Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

I7 or XEON Any Suggestions?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 7, 2013 7:57:31 AM

Hello All,

I am in the process of building a workstation for 3D Modeling (3D Max), Max Rendering, Video Editing, Photoshop and other adobe like products. I want to knock out the CPU selection of the build first. With that said I have a couple questions I was hoping someone could help me out with:

PS: Don't worry about cpu cost I am more concerned with power and speed.

1. What is the better way to go for a workstation like this i7 or Xeon?

2. What is the fastest processing speeds to date for the i7 and Xeon?

I am solely looking for top notch CPU speed right now!!

Thank you,

Frank G.

More about : xeon suggestions

a c 103 à CPUs
January 7, 2013 8:15:09 AM

Depends on what program you're going to use, really...

The top of the line i7s are amazing if the program can use hyperthreading, and the mid-range Xeons are amazing if it doesn't.

The extreme Xeons trounce anything, as far as I know, but you have to sit back and consider if it's worth spending $1000 on the CPU and $200 more than a normal motherboard for a gain of 20-30 seconds encoding time.
m
0
l
January 7, 2013 1:49:18 PM

DarkSable said:
Depends on what program you're going to use, really...

The top of the line i7s are amazing if the program can use hyperthreading, and the mid-range Xeons are amazing if it doesn't.

The extreme Xeons trounce anything, as far as I know, but you have to sit back and consider if it's worth spending $1000 on the CPU and $200 more than a normal motherboard for a gain of 20-30 seconds encoding time.


Hello DarkSable,

The software that I will mostly be using on this system is:

1. 3Ds Max
2. Photoshop
3. Fireworks
4. Sony Vega
5. Dreamweaver
6. Adobe Flash
7. Other Video Editing Software

As well as a few others. From what I have read it appears that Max is not fully compatible with threading. It more of a user preference but it doesn't take full advantage of it. But I'm not building a computer workstation for today I need to go with the future because I am sure Max will change this in the next software release or two.

What would you recommend I do for this? I guess for now I'm after a broad range of things I need this computer to do so with that what would be the better processer?

Thanks again for your help!!
m
0
l
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
a b à CPUs
January 7, 2013 3:19:06 PM

You'd want to go Xeon's based on your desire to have a workstation (vs a consumer PC) and the kind of software you're likely to be running.

Look at ECC Registered x4 (not x8) RAM too, and plan to keep the thing around 'til it has 128GB of RAM if you can.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 7, 2013 3:42:15 PM

You should get the i7's instead of Xeon
m
0
l
a c 158 à CPUs
January 7, 2013 3:59:48 PM

It actually depends on your budget. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i7-3970x-sandy... Max takes full advantage of all cores and has always been like this. I'd dig up older benchmarks but you should just take my word on it. The viewports of any 3d software is single threaded but the performance there is gpu related.
m
0
l
January 7, 2013 4:32:55 PM

k1114 said:
It actually depends on your budget. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i7-3970x-sandy... Max takes full advantage of all cores and has always been like this. I'd dig up older benchmarks but you should just take my word on it. The viewports of any 3d software is single threaded but the performance there is gpu related.


Hello K1114, thank you for that info very helpful.

Okay looking at the following results from your chart above.

Intel Xeon E5-2687w - Rendered in 1:42 Avg. Price $2,000.00 per chip

Intel Core i7-3970X - Rendered in 1:53 Avg. Prive $1,000.00 per chip

Intel Core i7-3930X - Rendered at 2:00 Avg. Price $600.00 per chip

1. Is it really worth going for the E5-2687 or 3970x for that much more money? It almost seems like to the naked eye you might not even notice the difference. Seems like a lot of money for a small increase. What do you think? I am leaning towards getting two of the i7-3930X chips.

2. Does Max take advantage of a duel processing motherboard if I were to put 2 x Core i7-3930X chips on it?

Thanks again!!
m
0
l
January 7, 2013 4:46:06 PM

If you want dual CPU then you must go Xeon as i7’s only support single CPU configurations the other reason to go for Xeon is if you need/want more than the 64GB ram supported by the i7 39xx CPU’s
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 7, 2013 4:52:42 PM

Only the xeons are designed to run with more than a single processor in the board. And I seriously doubt if an i7 would run on a board designed for a xeon, even though they share the same socket.
m
0
l
a c 158 à CPUs
January 7, 2013 5:06:01 PM

You cannot dual two i7, you must get xeon for that. But you can however have multiple computers like a renderfarm. Yes max can take advantage of any hardware setup. Being able to use dual socket mobos is not down to the software anyways, meaning any software will. Windows handles the cpu workload distribution, the software just needs to be multithreaded. Renderfarms do need software though to essentially communicate with them all since they are a network and not one pc. Max comes with software called backburner for that.

For professionals, time equals money so they have to have the best of the best and have the budget to do so. It's much more cost effective to go for a cluster of cheaper setups, but some people don't have the space and/or really just want 1 pc. If I were to suggest an xeon, the 2687w would not be my suggestion for your budget.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 7, 2013 5:26:03 PM

I would think that multiple machines using the i7-3930k would probably be the most reasonable and cost efficient option. Especially since it would make it so you could have 2 of your machines off doing random work while you have full usage of your main machine.
m
0
l
January 7, 2013 5:36:28 PM

Hello Fellas, yes I do like that idea of a render farm but its more invalid then I want to get into right now. However down the road I will look at doing that. For now I need a workstation that is fast would allow me to do work in max, adobe products (dreamweaver, photoshop, flash, sony vega, outlook, word, chrome, etc...). I do want to get a lot of memory so it will be able to handle leaving different applications open at any given time. I have decided to go with Xeon's since they will allow me two processors on a board. I just now need to figure out how much I want to spend on the Xeon's. I am thinking some where in the ball park of $1,000 to $1,500 per chip. Any suggestions what you think would fit that? Thanks again!!
m
0
l
January 7, 2013 5:37:44 PM

Scott_D_Bowen said:
You'd want to go Xeon's based on your desire to have a workstation (vs a consumer PC) and the kind of software you're likely to be running.

Look at ECC Registered x4 (not x8) RAM too, and plan to keep the thing around 'til it has 128GB of RAM if you can.



Many individuals, and even companies use regular i7's (even i5's) for "workstations". Don't just parrot Intel marketing literature. It's a little more complicated than just "you need a Xeon and a Quadro for a workstation, end of story".

Rather than just repeating marketing hype, why don't you link to tests, comparisons, benchmarks or other examples that illustrate the difference between Xeons and "consumer" grade processors, in those type of programs that the OP listed, so everyone has a chance to be more informed?

Xeons are allegedly more "reliable" and "durable" under the constant, heavy usage that you would have in a work situation. At least that is what Intel "says". OK then, where is the data to support this? Forgive me if I do not just take Intel's word for it, I need to see some proof.

What does ECC RAM do for CAD and Graphic Design software? How much does that really increase performance and reliability with those programs? Show us.

As others stated, you would need to jump up to a Xeon if you felt you could benefit with more than 6 cores (currently the limit for non-Xeon i7's) or you want to have a dual-CPU setup. If you have the budget and you are doing lots of CPU-based rendering (3DS Max Mental Ray), then, yes - you most likely want Xeons and 8-16 cores. However, bear in mind that for the programs that utilize GPU-acceleration (iray, Vray-RT, some of your Adobe software) you really just need something with a lot of CUDA cores, and the right driver support. Supposedly, even the GTX-5xx Geforces perform well in this regard, look around for some benchmarks and performance comparisons. The Kepler 6xx Geforces are reportedly hamstrung from performing GPGPU up there with the pro cards, though; I guess Nvidia wasn't too appreciative of the fact that folks could get pretty good GPU acceleration off of their "gaming" cards.

If you are saying money is no concern, than by all means, go all out and get dual E5-2687W Xeons (each one will set you back ~$1,800-$1,900), for the cores and the high clocks (the less expensive E5 Xeons are slower) and a Quadro along with a Tesla, for the ultimate in CAD performance and GPU acceleration.
m
0
l
January 7, 2013 5:49:56 PM

ebalong said:
Many individuals, and even companies use regular i7's (even i5's) for "workstations". Don't just parrot Intel marketing literature. It's a little more complicated than just "you need a Xeon and a Quadro for a workstation, end of story".

Rather than just repeating marketing hype, why don't you link to tests, comparisons, benchmarks or other examples that illustrate the difference between Xeons and "consumer" grade processors, in those type of programs that the OP listed, so everyone has a chance to be more informed?

Xeons are allegedly more "reliable" and "durable" under the constant, heavy usage that you would have in a work situation. At least that is what Intel "says". OK then, where is the data to support this? Forgive me if I do not just take Intel's word for it, I need to see some proof.

What does ECC RAM do for CAD and Graphic Design software? How much does that really increase performance and reliability with those programs? Show us.

As others stated, you would need to jump up to a Xeon if you felt you could benefit with more than 6 cores (currently the limit for non-Xeon i7's) or you want to have a dual-CPU setup. If you have the budget and you are doing lots of CPU-based rendering (3DS Max Mental Ray), then, yes - you most likely want Xeons and 8-16 cores. However, bear in mind that for the programs that utilize GPU-acceleration (iray, Vray-RT, some of your Adobe software) you really just need something with a lot of CUDA cores, and the right driver support. Supposedly, even the GTX-5xx Geforces perform well in this regard, look around for some benchmarks and performance comparisons. The Kepler 6xx Geforces are reportedly hamstrung from performing GPGPU up there with the pro cards, though; I guess Nvidia wasn't too appreciative of the fact that folks could get pretty good GPU acceleration off of their "gaming" cards.

If you are saying money is no concern, than by all means, go all out and get dual E5-2687W Xeons (each one will set you back ~$1,800-$1,900), for the cores and the high clocks (the less expensive E5 Xeons are slower) and a Quadro along with a Tesla, for the ultimate in CAD performance and GPU acceleration.


Hello ebalong, thank you very much for your info. Money is an object! I wanted to see what the best of the best is, how much it really costs and what's the difference between the best and mid class. Also from what I'm gathering is the video card is the most important part of the rendering and is where you get most of your rendering speed. I did look at the Quadro 6k and the Quadro 5k for about $4,000 grand. The problem with the card is I have 4 monitors and those cards from what I am told can only handle 2 monitors and you can't use those cards in SLI configuration to add additional monitors. So that's another problem I am going to face as I move forward in this building processes. But first I wanted to nail down the motherboard and processors to use then I will look at Memory, GPU, etc...

As for processes I am looking at the E5-2470 or E52670 both are 8 cores an a little less expensive then the E5-2687W. What are your thoughts?

Thanks again!!
m
0
l
a c 158 à CPUs
January 7, 2013 6:46:50 PM

You need to know what renderer you are using. Some will only use the cpu making all that gpu power useless. The ones that can use the gpu do not need sli meaning you can use a gtx+quadro+tesla. You don't need the same gpu for more monitors, right now I have my intel integrated and my 560ti running different monitors. The quadro 5000 and up can sli but note that viewports only use 1 gpu.

The e5 2470 is the wrong socket.
m
0
l
January 7, 2013 7:04:09 PM

Knuckles2002 said:
Hello ebalong, thank you very much for your info. Money is an object! I wanted to see what the best of the best is, how much it really costs and what's the difference between the best and mid class. Also from what I'm gathering is the video card is the most important part of the rendering and is where you get most of your rendering speed. I did look at the Quadro 6k and the Quadro 5k for about $4,000 grand. The problem with the card is I have 4 monitors and those cards from what I am told can only handle 2 monitors and you can't use those cards in SLI configuration to add additional monitors. So that's another problem I am going to face as I move forward in this building processes. But first I wanted to nail down the motherboard and processors to use then I will look at Memory, GPU, etc...

As for processes I am looking at the E5-2470 or E52670 both are 8 cores an a little less expensive then the E5-2687W. What are your thoughts?

Thanks again!!



The video card accelerates rendering only when you have a renderer that utilizes CUDA, which means you need a Nvidia card.

Mental Ray, Vray - CPU only (more cores, faster rendering)

iray, Vray-RT - CPU + GPU (you need a Nvidia GPU, because this only works with CUDA)

Do the new Kepler Quadros (K4000, K5000, etc.) support more than two displays? I know that previous ones did not, which is why some people went with the AMD Firepro cards, but then you don't have the CUDA cores for rendering acceleration.

The 2670s look good if you want to shave a little off the price of the 2687W; 3.3GHz at turbo is respectable. I don't know what the real life performance difference would be between that chip and a sub-3.0GHz processor like the E5-2650 (which is ~$400 less than the 2670). Also take note of the differences in TDP between the different Xeons. The 2650 can run 8-cores at only 95W TDP because of the lower clocks. Might be something to consider if you are concerned about heat (if you don't have a well-ventilated case).

There are so many options and versions it requires a lot of research to determine what your exact needs, budget and performance expectations are.
m
0
l
January 7, 2013 7:06:56 PM

k1114 said:
You need to know what renderer you are using. Some will only use the cpu making all that gpu power useless. The ones that can use the gpu do not need sli meaning you can use a gtx+quadro+tesla. You don't need the same gpu for more monitors, right now I have my intel integrated and my 560ti running different monitors. The quadro 5000 and up can sli but note that viewports only use 1 gpu.

The e5 2470 is the wrong socket.


Thanks again for all your help!! It's hard to say what I will be using to render. Right now I am a programmer and web developer and have owned my own business for about 12 years and I also gave myself junky, crappy slow computers and I am just sick and tired of waiting and waiting so I reached a point that I deserve to work on something that can keep up with me and help me get things down easier, faster and as well as be much more productive over all. For example right now I am using a Core 2 Duo 2.0ghz with 4 gb memory and a 480gb SSD drive painful to work on to say the least!!

I have used 3D Max in the past doing simple little things so I do have some experience. I am planning on taking lessons and getting more into it and this is why I am looking for a system that would allow me to grow in to that as well as be able to handle my web development work to.

Is this system i'm looking to build overkill I'm sure... especially because my 3D Max skills aren't up to that kind of par yet. But I will be one day for sure! So I am just trying to see what the best of the best is and see how I can fall somewhere in the middle of it. Sure I would love the Quadro 6000 but I don't have 4 grand to drop on a gpu right now.

So I don't know what I will be using to render but I like to find something that works fair for all kinds of things for now and as I get better i can buy for that.

What socket should I be looking at for the Xeon processor?

Thanks again!
m
0
l
a c 158 à CPUs
January 7, 2013 7:11:33 PM

Vray does not need cuda, iray does. The k5000 does support 4 monitors. The k4000 is not out yet but like other high end kepler gpus it will also support 4.

You should be looking at lga2011. Since you are just starting out, I'd suggest just going with a single i7 3930k. It will be plenty fast and then you can drop more money into a later dual cpu rig. My 560ti handles any project I throw on max and maya and gpu accelerated rendering is definitely what you want to use to save render time.

Btw it's 3D Studio Max shortened to 3DS Max or just Max. 3D max is something different.
m
0
l
January 7, 2013 7:24:45 PM

Knuckles2002 said:
Thanks again for all your help!! It's hard to say what I will be using to render. Right now I am a programmer and web developer and have owned my own business for about 12 years and I also gave myself junky, crappy slow computers and I am just sick and tired of waiting and waiting so I reached a point that I deserve to work on something that can keep up with me and help me get things down easier, faster and as well as be much more productive over all. For example right now I am using a Core 2 Duo 2.0ghz with 4 gb memory and a 480gb SSD drive painful to work on to say the least!!

I have used 3D Max in the past doing simple little things so I do have some experience. I am planning on taking lessons and getting more into it and this is why I am looking for a system that would allow me to grow in to that as well as be able to handle my web development work to.

Is this system i'm looking to build overkill I'm sure... especially because my 3D Max skills aren't up to that kind of par yet. But I will be one day for sure! So I am just trying to see what the best of the best is and see how I can fall somewhere in the middle of it. Sure I would love the Quadro 6000 but I don't have 4 grand to drop on a gpu right now.

So I don't know what I will be using to render but I like to find something that works fair for all kinds of things for now and as I get better i can buy for that.

What socket should I be looking at for the Xeon processor?

Thanks again!


For the E5's, the 2011 socket. It's the same one that the enthusiast-grade i7's use; just with a different chipset. If you are still learning in 3DS Max, then I wonder if you might want to begin with a 3930K rig, or even an i7-3770K.

A 3770K paired with an SSD, 16GB of RAM, and a decent video card (like a GTX 560ti or a 570) would cost thousands less than even a middle of the road E5 Xeon rig, but would still run circles around that old Core 2 system.

If you wanted a cheaper Xeon, they do have Ivy Bridge Xeons for the 1155 socket out right now. There is one (I forgot the exact model #) that is equivalent in every way to the i7-3770K except it runs slightly cooler, may be a little less expensive, and does not overclock (at least not easily).

Compare these socket 1155 processors:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Productcompare.aspx?Submi...

These are 1155 socket Xeons (4 core/8thread) that are comparable or less in price than the 3770K, and are clocked similar.

You could build a smoking 1155 system for less than $1,500 (maybe even less than $1,000 depending on the components and pricing) that would kick the tar out of your current system, while you are exploring your new software. After you get well-versed in 3DS Max, and decide you want more grunt to cut those rendering times down, then you can spend more money - maybe they will have Haswell Xeons out by then.
m
0
l
January 7, 2013 7:28:20 PM

k1114 said:
Vray does not need cuda, iray does. The k5000 does support 4 monitors. The k4000 is not out yet but like other high end kepler gpus it will also support 4.

You should be looking at lga2011. Since you are just starting out, I'd suggest just going with a single i7 3930k. It will be plenty fast and then you can drop more money into a later dual cpu rig. My 560ti handles any project I throw on max and maya and gpu accelerated rendering is definitely what you want to use to save render time.

Btw it's 3D Studio Max shortened to 3DS Max. 3D max is something different.



I thought there is a version of Vray called Vray-RT that includes support for CUDA-based acceleration. I agree with the sentiment to start out with a 3930K rig (or even a 3770K/E3 Xeon), and that a regular gaming card like the 560ti is plenty for a lot of CAD work.
m
0
l
a c 158 à CPUs
January 7, 2013 7:33:20 PM

Vray has vray rt in it and it can be gpu accelerated by both nvidia and amd.

The e3 1230v2 is the best bang/buck at the "lower end". It doesn't really run cooler, .1ghz less than the 3770, $60 less and the lower tdp is because there is no igpu.
m
0
l
January 7, 2013 7:40:43 PM

k1114 said:
Vray has vray rt in it and it can be gpu accelerated by both nvidia and amd.

The e3 1230v2 is the best bang/buck at the "lower end". It doesn't really run cooler, .1ghz less than the 3770, $60 less and the lower tdp is because there is no igpu.



Oh yeah, that's right. Vray-RT works with Firepro cards too? That's interesting. I guess the difference is iray is Nvidia's own renderer, so it is only programmed to be accelerated by Nvidia gpu's.
m
0
l
a c 158 à CPUs
January 7, 2013 7:45:28 PM

It'll work with radeon too, it uses opencl for amd.
m
0
l
January 7, 2013 7:45:29 PM

Hello All, I get that I'm just starting out but I rather dump some more into power and speed not just for max but for everything I do. I work on the desktop 15 hours a day. I need something that will make me SMILE from EAR to EAR!! No joke, I don't mind paying for speed it will make me get more done in turn making more money and working happier by all means. I rather stick toward the Xeon's they are a better processor.

Here is what I am looking at:

Motherboard: EVGA Classified SR-X 270-SE

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Processor: 2 x Xeon E5-2670 Sandy Bridge-EP 2.6GHz

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Now will the processor work with that motherboard? And will that be HAPPY FAST? haha thanks as always! Next is the video card yuppppy!!
m
0
l
January 7, 2013 7:50:44 PM

Knuckles2002 said:
Hello All, I get that I'm just starting out but I rather dump some more into power and speed not just for max but for everything I do. I work on the desktop 15 hours a day. I need something that will make me SMILE from EAR to EAR!! No joke, I don't mind paying for speed it will make me get more done in turn making more money and working happier by all means. I rather stick toward the Xeon's they are a better processor.

Here is what I am looking at:

Motherboard: EVGA Classified SR-X 270-SE

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Processor: 2 x Xeon E5-2670 Sandy Bridge-EP 2.6GHz

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Now will the processor work with that motherboard? And will that be HAPPY FAST? haha thanks as always! Next is the video card yuppppy!!



EVGA's website should have processor compatibility chart somewhere. If you are going the dual cpu route, check out the offerings from Tyan and Supermicro. I have heard that Tyan especially is quite reliable.
m
0
l
a c 158 à CPUs
January 7, 2013 7:58:10 PM
January 7, 2013 8:04:18 PM

ebalong said:
EVGA's website should have processor compatibility chart somewhere. If you are going the dual cpu route, check out the offerings from Tyan and Supermicro. I have heard that Tyan especially is quite reliable.


ebalong, I'm not stuck on anything right now. I'm really just trying to learn what's out there. However I know this when this system is done it better SMOKE! Now I just need to figure out what parts will give me that speed. I just feel the i7 wont get me that happy. I rather have 16 cores chopping away at whatever I am doing on the computer.

What I am thinking in my head is this:

Duel socket Xeon's not sure which ones some where between $800.00 and 1,300 per chip. Along with the EVGA motherboard which has a lot of room for grow. Video card I need to find something fast that works well with 3Ds Max and Four monitors. I do like the Quadro 5000 and K111 said it suports 4 monitors. What are your thoughts if that is a no go on maybe 2 x eVGA GeForce GTX 690? As for memory I going to do 64GB of something. And then for storage I was going to do two 480GB Raid 0 and then either another Raid 10 or something with like 3TB of storage for data. I was going to use a Cooler for the processors and maybe a Cooler Master case. Again this is what I am thinking in my head. I think a system like this will be STUPID fast! And will also allow me to grow for years to come.

What are your thoughts on my thoughts above yea or na, good or bad?

Thanks again for all your help!
m
0
l
January 7, 2013 8:07:34 PM

This is a pretty solid build without going too crazy. Ivy Bridge EP is supposed to hit sometime in late summer/early fall this year, and is rumored to have versions with 10 or 12 cores (don't put too much stock into those rumors yet), so, you might also have an upgrade path with that board (I don't know how easy/difficult it is to update the BIOS on a dual-socket mobo); just in case you find 16 cores/32 threads to not be enough :lol: 


Edit: I was referring to K114's suggested build.
m
0
l
January 7, 2013 8:14:14 PM

Knuckles2002 said:
ebalong, I'm not stuck on anything right now. I'm really just trying to learn what's out there. However I know this when this system is done it better SMOKE! Now I just need to figure out what parts will give me that speed. I just feel the i7 wont get me that happy. I rather have 16 cores chopping away at whatever I am doing on the computer.

What I am thinking in my head is this:

Duel socket Xeon's not sure which ones some where between $800.00 and 1,300 per chip. Along with the EVGA motherboard which has a lot of room for grow. Video card I need to find something fast that works well with 3Ds Max and Four monitors. I do like the Quadro 5000 and K111 said it suports 4 monitors. What are your thoughts if that is a no go on maybe 2 x eVGA GeForce GTX 690? As for memory I going to do 64GB of something. And then for storage I was going to do two 480GB Raid 0 and then either another Raid 10 or something with like 3TB of storage for data. I was going to use a Cooler for the processors and maybe a Cooler Master case. Again this is what I am thinking in my head. I think a system like this will be STUPID fast! And will also allow me to grow for years to come.

What are your thoughts on my thoughts above yea or na, good or bad?

Thanks again for all your help!



Be careful with your video card model numbers. K1114 was referring to the Kepler-based Quadro K5000 (the Quadro 5000, sans-K, is the now-older Fermi-based card). I would lean towards K1114's advice regarding the motherboard, he is an Expert/Addict :D 
m
0
l
January 7, 2013 9:19:41 PM



  • K1114,

    First off thank you very very much for taking the time to do that. I greatly appropriated it. I do have some questions maybe you can give me your thoughts?

    How would you rate this system you built here from 1 to 10. 10 being very very very very fast what would you give it?

    Cooling:
    Would there be more benefit to using a liquid cooled cooler vs the Hyper 212. I was thinking of going with the Cooler Master h60 or h100 for handling the cooling.

    Memory:
    As for the Kingston memory what are you thoughts of using Corsairs memory?

    GPU
    The one GPU comments on Neweggs page says "The Quadro is listed as a PCIe 3.0 GPU, however it is not, it is PCIe 2.0 only." Is that true? And the other says "Drivers for most programs such as Autodesk still need to be rolled out." Is that true as well? And the last Comment says "Does not work properly with Dual CPU boards" What do you think?

    Motherboard:
    Is this a good board compared to the EVGA Classified SR-X? Is it solid and reliable?

    Again I'm learning and just want to make sure once I do this build that I did all my research and know exactly what I got and that it is as close to the best of the best. Thanks soooooooo much for everything!
    m
    0
    l
    a c 158 à CPUs
    January 7, 2013 11:33:37 PM

    I think I would say 9 because it's 8 cores, the highest you can get, but the 2650 is the lowest model at 2ghz, the highest model being 3.1ghz.

    The h60 or h100 would be a waste of money in this situation. The h60 is a definite no as the 212 evo is cheaper, quieter and better cooling. The 212 evo will already be 20-30C under safe temps, and even the h100 will be close. If you could overclock the difference in cooling ability would be more apparent but you can't. You'd have an issue finding a case that can hold 2 h100. Also nh d14 or silver arrow costs less and rivals the h100. Although if I were to go that high end I would get the h100i (newer version of h100), the $30 difference vs the nh d14 isn't much in the grand scheme of the build. BTW it's corsair h100 not cooler master.

    I don't play favorites for any company except that they are proven reliable and corsair is in that list. But I'd assume you are talking about this ram that you posted in your other thread. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... I'd have to say no because of the high heatsinks gets in the way of the cooler, it costs more, fills all ram slots if you wanted 64gb so you can't upgrade easily, and the ones I posted are ecc. Heatsinks are just going to be for looks at 1.5v. Ecc is probably not necessary so you could go with non ecc to save some money.

    Pcie version isn't going to affect performance. The card is still new, just came out last month, and autodesk has to sign off on the drivers for it to be on the "certified" list but it still works as it should. I was not aware of this issue, but apparently the dual socket chipsets have an issue with any high end pcie 3.0 gpu because they request a 256mb memory bar. There is a bandaid fix to change the gpu firmware to 128mb for it to work but is not officially available and "should not be used in production." A later mobo bios update should solve the issue. I wouldn't suggest a mobo if it wasn't solid. But this issue is present on all dual socket mobos. The k5000 is better than the 5000 but if you were to need this soon, I think you'd have to get the 5000.
    m
    0
    l
    January 8, 2013 12:16:10 AM

    k1114 said:
    I think I would say 9 because it's 8 cores, the highest you can get, but the 2650 is the lowest model at 2ghz, the highest model being 3.1ghz.

    The h60 or h100 would be a waste of money in this situation. The h60 is a definite no as the 212 evo is cheaper, quieter and better cooling. The 212 evo will already be 20-30C under safe temps, and even the h100 will be close. If you could overclock the difference in cooling ability would be more apparent but you can't. You'd have an issue finding a case that can hold 2 h100. Also nh d14 or silver arrow costs less and rivals the h100. Although if I were to go that high end I would get the h100i (newer version of h100), the $30 difference vs the nh d14 isn't much in the grand scheme of the build. BTW it's corsair h100 not cooler master.

    I don't play favorites for any company except that they are proven reliable and corsair is in that list. But I'd assume you are talking about this ram that you posted in your other thread. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... I'd have to say no because of the high heatsinks gets in the way of the cooler, it costs more, fills all ram slots if you wanted 64gb so you can't upgrade easily, and the ones I posted are ecc. Heatsinks are just going to be for looks at 1.5v. Ecc is probably not necessary so you could go with non ecc to save some money.

    Pcie version isn't going to affect performance. The card is still new, just came out last month, and autodesk has to sign off on the drivers for it to be on the "certified" list but it still works as it should. I was not aware of this issue, but apparently the dual socket chipsets have an issue with any high end pcie 3.0 gpu because they request a 256mb memory bar. There is a bandaid fix to change the gpu firmware to 128mb for it to work but is not officially available and "should not be used in production." A later mobo bios update should solve the issue. I wouldn't suggest a mobo if it wasn't solid. But this issue is present on all dual socket mobos. The k5000 is better than the 5000 but if you were to need this soon, I think you'd have to get the 5000.


    No not in a major rush to get it. I rather do my diligence before rushing off and making mistakes. But you do think they would correct it the GPU that is? As for the system build you have there I might play with it again i'm not stuck on my 5k budget if I have to go to 6 I would for the boost but for now I just want to see what's on there overall then try and make some smart decisions.

    Can any of the Xeon Families be overclocked if so which ones. Also is it really recommended to overclock things I know you run risks of damaging or breaking things do it.

    As for the cooler yes I stand corrected it is Corsairs. I was only thinking of that to keep the system running as cool as possible so it performs even better. I will take a peak at the h100i series and see.

    As for the memory, I am going to put in 64 or more in because I can use a lot of that as a Ram drive to. And I was just wondering if there are any real differences between 64mg from Kingston vs Corsair's Platinum 64mg. Even tho both are 1600mghz. Can the board you provided take even faster then that like 2200?

    The GPU card seemed very promising, fast and render nicely on the youtube video review for it. And I like that I can run my four monitors on it.

    Again I can't thank you enough for all your help!!
    m
    0
    l
    January 8, 2013 12:58:00 AM

    Knuckles2002 said:

    Can any of the Xeon Families be overclocked if so which ones. Also is it really recommended to overclock things I know you run risks of damaging or breaking things do it.



    The clock multiplier on any of the newer Xeons is locked. Apparently, you can still play with the baseclock to squeeze a small overclock out of them, but I don't think it would amount to much and it's not recommended. Remember, Xeons are supposed to be the more "stable" brother of the i7. Overclocking them would kind of defeat that purpose.

    If you want Xeon and faster, then pony up for (2) E5-2687W beast processors.

    If you want to overclock then get a 3930K, an NH-D14 cooler, and run it at 4.6-4.8GHz. It will trounce the Xeons in single-threaded operations, but come up short in heavily multi-threaded stuff.
    m
    0
    l
    a c 158 à CPUs
    January 8, 2013 1:03:00 AM

    As long as you know the voltage and temps limits you have nothing to worry about ocing but none of the modern xeons can. Stability wouldn't be an issue if done right.

    Cooler temps does not make it perform better. The only important thing is that it isn't overheating. And as I said, only when you are pushing the ocing limits will you really see the difference in the cooling ability. With the 2650 you are bound to really only see ~2C difference for 4x the price over the evo.

    When getting ram you really shouldn't fill all you ram slots at first in case you need to upgrade. I doubt you would fill 64gb but also 8x8gb costs less than 16x4gb even when you are looking at other companies besides corsair and kingston. The only other difference is ecc and cl 11 vs non ecc and cl10 (plus the heatsink issue). There is such a small difference to faster ram that it is not worth it. http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/memory/2011/01/11/the-...
    m
    0
    l
    December 15, 2013 4:42:43 PM

    Hold your horses there. What makes xeons special is binning. Intel cherry picks the best examples that run the coolest at lowest TDP per clock and turn these into xeons, I7s are just refused xeons and disabled features. So yes, having a cooler running CPU will naturally translate to longevity, since heat is basically eating away at the lithography over time..

    I built a dual E5-2390v2 rig with 128gigs of ram on an asus ATX mobo and lian li case, with dual corsair water coolers, this thing chews through more work than any single OCed I7 would, silently, efficiently, and does this rock solidly, 24/7. I will not overclock any of my workstations, these are not toys and time spent tinkering is time that could be used to make more money, if you are buying a work station, and you are using this to make money, the cost of the tools is a tax write-off. don't compromise with lost productivity.

    Save money by not buying a quaddro, and put that into CPU and a geforce with many cuda cores.

    if money is tight, buy a single CPU at a time, just be aware that you need both cpus to use all of your total ram, so plan accordinly. I recommend samsung ECC ram in 16gig DIMM size.

    ebalong said:
    Scott_D_Bowen said:
    You'd want to go Xeon's based on your desire to have a workstation (vs a consumer PC) and the kind of software you're likely to be running.

    Look at ECC Registered x4 (not x8) RAM too, and plan to keep the thing around 'til it has 128GB of RAM if you can.



    Many individuals, and even companies use regular i7's (even i5's) for "workstations". Don't just parrot Intel marketing literature. It's a little more complicated than just "you need a Xeon and a Quadro for a workstation, end of story".

    Rather than just repeating marketing hype, why don't you link to tests, comparisons, benchmarks or other examples that illustrate the difference between Xeons and "consumer" grade processors, in those type of programs that the OP listed, so everyone has a chance to be more informed?

    Xeons are allegedly more "reliable" and "durable" under the constant, heavy usage that you would have in a work situation. At least that is what Intel "says". OK then, where is the data to support this? Forgive me if I do not just take Intel's word for it, I need to see some proof.

    What does ECC RAM do for CAD and Graphic Design software? How much does that really increase performance and reliability with those programs? Show us.

    As others stated, you would need to jump up to a Xeon if you felt you could benefit with more than 6 cores (currently the limit for non-Xeon i7's) or you want to have a dual-CPU setup. If you have the budget and you are doing lots of CPU-based rendering (3DS Max Mental Ray), then, yes - you most likely want Xeons and 8-16 cores. However, bear in mind that for the programs that utilize GPU-acceleration (iray, Vray-RT, some of your Adobe software) you really just need something with a lot of CUDA cores, and the right driver support. Supposedly, even the GTX-5xx Geforces perform well in this regard, look around for some benchmarks and performance comparisons. The Kepler 6xx Geforces are reportedly hamstrung from performing GPGPU up there with the pro cards, though; I guess Nvidia wasn't too appreciative of the fact that folks could get pretty good GPU acceleration off of their "gaming" cards.

    If you are saying money is no concern, than by all means, go all out and get dual E5-2687W Xeons (each one will set you back ~$1,800-$1,900), for the cores and the high clocks (the less expensive E5 Xeons are slower) and a Quadro along with a Tesla, for the ultimate in CAD performance and GPU acceleration.


    m
    0
    l
    a b à CPUs
    December 16, 2013 10:06:33 AM

    Hold yer horses???

    This thread is almost a year old. Whatever the OP chose to do will have been done many, many moons ago.

    I would also question your binning theory for i7s/xeons as I simply don't believe it. I don't believe they would bin a failed xeon as an i7 with a higher tdp and a higher clock speed. I can believe them binning a failed higher spec xeon as a lower xeon but NOT an i7.
    m
    0
    l
    a c 158 à CPUs
    December 16, 2013 2:52:09 PM

    Stoochtv said:
    Hold your horses there. What makes xeons special is binning. Intel cherry picks the best examples that run the coolest at lowest TDP per clock and turn these into xeons, I7s are just refused xeons and disabled features. So yes, having a cooler running CPU will naturally translate to longevity, since heat is basically eating away at the lithography over time..

    I built a dual E5-2390v2 rig with 128gigs of ram on an asus ATX mobo and lian li case, with dual corsair water coolers, this thing chews through more work than any single OCed I7 would, silently, efficiently, and does this rock solidly, 24/7. I will not overclock any of my workstations, these are not toys and time spent tinkering is time that could be used to make more money, if you are buying a work station, and you are using this to make money, the cost of the tools is a tax write-off. don't compromise with lost productivity.

    Save money by not buying a quaddro, and put that into CPU and a geforce with many cuda cores.

    if money is tight, buy a single CPU at a time, just be aware that you need both cpus to use all of your total ram, so plan accordinly. I recommend samsung ECC ram in 16gig DIMM size.


    You do get a popup saying the thread is over 3 months or something along those lines.

    IBEP was shown to use 3 dies, a 6 core which is used for i7 and xeon, and a 10 and 12 core which are only xeons. They do bin xeon and i7 but the issue is it's not a valid reason to choose xeons as they are similar power and heat. With the smaller processes of today, a defect is more likely to be a failure. I wouldn't doubt many "lower" bins still qualify to be higher models. Longevity isn't even a concern as even a oc i7 will outlast its usefulness. The most common reasons to go with xeon are ecc or mult cpu configs, not the binning advantage.

    You are comparing the cpu performance of $4k with 20 cores vs $600 with 6 cores? Well that's a fair comparison. Also with quadros you contradict yourself saying to go with geforce. They do similar binning with gpus as well as having ecc. With workstation builds such as this which is purely a workstation I always suggest workstation parts. It's also better performance/$ as well as more efficient to go with dual cpus.
    m
    0
    l
    December 30, 2013 9:14:31 PM

    Hello All,

    First and foremost a Hugh THANK YOU to all of you for your help!!!!

    I think i'm more confused now then ever before haha!! I haven't did my purchase yet I did a lot of research and looking around on the net and between work, play and family I just couldn't find the time to nail it out. I now without a doubt need one bad because the system I am on now is maxed out. But what confuses my even more is Cloud rendering added to the mix. I started using it around the middle of the past year and fired up over 30 Quad workstations to render a project that would have taking me 30 plus hours on my computer but ended up only being 2 hours from the cloud.

    Now I'm wondering is it even worth going for Xeon since any heavy rendering I will just do over the cloud. However, keep in mind I still want a very fast computer to complete the max projects or graphic design stuff.

    So now the question is do I still lean towards Xeon or say the heck with the costs and overclock an i7 instead since it will only render simple things to test projects but once i'm ready to really render it send it to the cloud.

    Right now I am looking at Xeon E5 series or Extreme i7 (water cooled/overclocked). Cost is not the issue I just want to be very very happy with the performance. I don't want it to pause, delay, drag and feel slow. From what I have gathered in my research is Quadro is the way to go. Not saying there isn't cheaper cards that are very compatible with the software but I wouldn't even know where to look with soooooooo much out there already.

    What are you thoughts? Thanks again fellas for you knowledge and help!!
    m
    0
    l
    a c 158 à CPUs
    December 31, 2013 9:45:53 AM

    You can get dual e5 and outperform an oc i7.
    m
    0
    l
    January 4, 2014 6:08:00 AM

    you know Nvidia are releasing their new Maxwell geforce 800 series in the first quarter of 2014. it's a new architecture with what they call stacked memory. first GPUs to have their own CPUs as well. might be worth waiting a little bit.
    m
    0
    l
    !