Entry level workstation need help

Lukaszz,

As far as I am aware, the parts in your list should make a very good system for 3D CAD- very good choices. The ASUS WS series motherboards have a very good reputation- only be very careful as regards the pins when installing the CPU.

My only question is the choice of the GTX 660. This is very fast graphics card and listed on the Autodesk hardware site as acceptable for 3ds Max:

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/syscert?siteID=123112&id=18844534&results=1&stype=graphic&product_group=6&release=2014&os=32768&manuf=all&opt=0

> but the GTX is not "Certified' or "Recommended'. I don't know the details, but if you are use a GPU that is not certified, Autodesk seems to start accusing the graphics card very quickly when there problems running the program. This is especially true when the programs in question uses viewports- 3Ds Max and Maya and there are viewport running troubles. Note the list for the Autodesk Infrastructure Design Suite 2014:

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/syscert?siteID=123112&id=18844534&results=1&stype=graphic&suite_group=109&release=2014&edition=2&os=32768&manuf=all&opt=0

- in which no GTX is listed at all.

My suggestion is to review each program that you are or may in future use and to be safe, if any possible program does not list GTX's as acceptable, consider choosing a workstation GPU with a a good cost / performance ratio. One of the best I've found in that regards is the AMD V4900 :

1GB AMD FirePro V4900, PCIe 2.1 (x16), 128 Bit GDDR5, 2x DisplayPort/ Dual Link DVI-I, Eyefinity, Retail > £119.39 (Scan UK)

I revived an old Dell Precision 390 and changing the Quadro FX 1700 for a V4900 changed the 3D score on Passmark Performance Test from 283 to 1341. The Quadro FX 4800 (1.5GB, $1,300) in a Dell Precision T5400 scores only 1097. A GTX 660 will produce a score of perhaps 3500, but the question is reliability running complex 3D CAD where a crash and an hour's lost work can cost more that than GPU value.

Another tactic would be to consider a used Quadro K4000 (3GB). As there is the new, superb Quadro K4200 (4GB), the prices for used K400's are dropping rapidly. If you can buy from Ebay US, these are selling for as little as $400 now. I've had 8 used Quadros since 2003 and never a failure- they're made to run full bore all the time.

I'll also make my semi-standard suggestion to consider buying a used Dell Precision T7500. These are beautifully constructed, purpose-designed for your uses, amazingly expandable- imagine having potentially dual 6-core CPU's, 192GB of RAM, two Quadros with a total of 24GB of RAM , two 1TB SSD's in RAID 0 and five 4TB HD's in a RAID 1+0. For example:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Dell-Precision-T7500-2-x-Intel-Xeon-X5680-6-Core-48GB-RAM-1TB-NVidia-Quadro-5000-/131248820397?pt=DE_Technik_Computer_Peripherieger%C3%A4te_PC_Systeme&hash=item1e8f0a10ad&nma=true&si=rfsg3ZI3Yxwp2noWzp83G7P8HqU%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

> a completed listing for a T7500 with dual Xeon X5680 6-cores at 3.33 /3.6GHZ, 48GB RAM, and a Quadro 5000 for a bit over £1100. Importantly, this saves researching, ordering, assembling, configuring, testing, and problem solving on a new system. You save days of time and possible frustration, getting back to work in a matter of hours. And then there's those 12 cores / 24 threads for brilliantly fast rendering. You might check German Ebay too as there are often more T7500 listings than the UK:

http://www.ebay.de/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=T7500+x5680&LH_Complete=1&rt=nc

(Completed listings)

these are somewhat above your budget, but with a single x5680, dual 4 core and/'or slower CPU's the prices can be quite reasonable.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

HP z420 (2014) > Xeon E5-1620 quad core @ 3.6 / 3.8GHz > 24GB DDR3 ECC 1600 RAM > Quadro 4000 (2GB)> Samsung 840 SSD 250GB /Western Digital Black WD1003FZEX 1TB> M-Audio 192 sound card > AE3000 USB WiFi > HP 2711X, 27" 1920 X 1080 > Windows 7 Ultimate 64 >[Passmark system rating = 3923, CPU= 9223/ 2D= 839 / 3D=2048]

Dell Precision T5400 (2008) > 2X Xeon X5460 quad core @3.16GHz > 16GB DDR2 ECC 667> Quadro FX 4800 (1.5GB) > WD RE4 500GB / Seagate Barracuda 500GB > M-Audio 2496 Sound Card / Linksys 600N WiFi > Dell 24" and Dell 19" LCD > Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit > [Passmark system rating = 1859, CPU = 8528 / 2D= 512 / 3D=1097]

Dell Precision 390 (2005) Xeon x3230 quad core @ 2.67GHz > 6 GB DDR2 ECC 667 > Firepro V4900 (1GB)> 2X WD 320GB > 2X Dell 19" LCD > Windows 7 Professional 64-bit [Passmark system rating = 1431, CPU = 3642 / 2D= 433 / 3D=1341]

Dell Dimension E520 (2006) Core2 Duo E6700 dual core @2.66GHz > 4GB DDR2 667 > GeForce GT440 (1GB GDDR5) > 2X Dell 19" LCD > Windows 7 Professional 64-bit [Passmark system rating = 1219, CPU = 2024 / 2D= 457 / 3D=978]

2D, 3D CAD, Image Processing, Rendering, Text > Architecture, industrial design, graphic design, written projects

Lukaszz,

Yes, overall, your component selections seem to be very good and my only question is regarding the GPU. I emphasize question because many workstation user successfully use GTX or HD Radeon cards and they are much less expensive and have higher 3D performance, at least in terms of speed. I think of Quadro / Firepro as image quality cards and GTX and Radeon as image speed orientated. The workstation drivers allow higher anti-aliasing, better color matching, more stable viewports, and so on. As time goes on, more worstation programs use OpenGL and unless you're designing/engineering very complex,large assemblies- whole aircraft or factories, or extremely large buildings, the consumer /gaming awards are probably fine. My experience though was that I tried a GTX 285 and while the 2D drafting was fine, the 3D modeling had too much aliasing- jagged lines- and I was never able to have a completely artifact-free rendering. The aliasing was actually the worse problem because I sometimes couldn't snap to the same point on curved surfaces and occasionally, concentric circles had different axes. After three months, I went back to Quadros.

My preference for overall, long-term use is to use workstation cards and while Quadro drivers are much better than Firepro, the Firepro cards have better performance for the price. Another fuss! I don't think of the V4900 as an entry level card as the benchmark performance is as good or better than a Quadro 2000, though not the K2000. The Quadro K600 is, I think very good as a 2D CAD or server monitor but not acceptable for 3D CAD use.

I use a Quadro 4000 and this is a very good card, but it does tend to run quite hot in rendering as it;'s a a single height card. I'm now sometimes seeing Quadro 5000's (2.5GB) and which are double height and cooler -running for reasonable prices to the point where higher priced used 4000's cost more than the lower 5000's. If you're patient you may find it's in your budget. The 5000 is a very good performing card, with 3D benchmarks about 30% higher than Quadro 4000. Another one to look at is the Firepro W5000 which can produce 3D scores higher than the Quadro K4000. On US Ebay, I recently saw a number of W5000's selling under $200 and even a "new other" for $180.

I understand completely about buying a used system, the parts can be one or two generations past and these systems do always need something changed, but on the other side, they are extremely well-made and designed for very long continuous use, plus can often be useful immediately.

Keep in mind that a T7500 with dual Xeon X5680's and a Quadro 5000 cost new over $12,000 three-four years ago. These are economically amazing purchases. I bought a Precision T5400 with a single X5460, 4GB or RAM and a Quadro FX580 (512MB) for $500, used it for six months, added as 2nd four core 3.2GHz Xeon X5460 for $150- it cost $1,600 new-,12GB RAM, a Quadro FX4800 (purchased for $150, new $1,300), changed to a new WD RE4 500GB Enterprise drive, Windows 7 Ultimate, for a total cost of about $1000. It has been run since 2010 over 12,000 hours (based on the HD statistics) with no failures and the value today is still almost $900- that's about $2 per month and less than 1 cent /hour- almost cost free! But, yes OK, it's used, obsolete technology, and there are no guarantees.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

You'll save money by assembling the parts yourself.