Picking the best 3D rendering computer/server

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
L

Lechnology

Honorable
Mar 27, 2012
19
0
10,510
I'm trying to decide on a server that I can use as part of my 3D render farm. I want to add virtualization so that I have, say 4 VMs running on the machine, reducing my render time. A server would fit this need, if it is built for it. The server has to be in the same room I'm in so it can't be a rack server (and I'm not skilled enough to build my own quiet 4U rack server) so I have to go with a tower server.

The specs I'm looking for:
Motherboard: 2-4 socket, RAID support.
CPU: i7-equivalent Xeon hex core, 2.5+GHz
RAM: 24+ GB
HDD: 4+ bays, 500+ GB each, RAID
GPU: Optional, since I'm not looking for a gaming computer, but I heard it helps, so 2GB+

Price: The ones I've narrowed down to were between $500-$1000
I found some used servers from eBay and Amazon that meet my specs, but might not do what I want it to do.

On Reddit, I'm told these are old data servers and not geared towards utilizing graphics cards.

I'm looking for recommendations on what model to look for in terms of tower servers for my render farm.
 
Solution
bambiboom


Lechnology,

I've had continual debates about CPU and GPU rendering, trying both. My general conclusion is that CPU rendering presents superior results for sinlge images while GPU rendering is the choice for animation /video processing.

Becuase of the demands of 3D modeling, since 2012, I've had a single, higher clock speed 4 or 6-core CPU system for modeling and a separate dual CPU system fro rendering. The dedicated rendering systems have been:

Dell Precision T5400...
Sort by date Sort by votes
L

Lechnology

Honorable
Mar 27, 2012
19
0
10,510
I'm looking at Blender. But there's other 3D software I might use.

Its optimal requirement is:
64-bit eight core CPU
16 GB RAM
Two full HD displays with 24 bit color
Three button mouse and graphics tablet
Dual OpenGL 3.2 compatible graphics cards with 4 GB RAM

I've based my specs on its recommended requirements for 4 VMs, which would be 2 VMs for the optimal:
64-bit quad core CPU
8 GB RAM
Full HD display with 24 bit color
Three button mouse
OpenGL 3.2 compatible graphics with 2 GB RAM
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
J

jtabb1256

Honorable
Jan 4, 2014
659
0
11,360
Looking at this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNwk0DEKPc8
and this: http://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/46813/dual-xeon-vs-high-end-gpu-for-cycles-rendering

It seems that good gpus could make a tremendous difference. Definitely worth looking into GPU rendering. I know that rendering in sony vegas pro with CPU gives much better quality than rendering with GPU, so that's also something to consider. Not sure how CPU / GPU rendering affects the quality in blender.

Another video showing GPUs being waaay faster than CPU:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atdcvMA0ULg

It seems that you can add more samples to make up for any loss in quality by the GPU rendering and still be much faster than CPU rendering with fewer samples (waaay faster if using the same number).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
L

Lechnology

Honorable
Mar 27, 2012
19
0
10,510
Yes, GPU does help. Given this, there's a lot of options out there, but different people, from sellers to redditors, have stated that they either don't know if these options I have listed work or that they're not configured for rendering.

Right now, I've been shown the fast and fuel efficient cars, but there's no test drive option to know if it's the car I want.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
k1114

k1114

Titan
May 2, 2010
14,240
93
75,540
There's no such thing as "not configured for rendering" and they're all mid towers that accept full sized gpus. Simply more performance renders faster. The t5500 is a favorite because of its popularity in commercial use so now there are loads of them on the used market for sell as companies need to update often. Depending on the specs and price, you might be able to find better. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Dell-Precision-T5500-2x-Xeon-X5675-3-06ghz-Hex-Core-72gb-100gb-SSD-2Tb-Win7-64-/232184467186
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
J

jtabb1256

Honorable
Jan 4, 2014
659
0
11,360


Good idea on that one. Lechnology, it's not hard to put a GPU into a system like that. (As long as the PSU is powerful enough, which we could probably figure out for you.)

I'd recommend getting a GTX 1080 if you can afford it and pair it with a system like k1114 recommended.

This is a type of "test drive". Look at how this guy benchmarked his system.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0pEscjbXv0

You could do the same with your current system and see the difference. Or when you find a computer you think is a good deal, just look up "Radeon__ or GTX __ Blender benchmark" Or "I7 XXXX or Xeon XXXX" Blender benchmark.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
L

Lechnology

Honorable
Mar 27, 2012
19
0
10,510
Essentially, the sellers are more familiar with data servers than anything else so they couldn't give me a good answer. The T5500 has been my main focus, thus far.

Assuming T5500 can support it, I'll look into the GTX 1080. Otherwise, maybe a Quadro
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
bambiboom

bambiboom

Splendid
Apr 7, 2012
2,462
5
21,965


Lechnology,

I've had continual debates about CPU and GPU rendering, trying both. My general conclusion is that CPU rendering presents superior results for sinlge images while GPU rendering is the choice for animation /video processing.

Becuase of the demands of 3D modeling, since 2012, I've had a single, higher clock speed 4 or 6-core CPU system for modeling and a separate dual CPU system fro rendering. The dedicated rendering systems have been:

Dell Precision T5400 (2008) > 2X Xeon X5460 quad core @3.16GHz > 16GB DDR2 667 ECC> Quadro FX 4800 (1.5GB) > WD RE4 500GB / Seagate Barracuda 500GB > M-Audio 2496 Sound Card / Linksys WMP600N WiFi > HP 2711X, 27" 1920 X 1080 and Dell 19" LCD > Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit >
[ Passmark system Rating = 1853, CPU = 8626 / 2D= 520 / 3D=1097 Mem= 736, Disk= 901]
[Cinebench 11.5 CPU=7.54 OpenGL = 51.89 fps] 10.24.15

Dell Precision T5500 (2011) (Revised) > 2X Xeon X5680 (6-core @ 3.33 / 3.6GHz), 48GB DDR3 1333 ECC Reg. > Quadro K2200 (4GB ) > PERC H310 / Samsung 840 250GB / WD RE4 Enterprise 1TB > M-Audio 192 sound card > Logitech z313 > 875W PSU > Windows 7 Professional 64> HP 2711x (27", 1920 X 1080)
[ Passmark system rating = 3844 > CPU = 15047 / 2D= 662 / 3D= 3550 / Mem= 1785 / Disk= 2649] (12.30.15)

HP z620 (2012) (Rev 3) 2X Xeon E5-2690 (8-core @ 2.9 / 3.8GHz) / 64GB DDR3-1600 ECC reg) / Quadro K2200 (4GB) + Tesla M2090 (6GB) / HP Z Turbo Drive (256GB) + Seagate Constellation ES.3 (1TB) / Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium PCIe sound card / 800W / Windows 7 Professional 64-bit > Logitech z313 2.1 speakers > HP 2711x (27" 1980 X 1080)
[ Passmark System Rating= 5675 / CPU= 22625 / 2D= 815 / 3D = 3580 / Mem = 2522 / Disk = 12640 ] 9.25.16
[ Cinebench R15: OpenGL= 119.23 fps / CPU = 2209 cb / Single core 130 cb / MP Ratio 16.84x] 10.31.16

Each system was substantially revised.

All of the above system as was configured to accommodate both CPU and as time went on, GPU rendering. Having a versatile system is key and as the modeling function is separate, hte CPU's can have more cores at a lower clock speed.

As much as I'm a big fan of LGA1366 and the Precision T5500 has been one of the best systems I've had- it's career included running flight dynamics problems in Matlab, my recommendation is to consider a dual LGA2011 workstation. There is a series of Xeon E5 6- core CPU- the E5-2670, 3680, and 2690 that today are not more expensive than the upper end of LGa1366 6-cores- the X5680 and X5690, plus those systems importantly support, DDR31600 instead of 1333, have PCIe 3.0, SATAIII 6GB/s controllers, and USB 3.0.

It's possible to add SATA III and USB 3 using PCIe cards, but the greater number of cores, higher calculation cycle rates, much better single-thread rates of LGA is worth it. For example:

Xeon X5690: 6-core @ 3.47 / 3.73GHz, about $160-180 Passmark CPU Mark = 9152 dual= 14319 / Single Thread Mark = 1519

Xeon E5-2680 8-core @ 2.7 /3.5GHz, about $110-160 Passmark CPU Mark = 12967 dual- 18380 / Single Thread Mark = 1671

So the E5- provides +4 physical cores and +8 threads with better single-thread rates

Example system:

HP Z620 Workstation 2x Xeon E5-2680 2.7GHz 8-Core 64GB 2TB Quadro 5000 Win7 Pro > $1450 or offer

On some level, this system could be used as is and improved with an SSD and GPU change. My tactic has been to buy low specification systems and upgrade which can save costs- the z620 above cost $270- but takes more shopping ant time.

The result with Xeon E5 is a system with better performance, a longer period of effective use, and better residual value.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

CAD / 3D Modeling / Graphic Design:

HP z420 (2015) (Rev 3) > Xeon E5-1660 v2 (6-core @ 3.7 / 4.0GHz) / 32GB DDR3 -1866 ECC RAM / Quadro K4200 (4GB) / Samsung SM951 M.2 256GB AHCI + Intel 730 480GB (9SSDSC2BP480G4R5) + Western Digital Black WD1003FZEX 1TB> M-Audio 192 sound card > 600W PSU> > Windows 7 Professional 64-bit > Logitech z2300 2.1 speakers > 2X Dell Ultrasharp U2715H (2560 X 1440)
[ Passmark Rating = 5581 > CPU= 14046 / 2D= 838 / 3D= 4694 / Mem= 2777 / Disk= 11559] [6.12.16]



 
Upvote 1 Downvote
Solution
L

Lechnology

Honorable
Mar 27, 2012
19
0
10,510
Thanks BambiBoom, very insightful. Going on the cheap, the T5500 looks very favorable and there's many options to pick from on eBay with just the GPU in need of an upgrade. The most affordable one that I've narrowed down to is a dual hex core. And, again due to keeping it cheap, I found some GT 730 4 GB I could use. If nothing else, I could always upgrade my older rendering units with them (T5400s).

The only thing left is looking at options for putting harddrives in the optical bays. I've seen some with fans, some 2.5" versions, some SSD versions.

This HotSwap cage can support 6 2.5"
This one is cheaper but has only 1 fan.

A couple of options out there, but the T5500 only has 5 SATA connectors. I guess it's a question of how hot will the harddrives get and how loud will two small fans get versus one.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
bambiboom

bambiboom

Splendid
Apr 7, 2012
2,462
5
21,965


Lechnology,

The Precision T5500 is of the highest build quality, reliability, and has a generous power supply given that current GPU's use far less power.

I do still believe that a Xeon E5 system has many important advantages, one of which is that the highest performance CPU's in any series command a premium. The examples of the Xepn X5690- the highest clock speed 6-core and the E5-2680 which is quite a ways off the highest performance E5-2600 series shows that for less cost there can be more cores, higher clock cycles, and single-thread performance for less money. The other important aspects are the faster RAM, SATAIII, and USB 3.0.

If the goal is to replicate the optimal Blender system inexpensively:

HP Z420 Workstation (500GB, Intel Xeon E5-1620, 3.60 GHz, 16GB) > Sold for $185

Xeon E5-2690 8C@2.9/3.8GHz:~ $180
GTX 770 4GB: ~$160
Samsung 850 Evo 250GB: ~$90
WD Blue 1TB: $50

That about $660 total. That system has a UEFI BIOS, so it can use GPT partitions and M.2: AHCI and the Samsung Pro 950 NVMe.

An HP z420 with a E5-2690 has a top Passmark CPU mark of 14858 and using a single GTX 770, a top 3D score of 6405.

A Precision T5500 could be initially less expensive:

DELL PRECISION T5500 TOWER 1X XEON QUAD CORE 2.4GHz 12GB 500GB DVDRW FREE SHIP > $135

Xeon X5680 6-core @ 3.33 / 3.6GHz: ~ $120
GTX 770 4GB: ~$160
PERC H310 6GB/s RAID controller: ~$60
USB PCIE card: ~$30
Samsung 850 Evo 250GB: ~$90
WD Blue 1TB: $50

Which adds up to $645 if the disk system is made 6GB/s and USB 3.0 is added. Still, that has 4 less threads- though a 2nd CPU riser (about $130, plus the cost of another CPU and additional RAM) can allow another CPU to be added for about $300, and so far as I know, no M.2 can be used, certainly not as a boot drive.

A better choice:

Dell Precision T5500 Workstation 2 x Xeon X5670 2.93GHz 6-Core 24GB Quadro 5000+ > $680

Add $160 for GTX 770 for a total of $840.

A Precision T5500 with a Xeon X5680 has a top Passmark CPU mark of 9347 and using a single GTX 770, a top 3D score of 6223.

The top Passmark CPU rating for 2X X5670 is 14130 so there is some good news. Given the VM use, and running a number of disks- I like the 5.25" bay hot swap adapter- a PERC H310 RAID controller is highly recommended.

Of course, either system can add a 2nd GTX 770 4GB later.

It's a difficult equation, but my understanding through experience with this kind of upgraded/focused use system is that today with careful choices, an LGA2011 system can have better performance and future potential for less cost- a better cost / performance ratio. If you're using Adobe CS/CC, consider the single 8-core CPU and invest in a single GTX 1070.

One other fairly important consideration in the discussion is that if you use Adobe CS /CC (I use CS6), it does not run at all well on dual CPU's- the performance is best using 5-6 cores on a single CPU and is actually worse on dual CPU's and does not recognize dual GPU's at all. See the excellent articles on that subject on the Puget Systems site

Cheers,

BambiBoom













 
Upvote 0 Downvote
L

Lechnology

Honorable
Mar 27, 2012
19
0
10,510
Thank you for the detailed info, BambiBoom. I've purchased that $680 one your recommended.

My next inquiry would be configuring such a machine to do multiple render jobs simultaneously, harkening back my inquiry on virtualization. Some say it's not necessary. If so, that's good enough for me. I'm just not sure how to configure it so that I can have, say, 3 instances of Blender processing a render job simultaneously.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
bambiboom

bambiboom

Splendid
Apr 7, 2012
2,462
5
21,965


Lechnology,

The T5500 is a good choice for your use- extreme reliability is really as important as performance if not moreso and the T5500 can be ultra-reliable and have really good performance by current standards as well. Fro one thing, the low cost means that funds can be redirected to excellent GPU's and disks.

Running more than one rendering stream at a time- assuming that could be configured through VM.s, would simply divide the processor and GPU cycle time and there would be a highly unstable and with a high latency involved in synchronizing the streams and output.

Although I have never tried it and don't know all the details, there is much more potential in running two or three systems in parallel - which is sequentially taking advantage of the physical core count in the example of CPU rendering and of CUDA cores in GPU rendering. I saw a demonstration at my local particle accelerator of 10X Raspberry Pi's that were running a large monitor at 60FPS of an MIT "chaos generator" that made shapes and colors based on "gravity", viscosity", density, pressure, and elasticity". It was fun to watch and more interestingly demonstrated the power of running clusters of simple systems. A serious problem with clusters and multiple systems is the cost of duplicated components and multiple copies of the software.

Overall, though, in my view, the best solution is to concentrate on the single system, and optimize it with a great GPU or two, a lot of RAM, and fast disks, then set up queues that can just churn away for a couple of days a a time. That will be the most reliable method, less expensive, and surprisingly fast. I did a 3180 X 2140 test GPU rendering in Vray RT for Sketchup on the HP z620 (2X E5-2690 / 64GB/ Quadro K4200 + Tesla M2090 / Samsung SM951+ Samsung 850 Evo + Seagate ES.3) and while the rendering had simple lighting, I was amazed to see the rendering finished in under 7 minutes.I could navigate the model in preview in real time - that's the "RT" - amazing.

Cheers,

BambiBoom

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom