Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Conroe vs. Woodcrest... Which is best? (FOR ME?)

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Product
Last response: in CPUs
Share

Conroe or Woodcrest? Which is best for MY new workstation?

Total: 36 votes

  • Dual Xeon Woodcrest System
  • 62 %
  • Core 2 Duo Conroe System
  • 39 %
July 15, 2006 3:16:48 PM

I posted something similar a while back here, but that thread is kinda dead now. And with the release of Tom's Core2 article, i thought i might get some more widespread responses. Anyway, i am planning to upgrade my current workstation for a new one. Here are my current specs:

Pentium 4 3.73 GHz @ 1066 MHz FSB
ASUS P5AD2-E Premium i925XE
Enermax Noisetaker 500W
2Gb Corsair XMS2 DDR2 711 Mhz
ATi FireGL V7100 256Mb PCIe
4 x Maxtor 250Gb 7200rpm
SoundBlaster Audigy 2 ZS

Now, before i post the two system specs i am considering, let me say what i use my workstation for. This will be my home workstation, in addition to being a general use home computer, it needs to be a killer gaming rig, as i am a gamer; and it needs to serve as a DCC (digital content creation) workstation. I am a digital animator, graphic artist, 3D modeler, texture creator, and video editor. I need MAXIMUM performance when rendering video (from both 3D animation programs and video editing programs). I can't be waiting 8 hours for something to render when it could take 4 hours if i had a different system. Here are some of the programs i commonly use:

For DCC and video editing (many of these are used daily):
Discreet 3D Studio MAX 8 (CAN be multithreaded)
NewTek Lightwave 8.5 (CAN be multithreaded)
Alias Maya 6 (CAN be multithreaded)
Adobe After Effects 6.5 (CAN be multithreaded)
Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 (CAN be multithreaded)
Roxio Media Creator 8
Adobe Encore DVD 1.5
Adobe Photoshop CS
Adobe ImageReady CS
Corel Paint Shop Pro X
Ahead Nero 7

In addition i also use everyday programs like IE, Firefox, Bittorrent, MS office, Windows media player, you know the common role stuff. I'll also be using this rig as my gaming PC. I'm not a heavy FPS player, i play mostly games like:

Civilization 4
Galactic Civilizations 2
Homeworld 2
Nexus
SW battlefront2
SW empire at war
Earth 2160
Command and Conquer
Age of Empires
etc...

So this machine must be best optimized for DCC and video editing, AND be a gaming powerhouse. So that brings me back to which is best for me? A conroe system? Or a dual Woodcrest system? Let's assume for the time being money is NOT an issue.

Here are the two candidates i am considering (note these specs have changed since my origional post):

Woodcrest based:
Intel Xeon 5140 (2.33Ghz 1333MHz FSB)
Intel Xeon 5140 (2.33Ghz 1333MHz FSB)
ASUS DSBF-D/SAS Intel 5000p chipset motherboard
4 GB (4 x 1 GB) Kingston DDR2 667MHz FB-DIMMs
Thermaltake ToughPower ATX/EPS12V 650W PSU
ATi Radeon X1900XTX PCIe
Creative Soundblaster X-Fi PCI
Western Digital Raptor SATA 150 GB (System Drive)

Conroe Based:
Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 (2.66GHz 1066MHz FSB)
ASUS P5WDG2-WS Intel 975X chipset motherboard
4 GB (4 x 1 GB) Corsair XMS2 DDR2 675Mhz SDRAM
Thermaltake ToughPower ATX/EPS12V 650W PSU
ATi Radeon X1900XTX PCIe
Creative Soundblaster X-Fi PCI
Western Digital Raptor SATA 150 GB (System Drive)

At the moment i am leaning toward the Dual Woodcrest system because it will give me maximum benifit in my DCC programs (esp those than can be multithreaded), while still performing as well in gaming. Another thing to keep in mind is that this workstation MUST last at least 2 years WITHOUT being upgraded and WITHOUT being replaced. Meaning i can't come back in 6 months or a year and change parts around or processors. It has to last in it's current configuration.

So, pros? cons? opinions? concerns? suggestions?





P.S.
No flaming please! :) 
I'm not considering AMD solutions (please no AMD suggestions).

More about : conroe woodcrest

July 15, 2006 4:31:51 PM

Quote:
I posted something similar a while back here, but that thread is kinda dead now. And with the release of Tom's Core2 article, i thought i might get some more widespread responses. Anyway, i am planning to upgrade my current workstation for a new one. Here are my current specs:

Pentium 4 3.73 GHz @ 1066 MHz FSB
ASUS P5AD2-E Premium i925XE
Enermax Noisetaker 500W
2Gb Corsair XMS2 DDR2 711 Mhz
ATi FireGL V7100 256Mb PCIe
4 x Maxtor 250Gb 7200rpm
SoundBlaster Audigy 2 ZS

Now, before i post the two system specs i am considering, let me say what i use my workstation for. This will be my home workstation, in addition to being a general use home computer, it needs to be a killer gaming rig, as i am a gamer; and it needs to serve as a DCC (digital content creation) workstation. I am a digital animator, graphic artist, 3D modeler, texture creator, and video editor. I need MAXIMUM performance when rendering video (from both 3D animation programs and video editing programs). I can't be waiting 8 hours for something to render when it could take 4 hours if i had a different system. Here are some of the programs i commonly use:

For DCC and video editing (many of these are used daily):
Discreet 3D Studio MAX 8 (CAN be multithreaded)
NewTek Lightwave 8.5 (CAN be multithreaded)
Alias Maya 6 (CAN be multithreaded)
Adobe After Effects 6.5 (CAN be multithreaded)
Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 (CAN be multithreaded)
Roxio Media Creator 8
Adobe Encore DVD 1.5
Adobe Photoshop CS
Adobe ImageReady CS
Corel Paint Shop Pro X
Ahead Nero 7

In addition i also use everyday programs like IE, Firefox, Bittorrent, MS office, Windows media player, you know the common role stuff. I'll also be using this rig as my gaming PC. I'm not a heavy FPS player, i play mostly games like:

Civilization 4
Galactic Civilizations 2
Homeworld 2
Nexus
SW battlefront2
SW empire at war
Earth 2160
Command and Conquer
Age of Empires
etc...

So this machine must be best optimized for DCC and video editing, AND be a gaming powerhouse. So that brings me back to which is best for me? A conroe system? Or a dual Woodcrest system? Let's assume for the time being money is NOT an issue.

Here are the two candidates i am considering (note these specs have changed since my origional post):

Woodcrest based:
Intel Xeon 5140 (2.33Ghz 1333MHz FSB)
Intel Xeon 5140 (2.33Ghz 1333MHz FSB)
ASUS DSBF-D/SAS Intel 5000p chipset motherboard
4 GB (4 x 1 GB) Kingston DDR2 667MHz FB-DIMMs
Thermaltake ToughPower ATX/EPS12V 650W PSU
ATi Radeon X1900XTX PCIe
Creative Soundblaster X-Fi PCI
Western Digital Raptor SATA 150 GB (System Drive)

Conroe Based:
Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 (2.66GHz 1066MHz FSB)
ASUS P5WDG2-WS Intel 975X chipset motherboard
4 GB (4 x 1 GB) Corsair XMS2 DDR2 675Mhz SDRAM
Thermaltake ToughPower ATX/EPS12V 650W PSU
ATi Radeon X1900XTX PCIe
Creative Soundblaster X-Fi PCI
Western Digital Raptor SATA 150 GB (System Drive)

At the moment i am leaning toward the Dual Woodcrest system because it will give me maximum benifit in my DCC programs (esp those than can be multithreaded), while still performing as well in gaming. Another thing to keep in mind is that this workstation MUST last at least 2 years WITHOUT being upgraded and WITHOUT being replaced. Meaning i can't come back in 6 months or a year and change parts around or processors. It has to last in it's current configuration.

So, pros? cons? opinions? concerns? suggestions?





P.S.
No flaming please! :) 
I'm not considering AMD solutions (please no AMD suggestions).




For your needs I'd definitley go for the 51xx. It will get you two quad core sockets next year. Core 2 is more for enthusiasts. All wkstas SHOULD be 51xx. Photoshop CS will fly with 4 cores. It is multithreaded. Maya will thank you also. Have you thought about X64? Native solutions should start coming out soon as MS moves all server products to X64.

If you work from home it will pay for itself pretty quick. Doubling my cores did wonders for me.
July 15, 2006 4:53:36 PM

Well i've thought about X64, but i was afraid of driver issues, esp with things like my printer/scanner, old FFB joystick, etc... etc... I was also under the impression that some software, games especially, might not run under X64?

And yes, i do work from home, that's why i can't afford spending excess time on 16 hour renders that could take less.
July 15, 2006 6:03:51 PM

Quote:
Well i've thought about X64, but i was afraid of driver issues, esp with things like my printer/scanner, old FFB joystick, etc... etc... I was also under the impression that some software, games especially, might not run under X64?

And yes, i do work from home, that's why i can't afford spending excess time on 16 hour renders that could take less.




I used X64 for awhile, drivers weren't the problem at the time. My HP printer loaded right up Logitech Wireless works great and every game I tried played well except for one which had a launcher problem not a "game" problem. I went back to XP because there was no IE7 which is a nightmare. FF was chewing up all my RAM and IE32 crashed every 10 minutes while IE 64 was 10% faster but HAD NO PLUGINS or TOOLBARs.

You'd be OK now as IE7 Beta 3 works great. MS is putting more emphasis on X64 now so by mid next year, they may stop promoting X86. it will save them manuf costs and push others to start moving faster to mainstream X64.
July 15, 2006 8:43:44 PM

Quote:
Well i've thought about X64, but i was afraid of driver issues, esp with things like my printer/scanner, old FFB joystick, etc... etc... I was also under the impression that some software, games especially, might not run under X64?

And yes, i do work from home, that's why i can't afford spending excess time on 16 hour renders that could take less.




I used X64 for awhile, drivers weren't the problem at the time. My HP printer loaded right up Logitech Wireless works great and every game I tried played well except for one which had a launcher problem not a "game" problem. I went back to XP because there was no IE7 which is a nightmare. FF was chewing up all my RAM and IE32 crashed every 10 minutes while IE 64 was 10% faster but HAD NO PLUGINS or TOOLBARs.

You'd be OK now as IE7 Beta 3 works great. MS is putting more emphasis on X64 now so by mid next year, they may stop promoting X86. it will save them manuf costs and push others to start moving faster to mainstream X64.

While the X64 is a great processor especially for MP systems, Woodcrest outperforms X64 in DP systems and uses less power (especially under full load). But the X64 scaled much better than woodcrest if you are going to be using more than 2 processors. If you want to go to 4 processors (8 cores) then the X64 would be better, but for 2 processors, woodcrest is definitely your best bet, and the 4 cores will perform much better than the 2 cores on the conroe system for all of the multithreaded apps you will be using.
July 15, 2006 10:54:15 PM

If you plan on using 4 GB of RAM I suggest going to a 64-bit version of XP or waiting until a 64-bit version of Vista comes out. With a 32-bit version of XP, your system won't be able to use all 4 GB (instead more like 3.2 - 3.6 GB). Also waiting for a 64-bit version of Vista will likely bring better driver support as it will likely become the most common platform in the future.
July 15, 2006 11:01:00 PM

Quote:
Well i've thought about X64, but i was afraid of driver issues, esp with things like my printer/scanner, old FFB joystick, etc... etc... I was also under the impression that some software, games especially, might not run under X64?

And yes, i do work from home, that's why i can't afford spending excess time on 16 hour renders that could take less.




I used X64 for awhile, drivers weren't the problem at the time. My HP printer loaded right up Logitech Wireless works great and every game I tried played well except for one which had a launcher problem not a "game" problem. I went back to XP because there was no IE7 which is a nightmare. FF was chewing up all my RAM and IE32 crashed every 10 minutes while IE 64 was 10% faster but HAD NO PLUGINS or TOOLBARs.

You'd be OK now as IE7 Beta 3 works great. MS is putting more emphasis on X64 now so by mid next year, they may stop promoting X86. it will save them manuf costs and push others to start moving faster to mainstream X64.

While the X64 is a great processor especially for MP systems, Woodcrest outperforms X64 in DP systems and uses less power (especially under full load). But the X64 scaled much better than woodcrest if you are going to be using more than 2 processors. If you want to go to 4 processors (8 cores) then the X64 would be better, but for 2 processors, woodcrest is definitely your best bet, and the 4 cores will perform much better than the 2 cores on the conroe system for all of the multithreaded apps you will be using.


X64 is the name of the OS not the chip.
July 15, 2006 11:03:26 PM

Quote:
If you plan on using 4 GB of RAM I suggest going to a 64-bit version of XP or waiting until a 64-bit version of Vista comes out. With a 32-bit version of XP, your system won't be able to use all 4 GB (instead more like 3.2 - 3.6 GB). Also waiting for a 64-bit version of Vista will likely bring better driver support as it will likely become the most common platform in the future.


It's 3.25GB. I know. I have to go back to X64 or go to 2003 or lose .75 GB. I'm leaning towards 2003 Server, but i have a need for server. I would definitely go with X64 in his case even if he is getting less than 4GB.
July 15, 2006 11:31:29 PM

Yea, I couldn't remember what the cut off point was for the RAM. In his case, Server 2003 wouldn't be a good choice because he wants to game and sound card support in server 2003 sucks. Very few companies offer drivers for 03 and the list of drivers 03 supports natively is really short. The same goes for graphics cards as well. I've heard of people using XP drivers to get cards to work but it can be glitchy or require modification. For a computer that will be used a work computer I wouldn't recommend this.
July 15, 2006 11:51:19 PM

Quote:
If you plan on using 4 GB of RAM I suggest going to a 64-bit version of XP or waiting until a 64-bit version of Vista comes out. With a 32-bit version of XP, your system won't be able to use all 4 GB (instead more like 3.2 - 3.6 GB). Also waiting for a 64-bit version of Vista will likely bring better driver support as it will likely become the most common platform in the future.


It's 3.25GB. I know. I have to go back to X64 or go to 2003 or lose .75 GB. I'm leaning towards 2003 Server, but i have a need for server. I would definitely go with X64 in his case even if he is getting less than 4GB.

Are you sure of the 3.25 figure, on XP pro?
July 16, 2006 12:24:36 AM

Quote:
If you plan on using 4 GB of RAM I suggest going to a 64-bit version of XP or waiting until a 64-bit version of Vista comes out. With a 32-bit version of XP, your system won't be able to use all 4 GB (instead more like 3.2 - 3.6 GB). Also waiting for a 64-bit version of Vista will likely bring better driver support as it will likely become the most common platform in the future.


It's 3.25GB. I know. I have to go back to X64 or go to 2003 or lose .75 GB. I'm leaning towards 2003 Server, but i have a need for server. I would definitely go with X64 in his case even if he is getting less than 4GB.

Are you sure of the 3.25 figure, on XP pro?

I'm looking at it right now. I tried Memory hole remapping HW and SW and it still says 3.25GB in the Computer properties but 4GB in BIOS and CPUz. I had heard it took some but I had hoped it wasn't that much. Addressability on X64 is like TBs, so it will see it all.
July 16, 2006 1:39:23 AM

Quote:
Well i've thought about X64, but i was afraid of driver issues, esp with things like my printer/scanner, old FFB joystick, etc... etc... I was also under the impression that some software, games especially, might not run under X64?

And yes, i do work from home, that's why i can't afford spending excess time on 16 hour renders that could take less.




I used X64 for awhile, drivers weren't the problem at the time. My HP printer loaded right up Logitech Wireless works great and every game I tried played well except for one which had a launcher problem not a "game" problem. I went back to XP because there was no IE7 which is a nightmare. FF was chewing up all my RAM and IE32 crashed every 10 minutes while IE 64 was 10% faster but HAD NO PLUGINS or TOOLBARs.

You'd be OK now as IE7 Beta 3 works great. MS is putting more emphasis on X64 now so by mid next year, they may stop promoting X86. it will save them manuf costs and push others to start moving faster to mainstream X64.

While the X64 is a great processor especially for MP systems, Woodcrest outperforms X64 in DP systems and uses less power (especially under full load). But the X64 scaled much better than woodcrest if you are going to be using more than 2 processors. If you want to go to 4 processors (8 cores) then the X64 would be better, but for 2 processors, woodcrest is definitely your best bet, and the 4 cores will perform much better than the 2 cores on the conroe system for all of the multithreaded apps you will be using.


X64 is the name of the OS not the chip.

I am sure he got the point of the post. I meant Opteron.
July 16, 2006 3:13:06 AM

Quote:
Yea, I couldn't remember what the cut off point was for the RAM. In his case, Server 2003 wouldn't be a good choice because he wants to game and sound card support in server 2003 sucks. Very few companies offer drivers for 03 and the list of drivers 03 supports natively is really short. The same goes for graphics cards as well. I've heard of people using XP drivers to get cards to work but it can be glitchy or require modification. For a computer that will be used a work computer I wouldn't recommend this.


It's the same kernel with different services. You can turn on DX and the drivers will work fine. MS posts those because they don't want people using too many different brands for server.
July 16, 2006 3:14:20 AM

Quote:
Well i've thought about X64, but i was afraid of driver issues, esp with things like my printer/scanner, old FFB joystick, etc... etc... I was also under the impression that some software, games especially, might not run under X64?

And yes, i do work from home, that's why i can't afford spending excess time on 16 hour renders that could take less.




I used X64 for awhile, drivers weren't the problem at the time. My HP printer loaded right up Logitech Wireless works great and every game I tried played well except for one which had a launcher problem not a "game" problem. I went back to XP because there was no IE7 which is a nightmare. FF was chewing up all my RAM and IE32 crashed every 10 minutes while IE 64 was 10% faster but HAD NO PLUGINS or TOOLBARs.

You'd be OK now as IE7 Beta 3 works great. MS is putting more emphasis on X64 now so by mid next year, they may stop promoting X86. it will save them manuf costs and push others to start moving faster to mainstream X64.

While the X64 is a great processor especially for MP systems, Woodcrest outperforms X64 in DP systems and uses less power (especially under full load). But the X64 scaled much better than woodcrest if you are going to be using more than 2 processors. If you want to go to 4 processors (8 cores) then the X64 would be better, but for 2 processors, woodcrest is definitely your best bet, and the 4 cores will perform much better than the 2 cores on the conroe system for all of the multithreaded apps you will be using.


X64 is the name of the OS not the chip.

I am sure he got the point of the post. I meant Opteron.


Just wanted to make sure. No offense meant.
July 16, 2006 3:59:07 AM

Also, one thing I would check in to (as I'm not entirely sure myself) is replacing your Radeon X1900XTX with a FireGL card. I believe that these cards would be better suited for your programs like Photoshop but would be less capable for gaming. Like I said I not entirely sure if a Fire GL would be great for the games that you wish to play but it should improve your other programs. If anyone is familiar how these cards stack up to a Radeon in gaming performance please share as I have not had a chance to use one.
July 16, 2006 2:51:33 PM

Quote:
Also, one thing I would check in to (as I'm not entirely sure myself) is replacing your Radeon X1900XTX with a FireGL card. I believe that these cards would be better suited for your programs like Photoshop but would be less capable for gaming. Like I said I not entirely sure if a Fire GL would be great for the games that you wish to play but it should improve your other programs. If anyone is familiar how these cards stack up to a Radeon in gaming performance please share as I have not had a chance to use one.


I have a FireGL right now, V7100 (look at my signature....). It's actually not worth the extra money for DCC programs. OpenGL cards like the fireGL and quadroFX are mainly for CAD based programs that use extremely complex vector algorithms, which comercial 3d modeling programs don't use. The other use for them is uber monitors with resolutions like 3840 x 3072, which i'm afraid to say, i will never be able to afford. I wish i had known all this be4 i got my current fireGL. I'll be selling the card to help pay for my new hardware. i bought it for $1000, i'm hoping i can sell it for at least $400.
July 16, 2006 7:07:54 PM

What's a good place to sell my current parts? I'd like to sell the CPU, motherboard, RAM, Video card, Sound Card, and PSU. That's a computer minus a hard drive and case! Hell i have an old case i can put the parts in!
July 16, 2006 7:20:53 PM

The only place I can think of off the top of my head is a pawn shop or ebay.
July 16, 2006 7:27:29 PM

Quote:
The only place I can think of off the top of my head is a pawn shop or ebay.


well obviously ebay... I just didn't know if there was a site somewhere specifically for computer enthusiasts to sell things.
July 16, 2006 7:34:46 PM

Quote:
The only place I can think of off the top of my head is a pawn shop or ebay.
He wont get shite from a pawn shop. The only options are to sell them to someone you know, or auction them for cheap on ebay.
July 16, 2006 7:47:53 PM

Quote:
The only place I can think of off the top of my head is a pawn shop or ebay.
He wont get shite from a pawn shop. The only options are to sell them to someone you know, or auction them for cheap on ebay.

I didn't say they would give a lot for it, I just said it was an option as a place to sell them. Obviously one could do better to sell it on their own rather than sell it to a store whose only purpose is to resell it at a profit.
July 16, 2006 7:48:27 PM

Quote:
What's a good place to sell my current parts? I'd like to sell the CPU, motherboard, RAM, Video card, Sound Card, and PSU. That's a computer minus a hard drive and case! Hell i have an old case i can put the parts in!



Try an ad or maybe a pawn shop. The FireGL will be a hard sell because of it's specialty nature, meaning you won't get much back. Local ebay may work.

I hate having to upgrade too much of the PC. It helps ifyou can get rid of the old parts or use them for something. Maybe you could use them for a file share.
July 16, 2006 7:52:04 PM

Quote:
What's a good place to sell my current parts? I'd like to sell the CPU, motherboard, RAM, Video card, Sound Card, and PSU. That's a computer minus a hard drive and case! Hell i have an old case i can put the parts in!



Try an ad or maybe a pawn shop. The FireGL will be a hard sell because of it's specialty nature, meaning you won't get much back. Local ebay may work.

I hate having to upgrade too much of the PC. It helps ifyou can get rid of the old parts or use them for something. Maybe you could use them for a file share.

i need to make some money off of it if i want a new video card for my new system ;) , so i need at least $500 for it... looks like ebay is the best bet tho...
July 16, 2006 8:14:20 PM

Quote:
What's a good place to sell my current parts? I'd like to sell the CPU, motherboard, RAM, Video card, Sound Card, and PSU. That's a computer minus a hard drive and case! Hell i have an old case i can put the parts in!



Try an ad or maybe a pawn shop. The FireGL will be a hard sell because of it's specialty nature, meaning you won't get much back. Local ebay may work.

I hate having to upgrade too much of the PC. It helps ifyou can get rid of the old parts or use them for something. Maybe you could use them for a file share.

i need to make some money off of it if i want a new video card for my new system ;) , so i need at least $500 for it... looks like ebay is the best bet tho...


I feel for you. I can honestly say though that I have a 19" LCD and I don't need that much video card - 7800GT. Have you though about CrossFire or SLI? That would let you get one "good enough" video card while you try to get rid of the parts. Then just buy the second.
July 16, 2006 8:40:32 PM

I don't see any reason why you can't get at least $500 for it. I was thinking of selling my system (see sig) minus the 2x Raptors, Audigy 2 ZS, 2x DL DVD burners, and a black FDD (it matches my new case) for around $300 -$400.

That would leave (with estimated retail price) a big Antec SOHO server case ($80), 550 Watt Antec TruePower PSU ($50), 2GB of PC3200 ($180), GPU ($270), mobo ($50), CPU ($50), and a big typhoon heatsink($60). If someone were to buy these parts individually it would run about $740. I actually looked up some exact prices on New Egg for some of these items and others I just estimated. Anyways, for $300 -$400 dollars this is a pretty good rig and they would be making out on parts alone.

Best suggestion I can come up with is to look at all your stuff, find out what it will go for in stores and charge about half. Look a other companies like Dell and see what a setup like yours will go for and just knock some cash off that price. Another thing to consider is what technologies does your system lack that similar priced devices have. An example is that you have a 3.7 GHz P4 but it lacks 64-bit and dual core. The hardest thing about selling a used system is justifying the price to someone.
July 16, 2006 9:07:48 PM

Haha, never thought of buying or selling any computer stuff at a pawn shop. WOuldn't e-bay be a little better?
July 16, 2006 9:38:12 PM

Quote:
What's a good place to sell my current parts? I'd like to sell the CPU, motherboard, RAM, Video card, Sound Card, and PSU. That's a computer minus a hard drive and case! Hell i have an old case i can put the parts in!



Try an ad or maybe a pawn shop. The FireGL will be a hard sell because of it's specialty nature, meaning you won't get much back. Local ebay may work.

I hate having to upgrade too much of the PC. It helps ifyou can get rid of the old parts or use them for something. Maybe you could use them for a file share.

Kinda like AMD's 4x4 and RHT, huh? :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 
July 16, 2006 9:50:37 PM

Quote:
What's a good place to sell my current parts? I'd like to sell the CPU, motherboard, RAM, Video card, Sound Card, and PSU. That's a computer minus a hard drive and case! Hell i have an old case i can put the parts in!



Try an ad or maybe a pawn shop. The FireGL will be a hard sell because of it's specialty nature, meaning you won't get much back. Local ebay may work.

I hate having to upgrade too much of the PC. It helps ifyou can get rid of the old parts or use them for something. Maybe you could use them for a file share.

Kinda like AMD's 4x4 and RHT, huh? :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 

*Grabs bucket of water to put out the silly flamethrower*
July 17, 2006 1:37:19 AM

Quote:
What's a good place to sell my current parts? I'd like to sell the CPU, motherboard, RAM, Video card, Sound Card, and PSU. That's a computer minus a hard drive and case! Hell i have an old case i can put the parts in!


ebay will be your safest, quickest way to sell your current rig!
July 17, 2006 1:50:49 AM

Dual Woodcrest of course!

but u should choose a kind of professional graphic card
such as ATI FireGL7350 and Nvida Quadro 4500
July 17, 2006 1:55:09 AM

The quadro 4500 costs nearly $2000. 8O
July 17, 2006 4:53:28 AM

well if i'm going to do crossfire i'd just assume have two Radeon x1900xtx's.

why get two x1800's when u can have two x1900xtx's... If i'm gonna get the best, i might as well get THE best right? Besides, i have 2 19" LCDs at the moment, and i plan to add at least one more if i get a second card. Remember, i constantly deal with 3d model construction with some models exceeding the 3 million polygon mark, every edge helps.
July 18, 2006 4:31:06 AM

Quote:
Dual Woodcrest of course!

but u should choose a kind of professional graphic card
such as ATI FireGL7350 and Nvida Quadro 4500


If you read up a couple of posts u'll read why i'm actually SELLING my CURRENT FIREGL V7100 in favor of a Radeon X1900XTX... But to put it simply, Workstation cards only offer siginificant improvements to programs that use complex vector algorithms, 3D modeling and animation programs (the kind i use) don't make use of those... so i'm better off with a gaming card.
July 18, 2006 1:51:34 PM

oh, i see.

MOBOs for woodcrest is much more expensive than that for Core Duo 2

and you need to buy a special kind of ram which is also much more expensive than DDR2 RAMs to match the MOBO for Woodcrest
July 18, 2006 2:21:27 PM

If you make money from what you're doing get the intel xeon (woodcrest) since obviously it'll pay for itself. Otherwise just get Conroe (whatever) if you do this as just a hobby and don't make any money off it.

Just my suggestion.

Quote:

Now, before i post the two system specs i am considering, let me say what i use my workstation for. This will be my home workstation, in addition to being a general use home computer, it needs to be a killer gaming rig, as i am a gamer; and it needs to serve as a DCC (digital content creation) workstation. I am a digital animator, graphic artist, 3D modeler, texture creator, and video editor. I need MAXIMUM performance when rendering video (from both 3D animation programs and video editing programs). I can't be waiting 8 hours for something to render when it could take 4 hours if i had a different system. Here are some of the programs i commonly use:

For DCC and video editing (many of these are used daily):
Discreet 3D Studio MAX 8 (CAN be multithreaded)
NewTek Lightwave 8.5 (CAN be multithreaded)
Alias Maya 6 (CAN be multithreaded)
Adobe After Effects 6.5 (CAN be multithreaded)
Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 (CAN be multithreaded)
Roxio Media Creator 8
Adobe Encore DVD 1.5
Adobe Photoshop CS
Adobe ImageReady CS
Corel Paint Shop Pro X
Ahead Nero 7
July 18, 2006 9:47:45 PM

Quote:
I am a digital animator, graphic artist, 3D modeler, texture creator, and video editor.


That means professionally.....
July 21, 2006 12:29:28 AM

In line with keeping my options open, here are the 2 solutions i came up with for Core 2:

Intel Dual-Core Core 2 Duo E6700 2.66GHz 1066MHz FSB LGA775
ASUS P5WD2-E Premium Dual-Core LGA775 Intel 975X
CORSAIR XMS2 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 800 CL 4
CORSAIR XMS2 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 800 CL 4
Thermaltake ToughPower W0104RU ATX/EPS 12V 650W
Creative Labs SoundBlaster X-Fi 24-Bit PCI
WD Raptor wd1500adfd 150GB 10Krpm 16MB cache sata150
XFX GeForce 7950GX2 1GB GDDR3 PCIe x16

$2,625.27



Intel Dual-Core Core 2 Extreme X6800 3.00GHz 1066MHz FSB LGA775
ASUS P5WD2-E Premium Dual-Core LGA775 Intel 975X
CORSAIR XMS2 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 800 CL 4
CORSAIR XMS2 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 800 CL 4
Thermaltake ToughPower W0104RU ATX/EPS 12V 650W (eWiz.com)
Creative Labs SoundBlaster X-Fi 24-Bit PCI (ZipZoomFly.com)
WD Raptor wd1500adfd 150GB 10Krpm 16MB cache sata150 (Monarch.com)
XFX GeForce 7950GX2 1GB GDDR3 PCIe x16

$3,120.27



Through some research i have discovered that no 5000(x) chipset motherboards are going to support overclocking, at least note yet, so if i go woodcrest, that locks in some things. However if i go core 2, i can always overclock. But i just wanted to ask a few things real quick.

If i go core 2, would it behuve me to get the core 2 extreme versus the core 2 E6700? I know the multiplier is unlocked on the Core 2 Extreme. I'm wondering could i run the Core 2 extreme at 1333Mhz fsb (changing it from 266 to 333) and underclocking the multiplier to 10. Do you think the mobo can handle 1333?

Are there any new chipsets coming out with conroe? Will 975x mobo's be compatible with conroe?
July 21, 2006 1:24:02 AM

Not all 975 motherboards will support Conroe; however, all 965 motherboards will. I believe the motherboard you selected will not support it. There was a good article on Anandtech about Conroe ready motherboards (Link Here)

Also, I wouldn't buy the X6800 as the extra performance isn't worth the money. The E6600 and the E6700 are much better options. I would only go for the X6800 if you plan to seriously overclock. This means you will need better cooling and RAM if you plan to reach 1333 FSB.
a c 105 à CPUs
July 21, 2006 1:44:45 AM

If you're a pro, then buy the professional system- the non-overclockable dual Woodcrest one. Your apps are mostly multithreaded so those two extra cores will help. Your proposed rigs are pretty much just gamer rigs- not professional workstations. Not that they would not handle professional work, but the dual Woodcrest would do better at those applications by a fair margin.

EDIT: And one more thing: you'll likely want to add a second Raptor 150 so you can do RAID 1. That and a NAS setup or other form of off-computer backup if you do not already have one. Lost data for a pro = lost time = lost money. Better to spend the extra money and be safe.
July 21, 2006 1:47:31 AM

Quote:
Dual Woodcrest of course!

but u should choose a kind of professional graphic card
such as ATI FireGL7350 and Nvida Quadro 4500


If you read up a couple of posts u'll read why i'm actually SELLING my CURRENT FIREGL V7100 in favor of a Radeon X1900XTX... But to put it simply, Workstation cards only offer siginificant improvements to programs that use complex vector algorithms, 3D modeling and animation programs (the kind i use) don't make use of those... so i'm better off with a gaming card.

I think you are seriously underrating the overall value of Workstation cards. They make a significant difference to some 3D tasks and include some features that are essential in professional work (all listed on specs but including availability of colours in the broad dynamic range, real time fx manipulation, overlay plane support).

It depends what work you are doing but, speaking as someone also working professionally (and full time) with Maya in a part of the industry where time is money and deadlines are pushed to the limit, workstation cards offer significant benefits over hobby cards.

I am not suggesting people buy one for a home setup as for basic modelling / animation use you will see little difference, but the assertion that specialist kit is not required as the programmes you are using will not make use of it is incorrect if you are using Maya. Perhaps the work you are doing does not require such specialist hardware (or doesn't take advantage of it), but the programme itself certainly benefits from it. There are some 3d apps where a specialist card makes little difference. Maya isn't one of them.

This is not to remotely assert one cannot run Maya on a regular 3d card but the idea that Maya as a programme can't take advantage of a specialist card is simply not true. If you want a card for multiple use then a so called gaming card is naturally the right choice, but its not the right choice because workstation cards are wrong for Maya. From your posts I think a general graphics card would suit you better in multiple apps but that certainly is not based on an inability of your software to use a pro setup.
July 21, 2006 1:58:06 AM

Here are a few Conroe ready boards.

ASUS P5W DH Deluxe

Gigabyte GA-965P-DQ6

ASUS P5B Deluxe/WIFI

ABIT AB9 Pro

These boards all currently support Conroe. There are a few lower end 965 mobos on New Egg. But I didn't include them because they are not probably what you’re looking for (they have fewer bells and whistles). Also the 975 chip mobos are the only ones that have Xfire support. 965 also doesn't have PATA but is usually added via a separate on-board controller. Just be sure to study each one closely before you decide. I personally like the Gigabyte board due to the fact that I will not use any multi-GPU solution and it will also support Quad-Core CPUs.
July 21, 2006 2:01:46 AM

Quote:
If you're a pro, then buy the professional system- the non-overclockable dual Woodcrest one. Your apps are mostly multithreaded so those two extra cores will help. Your proposed rigs are pretty much just gamer rigs- not professional workstations. Not that they would not handle professional work, but the dual Woodcrest would do better at those applications by a fair margin.

EDIT: And one more thing: you'll likely want to add a second Raptor 150 so you can do RAID 1. That and a NAS setup or other form of off-computer backup if you do not already have one. Lost data for a pro = lost time = lost money. Better to spend the extra money and be safe.


This is good advice imho.
July 21, 2006 2:41:31 AM

Quote:
What's a good place to sell my current parts? I'd like to sell the CPU, motherboard, RAM, Video card, Sound Card, and PSU. That's a computer minus a hard drive and case! Hell i have an old case i can put the parts in!


www.hardforum.com and post on the for sale forum.

It might be worth posting on anandtech as well. It's certainly worth a shot before you go to ebay and pay them a fee.
July 21, 2006 6:46:26 AM

Quote:
Not all 975 motherboards will support Conroe; however, all 965 motherboards will. I believe the motherboard you selected will not support it. There was a good article on Anandtech about Conroe ready motherboards (Link Here)


Hmmm, then i assume we will be seeing a new chipset release? Or New mobo versions with conroe support release next week?

Quote:
Also, I wouldn't buy the X6800 as the extra performance isn't worth the money. The E6600 and the E6700 are much better options. I would only go for the X6800 if you plan to seriously overclock. This means you will need better cooling and RAM if you plan to reach 1333 FSB.


Well you do no it's not just performance, it's the fact that the multiplier is unlocked. And Core 2 Extreme doesn't use the Conroe core, it uses a suped up version called the Conroe XE (if i'm not mistaken). Tom's article seemed to indicate it offered significant advantages.

Anyways, >>IF<< i went with a core 2 extreme, i would either A. bump the multiplier to 13 to get 3.46GHz @ 1066, B. ramp up the FSB to 300 to get 3.3GHz @ 1200, or C. ramp up the FSB to 333 and underclock the multiplier to 10 to get 3.333GHz @ 1333.

The Corsair XMS2 DDR2-800 CL4 is some of the best memory available, i have no doubt it could handle the Overclocking. As for cooling, i was planning to use my ZALMAN CNPS7700-CU 120mm CPU Fan with Copper Heatsink that's been keeping my overclocked P4 press"hot" (Presscott) 560J idling around 38C (never over 67C under full load). This is all IF i go with Core 2 Extreme.
July 21, 2006 6:48:16 AM

Quote:
If you're a pro, then buy the professional system- the non-overclockable dual Woodcrest one. Your apps are mostly multithreaded so those two extra cores will help. Your proposed rigs are pretty much just gamer rigs- not professional workstations. Not that they would not handle professional work, but the dual Woodcrest would do better at those applications by a fair margin.


Right, but will the Un-overclockable woodcrest 2.33GHz's be able to handle gaming as well as a core 2 would?

I want a rare and endangered creature... a professional workstation gaming computer...
July 21, 2006 6:49:46 AM

Quote:

I think you are seriously underrating the overall value of Workstation cards. They make a significant difference to some 3D tasks and include some features that are essential in professional work (all listed on specs but including availability of colours in the broad dynamic range, real time fx manipulation, overlay plane support).

It depends what work you are doing but, speaking as someone also working professionally (and full time) with Maya in a part of the industry where time is money and deadlines are pushed to the limit, workstation cards offer significant benefits over hobby cards.

I am not suggesting people buy one for a home setup as for basic modelling / animation use you will see little difference, but the assertion that specialist kit is not required as the programmes you are using will not make use of it is incorrect if you are using Maya. Perhaps the work you are doing does not require such specialist hardware (or doesn't take advantage of it), but the programme itself certainly benefits from it. There are some 3d apps where a specialist card makes little difference. Maya isn't one of them.

This is not to remotely assert one cannot run Maya on a regular 3d card but the idea that Maya as a programme can't take advantage of a specialist card is simply not true. If you want a card for multiple use then a so called gaming card is naturally the right choice, but its not the right choice because workstation cards are wrong for Maya. From your posts I think a general graphics card would suit you better in multiple apps but that certainly is not based on an inability of your software to use a pro setup.


Maya is not my PRIMARY 3D modeling program, in fact i use maya the least of any. NewTek Lightwave 3D is my main 3D program.
July 21, 2006 7:07:39 AM

Basically it comes down to this now (i just got news of my financing options, so now i know what i can work with).

I have $2500 to spend on this.
I have my old parts to sell and add to the $2500 (i will use $500 as a conservative estimate)
So i have a total of $3000.

so here again are my options (i haven't made any changes from you suggestions yet, as i just got the financing info):

Woodcrest:
Intel Xeon Woodcrest 5140 2.33GHz 1333MHz LGA771 OEM
Intel Xeon Woodcrest 5140 2.33GHz 1333MHz LGA771 OEM
SuperMicro Processor heatsink for Woodcrest Xeon
SuperMicro Processor heatsink for Woodcrest Xeon
SuperMicro X7DAE for Dual Core Xeon LGA771 Intel 5000x
Kingston 1GB DDR2 667MHz FB-DIMM
Kingston 1GB DDR2 667MHz FB-DIMM
Kingston 1GB DDR2 667MHz FB-DIMM
Kingston 1GB DDR2 667MHz FB-DIMM
Thermaltake ToughPower W0104RU ATX/EPS 12V 650W
Creative Labs SoundBlaster X-Fi 24-Bit PCI
Sapphire Radeon X1900XTX 512MB GDDR3 PCIe x16
WD Raptor 150GB 10000rpm 16MB cache sata150

TOTAL $3283.84 (Which means i'd have to cut the video card and use my current FireGL V7100 to make it $2796.15. But keep in mind, i would only have about $250 in sellable parts then, so in this instance i could only spend $2750.)



Core 2 Duo:
Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 2.66GHz 1066MHz FSB LGA775
ASUS P5WD2-E Premium Dual-Core LGA775 Intel 975X
CORSAIR XMS2 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 800 CL 4
CORSAIR XMS2 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 800 CL 4
Thermaltake ToughPower W0104RU ATX/EPS 12V 650W
Creative Labs SoundBlaster X-Fi 24-Bit PCI
WD Raptor 150GB 10000rpm 16MB cache sata150
XFX GeForce 7950GX2 1GB GDDR3 PCIe x16

TOTAL $2410.07



Core 2 Extreme:
Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 2.93GHz 1066MHz FSB LGA775
ASUS P5WD2-E Premium Dual-Core LGA775 Intel 975X
CORSAIR XMS2 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 800 CL 4
CORSAIR XMS2 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 800 CL 4
Thermaltake ToughPower W0104RU ATX/EPS 12V 650W
Creative Labs SoundBlaster X-Fi 24-Bit PCI
WD Raptor 150GB 10000rpm 16MB cache sata150
XFX GeForce 7950GX2 1GB GDDR3 PCIe x16

TOTAL $2905.07


Now that i have budget info, what's everyone's opinion? any changes? I'm not trying to spend as little as i can, or as much as i can for that matter, but i can't spend more than i have (or will have after i sell my old parts).
July 21, 2006 7:08:47 AM

Quote:
www.hardforum.com and post on the for sale forum.

It might be worth posting on anandtech as well. It's certainly worth a shot before you go to ebay and pay them a fee.


Thanks, i'll check those out
July 21, 2006 7:45:12 AM

Quote:

I think you are seriously underrating the overall value of Workstation cards. They make a significant difference to some 3D tasks and include some features that are essential in professional work (all listed on specs but including availability of colours in the broad dynamic range, real time fx manipulation, overlay plane support).

It depends what work you are doing but, speaking as someone also working professionally (and full time) with Maya in a part of the industry where time is money and deadlines are pushed to the limit, workstation cards offer significant benefits over hobby cards.

I am not suggesting people buy one for a home setup as for basic modelling / animation use you will see little difference, but the assertion that specialist kit is not required as the programmes you are using will not make use of it is incorrect if you are using Maya. Perhaps the work you are doing does not require such specialist hardware (or doesn't take advantage of it), but the programme itself certainly benefits from it. There are some 3d apps where a specialist card makes little difference. Maya isn't one of them.

This is not to remotely assert one cannot run Maya on a regular 3d card but the idea that Maya as a programme can't take advantage of a specialist card is simply not true. If you want a card for multiple use then a so called gaming card is naturally the right choice, but its not the right choice because workstation cards are wrong for Maya. From your posts I think a general graphics card would suit you better in multiple apps but that certainly is not based on an inability of your software to use a pro setup.


Maya is not my PRIMARY 3D modeling program, in fact i use maya the least of any. NewTek Lightwave 3D is my main 3D program.

There really is no need to shout. You did not make that clear in your posts. Lightwave is indeed probably best suited to a hobby card and anyone knowing your main area of work would have said so.

If, however, you list many programmes and 'millions of polygons' as a work example, you cannot expect to receive very specific advice. Your assertion that all the programmes you use would make no use of the card was in any case incorrect (and as you say you are in the industry other people might have used that to make buying decisions themselves which might have been unfortunate).

The choice is probably financial (most things are), but given both options I would go for the pro setup for the work benefit. Sadly if you want a hybrid machine you have to compromise on one side of things or the other. Given work is what brings in the cash that's the side I'd compromise less myself.
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!