Looking for GPU+Monitor combo for new build 3D rendering/Graphic design system

0nard00

Reputable
Jan 15, 2015
386
0
4,790
Hi,

I'm still in the process of completing this build, but what you see on this list is what I already currently have up and running. I will be using this system mostly for 3D design and Graphic design. I'm about to purchase a Surface Book to stand as a remote sub for this system, so my budget will be considered greatly.

I've been looking at an EVGA 980 Ti FTW, but hasn't really seen it in stores, so I'm waiting.
What other GPU's should I go after? Pro cards or is a 980 Ti good enough?

Display wise, If I had the budget, I'd go for two 4Ks, but right now, I'm only after 1 of either a 1440p or 4K monitor. Any suggestions? IPS + 1440p minimum is my criteria for them.

Here's the build.
https://pcpartpicker.com/user/0nard00/saved/#view=Gj3J7P

This is my first Intel build, so I'm open to any suggestions. Shoot 'em in, I'll put them in a list of stuff I can replace or consider, since I'm still reselling my AMD parts.

I'm only really considering a GPU and Display upgrade atm. Nothing much else.

Thanks.
 

0nard00

Reputable
Jan 15, 2015
386
0
4,790
Someone? It'd be nice to prove this forum isn't all about gaming, and can actually answer something that doesn't involve gaming at all or something that's actually technical.
 

Sunny Kapoor

Distinguished
Jul 4, 2014
126
0
18,690
Which software are you using for 3D rendering?

Cut down that RAM, get these instead, will save you a lot of money.

G.Skill Sniper Gaming Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR3-1600 Memory

If you an afford get 2 x R9 390 AMD GPU or 1 x GTX 980 ti. That will make you future proof for 3D rendering.



 

MyHD4870x2Melted

Reputable
Oct 21, 2015
87
0
4,660
I also do 3D design, mostly CAD however. Back in my glory days of 3DS MAX I actually used a 32" 1080p TV because it was the same price as a 22" 1080p monitor.
Things you need to consider is what you are rendering for. Most content is currently at 1080p, do not know how long it will take before 4k is standard.
If you re doing precision work (Like I do) you want to be able to get down to pixl level and having a 4k at 20" may be more of a pain in the ars.
Larger monitors start approaching the price of a TV and TVs use HDMI you could just use that instead.
Some monitions, however, can do TRUE 120hz (or at least over 60hz) where as TVs can only do true 60hz, the 120hz is faked.
Most video content like movies are like 25 fps so true 120hz is useless for that media.

If you are doing CAD, a gaming card is not your best option. CAD cards are like the NVIDIA Quatro or the AMD FIRE PRO that can range from 150$ to $4000
Solidworks, a popular CAD program, is made to run off of workstation graphics so any graphics card is just icing on the cake.

Rendering 3D videos takes FOREVER and it's not your GPU that is doing most of the work. If you were looking to maximize your (non-real time) 3D rendering output you need a chip like the i7 extreme series.
 

Sunny Kapoor

Distinguished
Jul 4, 2014
126
0
18,690


I have quadro 4000 and rendering takes ages. It is great for handling millions of polygons in the viewport, horrible for 3D rendering in blender, octane, maybe even Maya.

So be sure what you want it for. For CAD it is awesome, for 3D animation software it is horrible.
 

MyHD4870x2Melted

Reputable
Oct 21, 2015
87
0
4,660
"I have quadro 4000 and rendering takes ages"
Yes, Quadro and Fire Pro are for CAD and render (real time) differently then a normal GPU
As for post rendering (creating 3D images or video) only a GPGPU should have any major effect on how it is rendered.
Post rendering is a CPU intensive task.
Best solutions for that are...

Better CPU! They have CPUs made for this kind of thing, but most are crazy expensive.
My first (business) rendering computer had 2 separate processors in it!

Offload work to a server. At work we have our CAD license server setup to do renders of 3D models.
Our computers can do quick renders but the high end stuff literally took 2 days for a 10 min full render
Our server can do the same render in about 5 mins.

Folding! If your a CPU guru, or just don't throw away anything, you probably have enough parts laying around to build a few more systems.
Get them up and running then network them together so you can use all the CPUs and GPGPUs to split the work load.
 

Sunny Kapoor

Distinguished
Jul 4, 2014
126
0
18,690
3D rendering now days are being supported by GPUs, the reason I am going to buy a 980 ti or 2 x R9 390 by next week.

Post processing - like editing in première or VFX effects in after effects doesn't depend on GPU but CPU and RAM.

I think this person already got a 980 ti, as he posted in another thread.

Let him respond.
 

0nard00

Reputable
Jan 15, 2015
386
0
4,790
I apologize. Didn't see this thread had replies. I'm currently using Maya and Nuke. I'm looking at some heavy works coming in soon, so I think a 980 Ti should do great.
The RAM is pass its 30-day return, I might be able to ask for iin-store credit, so I'll check. I think the 32GB is more future proof for me, since I also do Photo editing and graphic design. I've ran into quite a lot of issues when it comes to lack of RAM, so, I'd feel better having the 32gb for the next 5 or so years

CPU-wise, I went with the 5820K because it was on sale for 299. And really, the best bang for the back CPU I could find. The board, I'm still testing.

But, for the main question. I'm looking around for a 1440p or a 4K IPS monitor right now. The one's I have in mind are getting close to price comparison lately. I don't really see the need for SLI or XFiresetups right now, since I'm only doing student work types of projects.

A Quadro was an option before I got my 980 Ti, still is. But, will probably go after that at a higher end when I start doing work for VFX.
 

MyHD4870x2Melted

Reputable
Oct 21, 2015
87
0
4,660


KK, so film rendering for full length video! Gottcha!

Guessing your going to be rendering at 1080p like most media is now...
IMHO it might be better to go 1440p @60hz x 2 rather then 4k x1
reason would be work space. while 4k is more pixels, 2 monitors is a larger physical area.
Being over 1080 you can see your entire video plus your tools and have other programs opened in your 2nd windows.

If your rendering in 4K, you pretty much have to go 4k monitor but you still wont be able to see tools + your entire video on the desktop at one time. You also would have to re size your window to use 2 programs at once making it even more difficult or have to constantly window back and forth.

Let me know how that card works!
My 2 GTX 670s do not cut it for rendering video at the level I do at work.
Our server has a couple of Xeon E5-24s and it's rips through our rendering times.
If a 980ti can render as well as our server I might have to just kick myself and go pick one up so I can render at home.
I'm still gonna fold! You can't stop me!!!
 

0nard00

Reputable
Jan 15, 2015
386
0
4,790


I get exactly what you mean. It'd be nice to see a 1440p monitor that has no issues with a DP connection. And chances are, I'll be running into a 1440p monitor in a month that I can buy 2 for the price of one 4K.

I have tried out a 4K TV--- the scaling is God-awful, and I just can't see the popup screens. So, that might play into the decision.

I'll be looking into testing out a good chunk of video renderings and Maya renders this weekend. I'll keep this thread updated, see how the 980 Ti holds up. Right now, I'm just having issues streaming 8K videos on Youtube, which is probably a system inconsistency that I need to look into.

It's a great card. Can't complain--- but I've yet to push it to capacity.
 

Sunny Kapoor

Distinguished
Jul 4, 2014
126
0
18,690



Please let us know your 980 ti temps on full load? My quadro easily goes upto 92 degrees,

but I am writing on this thread ( with 32 tabs open in chrome) and with a blender render going on simultaneously on another monitor. That is the power of quadro. Maybe test your 980 ti on dual monitor and see how it works together :

rendering + photoshop

rendering + browsing

It starts hanging a bit when I do all three simultaneously.


The reason I am keeping quadro is for video editing and polygon handling in software like Vue where with eco system, polygons easily go in billions.

Go for a dual setup, 980 ti has options for triple monitor setup but then you will have less memory for rendering.

That is why I will keep Nvdia quadro for display device and use 2 x AMD R9 390 just for rendering. Complete different systems ( so no sharing of VRAM) and it will have 8 GB VRAM.
 

0nard00

Reputable
Jan 15, 2015
386
0
4,790
So, here's an update. I pushed the system to it's limit with real world use--- all at the same time. Temps stayed well below normal. The GPU stayed at 64-65, the RAM peaked at 17gb, rendering a 4K video into another 4K video, while recording in 4K using Geforce Ex. No issue.
It's just really that 8K viewing thing. I have no clue what's up.

But I think the system is great! Just need to figure out that one thing.

JUZgqyB.png

8dIEOFX.jpg
 

0nard00

Reputable
Jan 15, 2015
386
0
4,790


I borrowed one of 3D artist works that was very detailed and heavy, rendered it to around 200 frames. Took about an hour 5 mins exactly. I haven't asked how long it took him to render that, but, it went fast as well.
 

MyHD4870x2Melted

Reputable
Oct 21, 2015
87
0
4,660


That's pretty good FPM for a personal computer.
My workstation only gets about 1 frame per 5 mins without the server.
I was going to get a low end server chip and make a rendering box but your way might be cheaper.
Or... I wonder if installing a 980 in a low end server would boost performance, then I could add more card later...
Anywho, TYVM for sharing!
 

0nard00

Reputable
Jan 15, 2015
386
0
4,790


I have a friend who does design as well. He said he didn't notice the difference from a 6990 that he had compared to the 980. I think the "Ti" is where you actually break away from the mid to high-end gaming build, and into the server type sort of build.

I found the 5820K to be very efficient and quite the chip. Those 12 threads are a blessing. I would agree with anybody who says that it's the best bang for the buck workstation chip. I did that research well before buying, it proves well, and at $299... can't complain.

Glad I could share and insight.
You're very welcome!