Auto CAD, 3D, Sketchup and other Architecture Needs.

To start with, how many watts the PSU is has nothing to do with anything, aside from meeting the capacity requirements of whatever GPU you go with and whether or not anything will be overclocked. Pick a GPU first, then pick a PSU that meets the recommended requirements of the GPU card. Don't base decisions on wattage or 80plus bronze, silver or gold ratings. Base your decision on quality of the unit and known reliability. I recommend using a Tier 1 or Tier 2 unit of whatever the recommended capacity for the card you choose is, plus 100w, to ensure the unit runs cool and has a long reliable life.


PSU Tier list: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/id-2547993/psu-tier-list.html


Next, what GPU you pick is likely highly dependent on WHAT specific applications you will be likely to run. High end professional CAD and 3D rendering applications are often very specific about what instructions, cards and features they are compatible with. Most application manufacturers provide lists of cards that are compatible with their high end products, or what features need to be supported, such as CUDA or OpenGL, to be compatible with their software. Do you know what specific applications, and application versions you will be running?

Just about any higher tiered gaming card will support the features necessary for those applications. I think you're going to want to spend more than the W4100 runs though. I'd recommend a GTX 970 or R9 290x, both of which support OpenGL. You might be able to get by with a GTX 960 or R9 280x, but honestly, I'd want the bigger card. I think you're best bet is going with the GTX 970 or the W5100.

I think it would be fine, and it would allow you to get a higher end GPU.

What country are you in?

Gaming card would work better in these applications. CAD supports DX11, if there's anything else you use then look into their webpage. There are only a few applications (that are very expensive) that take advantage of the really high end workstation cards, today it's just not worth it, you'd have to spend a lot to match the performance of a gaming card. You won't have the reliability of those cards though, and "optimised" drivers, which is in my opinion, a scam--only part that seperates workstation from gaming line...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133586

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487130&cm_re=titan_x-_-14-487-130-_-Product

Yeah...

Actually, most workstations would have some form of Xeon, ECC memory AND a workstation card, but I agree, a high end gaming card will work fine, and as I checked the requirements of all those applications, would be supported just fine with a newer gaming card.

I had to edit a few words, but yeah. And the funny thing is, look at the specs of that M6000 and Titan X. It's just scary, I can understand that in the past, a workstation card would benefit you, but I really don't see that today. I have friends that still use 980 for semi professional/professional work, and I havent asked, but it wouldnt surprise me if they didnt need a 'high' end workstation card. As for ECC, what if they just blocked it, or how does that work? It seems like a small feature, not that useful, because gaming cards are very stable overall, normal RAM is stable too, or has that changed recently? I can only google this....

The M6000 and the Titan X use the same GPU (GM200). The difference is ECC memory and drivers. That's the only thing they can do to seperate the two, intentionally crippling the other cards performance.

There is many things that trigger a blue screen, without knowing what was running, or seeing the crash report, it's impossible to say. It's likely the hard drive or CPU.

Yeah, ECC memory, workstation cards and server/workstation processors are becoming largely unnecessary these days. Enthusiast and mainstream hardware have many if not all of the features baked into them that a lot of workstation-only hardware used to have.

The cards you are talking about are far outside the budget of the OP, and are probably even more so in his region.

Looking at that, then I'd suggest changing the Xeon processor to an i7-4790. Gigabyte H97-Gaming 3 motherboard. Any DDR3 1600mhz 2 x8GB memory made by Kingston, Corsair, G.Skill, Mushkin, Geil, or even maybe Patriot or PNY. 1TB or large hard drive made by Seagate or Western Digital. 250GB SSD made by Samsung (NOT the 840 EVO. The 850 EVO is ok though.) Crucial, Sandisk or Kingston (Last resort).

Whatever mid or full tower ATX case you like and can afford that's made by NZXT, Fractal Design, Corsair, Cooler Master, Phanteks, Rosewill, Thermaltake or Silverstone. I would avoid the very low end cases as they just don't have the features and quality you will want to have. If it's less than 40.00 US it probably sucks. Lower end models that might be good include the Thermaltake Versa H25, Corsair 200R, NZXT Source 210 or 220, Fractal Design Core 3000, Silverstone SST-RL01B-W-USB3.0, Thermaltake Core V31. I'd avoid other brands like Raidmax.

Any aftermarket GTX 970 that has two fans, you don't want a reference model that's enclosed and has a single fan, if you can avoid it, but that might be ok if you can get one for enough of a price difference from an aftermarket version to make it worth it. The R9 290x would be the other card I'd look at. If those are too expensive, then you can consider the GTX 960 and R9 280x.

I went off topic too much. Anyways. Excellent build. I would personally not buy an expensive cooler. What makes one silent is typically the fan speed. If you don't want an ssd then you have money for something else.

Here is fine. Ask anything you like. Personally, for what you plan to do, an SSD should be an ESSENTIAL part of the build. Graphics, CAD and 3D applications will ALL benefit from the much faster read and write speeds. You want the OS installed on the SSD, which has the added benefit of increasing performance speeds for the operating system as well as applications. Reading and writing of files from the SSD will also be faster. Even if those files are stored on a secondary hard drive, the temporary and scratch files that are created while working on the project will be copied to the HDD faster when saving them.

If you were just gaming, an SSD wouldn't offer much benefit. For what you plan to do, it offers a terrific bump in application speeds. You can of course do without an SSD if necessary, it's just a lot more efficient to have one on a high end, or any machine.


If you want to have the unit be relatively quiet, which I would, then using a good aftermarket cooler is also essential. Stock coolers are smaller, generally 92mm vs 120 or 140mm, and must run at much faster speeds to provide the same cooling that a larger cooler can provide at low RPM without much effort at all. From what I see available on those sites, my recommendations would be, in order, the Nocta NH-U14S. Noctua NH-U12S, Scythe Mugen, Thermalright True spirit 120 and Cooler Master Hyper 212X Turbo. If the Cryorig H7 was available to you, that would be a great budget choice with very good performance, followed by the old faithful CM Hyper 212 EVO, but I don't see either of those on those sites.

I'd just start out with the stock cooler, and if it seems a bit too loud, you can always add an aftermarket cooler at any later date.

These days, in most cases, the requirements necessary for a good gaming machine are almost identical to those required for a good graphics, video or 3D rendering machine. GPU cards use similar platforms and interfaces for various kinds of rendering as well as gaming and often they're the same.

Most expensive RAM either has lower latency, which translates to somewhat faster speeds but is not entirely noticeable to the average person. You would probably never notice the difference between a CL9 and CL10 latency, except in benchmarks, but if given a choice between two otherwise identical modules that are similar in price, you should go with the model that has the lower latency.

Some high end RAM have other features like lighting, use better chips or have taller heat sinks. Mostly the very high end RAM is for enthusiasts that intend to be overclocking the RAM. Any entry or mid level module made by Corsair, G.Skill, Mushkin, Kingston, Crucial, Samsung or IBM is likely to be just as good for the average user as a high end unit would be. Nearly all RAM has a lifetime warranty anyhow, so choose a module with the fastest speed, lowest latency and with a trusted name, for the lowest price at the time.

The faster the speed, 1600mhz, 1866mhz, 2133mhz, 2400mhz, etc., the higher the average latency is likely to be but the speed somewhat balances out the faster latency, and visa versa. A 1600mhz module with a CL7 latency is likely to be just as fast as an 1866mhz module with a CL9 latency.


For motherboards, just refer to this list as it's about as accurate as you can expect any Tier list to be:

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-2383150/motherboard-tier-list.html

For LGA 1150 processors like the i5-4690, i5-4690k, i7-4790 and i7-4790k, the H97 boards which do not support overclocking of those chips, don't allow SLI on most models, and only allow x4 speeds on the second card for crossfire configurations, and the Z97 boards which allow at least x8 speed son both cards, overclocking and RAM speeds faster than 1600mhz which the H97 boards do not, are the only two chipsets you should even really be considering.

I think this build is just fine. I see no issues at all with it. Very good in fact.