be good enough for rendering. Theres no way I can save up for a titan or would even spend money on a titan, I am sorry but $1k on a video card is kind of silly, or no?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 1, 2014 7:50:49 PM

Altiris said:
I thought it would be good enough for rendering. Theres no way I can save up for a titan or would even spend money on a titan, I am sorry but $1k on a video card is kind of silly, or no?


Just wait until somebody tells you to drop $5K on a Quadro K6000. The 750 Ti isn't good for 3D modeling and CAD applications. I would get at least a GTX 770.
m
0
l
July 1, 2014 8:02:58 PM

Andrew Buck said:
Altiris said:
I thought it would be good enough for rendering. Theres no way I can save up for a titan or would even spend money on a titan, I am sorry but $1k on a video card is kind of silly, or no?


Just wait until somebody tells you to drop $5K on a Quadro K6000. The 750 Ti isn't good for 3D modeling and CAD applications. I would get at least a GTX 770.

Well I wont be doing anything in Autocad. Only Autodesk maya and I heard they have CUDA support. However, what about AMD? My friend's macbook pro has an AMD radeon 6xxxm series and it performs rather well with it so would AMD be a good option?

m
0
l
July 1, 2014 8:04:56 PM

Wait a second, will this Xeon processor I am using be compatible with any LGA 1150 motherboard? I am assuming it is.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 1, 2014 8:05:39 PM

Altiris said:
Andrew Buck said:
Altiris said:
I thought it would be good enough for rendering. Theres no way I can save up for a titan or would even spend money on a titan, I am sorry but $1k on a video card is kind of silly, or no?


Just wait until somebody tells you to drop $5K on a Quadro K6000. The 750 Ti isn't good for 3D modeling and CAD applications. I would get at least a GTX 770.

Well I wont be doing anything in Autocad. Only Autodesk maya and I heard they have CUDA support. However, what about AMD? My friend's macbook pro has an AMD radeon 6xxxm series and it performs rather well with it so would AMD be a good option?



6000M series isn't great, but it is decent in gaming. It isn't good for CUDA, because it doesn't have CUDA cores.
m
0
l
July 1, 2014 8:14:23 PM

Andrew Buck said:
Altiris said:
Andrew Buck said:
Altiris said:
I thought it would be good enough for rendering. Theres no way I can save up for a titan or would even spend money on a titan, I am sorry but $1k on a video card is kind of silly, or no?


Just wait until somebody tells you to drop $5K on a Quadro K6000. The 750 Ti isn't good for 3D modeling and CAD applications. I would get at least a GTX 770.

Well I wont be doing anything in Autocad. Only Autodesk maya and I heard they have CUDA support. However, what about AMD? My friend's macbook pro has an AMD radeon 6xxxm series and it performs rather well with it so would AMD be a good option?



6000M series isn't great, but it is decent in gaming. It isn't good for CUDA, because it doesn't have CUDA cores.

So stick with Nvidia? I dont know because I have been reading and people are saying that on the GTX cards, even though they have more CUDA cores than some of the Quadro cards their drivers limit their performance or Nvidia has crippled them or something. Then people say that with their AMD cards, or the R9 290 for example it works just fine. I find this very confusing. So, stick with Nvidia yes?
m
0
l
a c 816 à CPUs
July 1, 2014 8:15:45 PM

Altiris said:
Wait a second, will this Xeon processor I am using be compatible with any LGA 1150 motherboard? I am assuming it is.


I would pair it up with an H97 pro4, for a decent, yet fairly inexpensive motherboard.
m
0
l
July 1, 2014 8:25:52 PM

logainofhades said:
Altiris said:
Wait a second, will this Xeon processor I am using be compatible with any LGA 1150 motherboard? I am assuming it is.


I would pair it up with an H97 pro4, for a decent, yet fairly inexpensive motherboard.

Ive selected this motherboard http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... it is an H87 and $99 am I overpaying/ is there something better out there? I do plan to be able to overclock in the future so maybe I should rule this out....
Also, I plan to play a few games on this system so I will rule out the quadro as they arent good with gaming.

EDIT: Changed to this motherboard http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 1, 2014 8:26:00 PM

Yes. Stick with a GTX 770.
m
0
l
a c 816 à CPUs
July 1, 2014 8:36:06 PM

I would probably go with this board. You get support for M.2 SSD's, when they become more widely available, plus has a setting that will allow you to run all cores at the max turbo setting. :D  You cannot overclock a Xeon. The board does have non Z overclocking, if you decided to later drop a k series i7 into the board though.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 1, 2014 8:43:29 PM

Very true. Good option there.
m
0
l
July 1, 2014 8:43:55 PM

Andrew Buck said:
Yes. Stick with a GTX 770.

I really can't afford any GPU over $160-190...I can save up for it but it would take months. Is there anything else just as good?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 1, 2014 8:46:11 PM

Then the 750 Ti is your best bet, maybe the R9 270X.
m
0
l
a c 816 à CPUs
July 1, 2014 9:03:01 PM

Altiris said:
Andrew Buck said:
Yes. Stick with a GTX 770.

I really can't afford any GPU over $160-190...I can save up for it but it would take months. Is there anything else just as good?


A GTX 660 from Nvidia, or an R9 270/270x from AMD. Research the programs you intend to use, and see which is better for them.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 2, 2014 6:07:50 AM

Forgot about that GPU, the GTX 660 would be best for CUDA applications, the AMD card would be a little bit better at 3D Rendering.
m
0
l
July 2, 2014 10:44:08 AM

Andrew Buck said:
Forgot about that GPU, the GTX 660 would be best for CUDA applications, the AMD card would be a little bit better at 3D Rendering.

I added in a GTX 660 and my entire build is $866 which I think is a over my budget but I think that is fine.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 2, 2014 10:51:33 AM

Altiris said:
Andrew Buck said:
Forgot about that GPU, the GTX 660 would be best for CUDA applications, the AMD card would be a little bit better at 3D Rendering.

I added in a GTX 660 and my entire build is $866 which I think is a over my budget but I think that is fine.


Alright, you will enjoy it, good luck and have fun! :D 
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 2, 2014 12:17:34 PM

an amd radeon gpu is what you want for autodesk or maya.... just get the e3-1230v3 for around $250 and look at the amd radeon benchmarks for gpu acceleration for those apps. eec ram is very overrated unless you are doing professional rendering where every single pixel needs to be perfect or you loose your job. on top of that, only firepros/quadros have eec vram and since the gpu will be doing the work for you, that is where you would "want" the error correction if you are in a high end professional atmosphere. if this is just for fun and for family/friends personal use, you would never notice the difference with error correction unless you are trying to render movie quality graphics.
m
0
l
!